Clutch

[gargol]

Silence from Benfield since Wed's

[gargol]

Voted with my feet, goodbye Toyota!!!

Just picked up my new Kia Ceed GT.

Not leaving Toyota to get away with it though!

[gargol]

Update - Benfield Toyota returned the parts to Toyota last month, and today I received an email from Benfields manager to say that Toyota are to pay for the repair!

great result, and thanks to Benfields manager.

[gargol]

Cheque arrived today, result!!!

[FROSTYBALLS]

Toyota would have been reliant on the opinion of the dealer as to whether the clutch issue was wear and tear. Hyundai and Kia are having issues with premature clutch failures - Hyundais affected include the current i10, first generation i20 and the i40, and Kias include the Ceed, Venga and Rio. We've just had the clutch replaced under warranty at 16,000 miles/2 years 10 months of age, but the dealer reported it as a clutch fault.

[Heidfirst]

Congrats.

once more Toyota prove that they stand behind their product better than pretty much any other volume manufacturer.

[gargol]

But only after two months of arguament and my refusal to go away and get lost!

[Heidfirst]

maybe but many others wouldn't have budged even then. Also, as Frosty said Toyota UK were relying on what your dealer (& according to you they initially said wear & tear) said so the delay may have actually been down to your dealer whom you ended up praising ...

Dealers vary, even within a dealer you might get a different result from a different member of staff - c'est la vie.

[TomdeGuerre]

So once more Toyota prove that they stand behind their product better than pretty much any other volume manufacturer?

Would that be the same Toyota that pled guilty in Federal court to charges that they misled US consumers by concealing and making deceptive statements about two safety issues affecting its vehicles and paid a fine of over 1 billion dollars?

According to an FBI assistant director "Toyota put sales over safety and profit over principle and the disregard Toyota had for the safety of the public was outrageous. Not only did Toyota fail to recall cars with problem parts, they continued to manufacture new cars with the same parts they knew were deadly".

[FROSTYBALLS]

Not too different to the current GM safety issues and the Ford Explorer/Firestone safety issues in the early 2000's, where both manufacturers concealed safety issues.

[Heidfirst]

1) that was Toyota USA (albeit I am sure that some of it was at least run past Japan at some point).

2) the US has a history of punishing non-US companies more than home grown (& as a US citizen I'm probably in a better place to say that than most of you)

3) look at current Chrysler Jeep, GM, Ford etc. recalls. GM is hiding behind part of it's provision from exiting bankruptcy to not be held liable for things that happened before that including the deaths of at least 12 people linked to ignition switches that they continued to fit for years despite knowing that there was a problem. Jeep has paid out $150 million for one accident but over a million vehicles are potentially implicated.

4) I have personal experience with Ford & Vauxhall & you can very easily find info on how Audi, BMW etc. deal with warranty claims in the UK despite known problems. Toyota may not be perfect but they are distinctly above average.

[TomdeGuerre]

Frosty you claim "not too different to the current GM safety issues....." and how does that in any way show that Toyota stand behind their product better than pretty much any other volume manufacturer as was claimed?

Toyota dragged their feet over complaints about unintended acceleration and when the heat got too high for them they threw their toys out the pram and pulled out of manufacturing in North America saying they did not know "when or if" they would ever start again. Didn't take long for them to come crawling back though and agree to pay their fine. They still faced a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation and of course their lawyers will be involved in settlement talks alleging wrongful deaths and injuries adding hundreds of millions more.

It seems they haven't got the message here in the UK when you read the post from Neilscabs about T27 Random Revving Up because he's reported repeated cases of unintended acceleration with his car and the dealer doesn't seem too concerned about it. If he was in America Ill bet he would have had his Toyota dealers attention pronto. Maybe the way the EU is going there'll be a more concerted approach to product liability - I certainly hope so.

[FROSTYBALLS]

Toyota's issues of 4/5 years ago weren't too different to GM's current safety issues, in that both companies allegedly withheld safety information..

GM knew about the potential safety issues before they went into bankruptcy protection, yet did nothing about it.

However where GM differs from Toyota is the way the US legal system and protectionism has handled the GM issues. We now have two GM companies -

1. 'old GM' that was separated out from bankruptcy protection, was left with the bad debts and very little money with which to pay those debts, and

2. 'new GM' that has had the debts stripped away and produces GM cars today.

'New GM' has got the courts to agree that any court action arising from these safety issues should be the responsibility of 'old GM'. So 'new GM' has been able to wash their hands of any responsibility for these safety issues, any subsequent court action, and get away effectively scot free.

[Heidfirst]

"Toyota dragged their feet over complaints about unintended acceleration and when the heat got too high for them they threw their toys out the pram and pulled out of manufacturing in North America saying they did not know "when or if" they would ever start again. Didn't take long for them to come crawling back though and agree to pay their fine. "

Would you have had them continue building products that they potentially would not have been able to sell without incurring additional remedial costs or further potential liabilities? Surely that is precisely the opposite of what it seems your position would advocate?

They were never going to walk away from the US market & all their investment there.

Most people would say that Toyota have obviously become more open as a result of all of this so we are discussing old behaviour in another continent/subsidiary versus current behaviour here.

In neilscabs thread there is nothing to say that the dealer is unconcerned - but like any intermittent fault if they can't replicate/see it it will be very hard to solve.

[TomdeGuerre]

Speaking from personal experience Toyota certainly didn't "stand behind their product" with the last Auris I had with the Multi Mode Transmission. I had to fight them all the way to get improvements made and in the final analysis I was still left with an inferior product that should never have been released without further development. Oh and how about the handbrake which they knew had a bad design but only those who shouted hard enough and long enough got it replaced, the rest they got nursed through the warranty perid after which the owners had to pony up for the fix.

With my current Auris I have a serious complaint about the headlights. Maybe I should nosey on over to the Honest John forum to see if Auristocrat's about in case he comes on here and "outs" me because I've already posted on the Toyota forum about this - oh no, he's done that already. So what has Toyota done about it? well they did send me an email about a year ago saying they'd look into it.