Skylarking
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2018
- Messages
- 10,196
- Reaction score
- 10,750
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 123
- Location
- Downunder
- Members Ride
- Commodore Motorsport Edition
I get that people think the factory trans service interval is far too long between drinks at 150,000 but that’s what the factory specified. Heck Holden even went to the trouble of removing the dip stick so owners can’t check fluid levels themselves and have turned a simple owner check into a mechanics service activity.
So Holden shouldn’t then use the fact that the trans wasn’t serviced more frequently as an excuse not to stand by their product. Holden also should use the harsh service schedule as an excuse nor to stand by their product unless the service centre specified in writing one of the service receipts that they recommend the owner follow the harsh service schedule because of the way the vehicle is used.
But what we’ve been told by the OP, the car has had a well serviced gentle life and no one can explain why the gearbox fail? Was it the infamous known defect of a cracked oil pump* (or such)? I find it odd that none of the service experts can explain what caused the trans failure.
A manufacturers warranty is a voluntary warranty, not a statutory warranty. Oh, and Apple have being fined millions for pushing their Apple Care warranty in many countries… but that’s another story…
And many PC manufacturers have been forced to provide remedies and extended warranty for known manufacturing defects well outside their voluntary factory warranty period. So in some cases having them fix a laptop after some years depends on what the fault is and may not be a stretch…
ACCC simply wouldn’t (for the most part) get involved in a single case (unless there are industry wide implications) as it’s not their purview.
A single trans failure (which has hallmarks of failing the durability requirements of ACL) falls squarely with state consumer group purview (though it’s still worth reporting it to ACCC so they can gather stats and see if it’s a bigger problem than a one off).
The fact OP is from NZed, that means ACCC has no bearing on this… and I’m not even sure if there is an NZ equivalent as such powers may all sit with the Commerce Commission.
As for down under, all products sold within this country by businesses must meet the following.
The NZ law is rather similar if I’m not mistaken.
So in what world should a transmission maintained according to the manufacturers requirements fail after 7 years and 130,000 if it is durable and most would expect decades of life out of it (rhetorical)?
Really, the moral of the story or lesson should be to change fluids much more frequently than the service schedule states because too often an oil change has never killed a gearbox or engine… Much easier than fighting a recalcitrant manufacturer who no longer gives a ****.
(Sticking to the service schedule doesn‘t absolve the manufacturer‘s responsibility that their product is durable… but it can cause headaches for the owner)
* I think the cracked oil pump was a 6L45E issue (so VE?) but not sure
So Holden shouldn’t then use the fact that the trans wasn’t serviced more frequently as an excuse not to stand by their product. Holden also should use the harsh service schedule as an excuse nor to stand by their product unless the service centre specified in writing one of the service receipts that they recommend the owner follow the harsh service schedule because of the way the vehicle is used.
But what we’ve been told by the OP, the car has had a well serviced gentle life and no one can explain why the gearbox fail? Was it the infamous known defect of a cracked oil pump* (or such)? I find it odd that none of the service experts can explain what caused the trans failure.
The ACL legislation doesn’t specify a duration for our statutory warranty which is by design. So for you to say “12 month stat warranty” highlights your lack of understanding of the way the legislation is written.My $2500 laptop is 3 years old, covered by a 12 month stat warranty.
A manufacturers warranty is a voluntary warranty, not a statutory warranty. Oh, and Apple have being fined millions for pushing their Apple Care warranty in many countries… but that’s another story…
And many PC manufacturers have been forced to provide remedies and extended warranty for known manufacturing defects well outside their voluntary factory warranty period. So in some cases having them fix a laptop after some years depends on what the fault is and may not be a stretch…
Yes ACCC got involved in the case because Fords illegal actions were impacting a great many people. But to put it in pure and simple terms, ACCC won not because of the numbers of people impacted but because Ford wasn't following the law and repairing these defective gearboxes for their impacted customers.the problem here (Ford DTC) was this was a widespread fault, caused by a known defect that ACCC eventually won on because it impacted most if not all of those transmissions.
:
Theres a big difference between one persons part failing before they'd expect it to, and an actual known proven defective part that plagues a line of vehicles which is when the ACCC should be getting involved, not over one transmission failure.
ACCC simply wouldn’t (for the most part) get involved in a single case (unless there are industry wide implications) as it’s not their purview.
A single trans failure (which has hallmarks of failing the durability requirements of ACL) falls squarely with state consumer group purview (though it’s still worth reporting it to ACCC so they can gather stats and see if it’s a bigger problem than a one off).
The fact OP is from NZed, that means ACCC has no bearing on this… and I’m not even sure if there is an NZ equivalent as such powers may all sit with the Commerce Commission.
As for down under, all products sold within this country by businesses must meet the following.
Consumers have the following guarantees in respect of goods: goods are of acceptable quality—that is, they are safe, durable and free from defects, are acceptable in appearance and finish and do what they are ordinarily expected to do (ACL section 54)
The NZ law is rather similar if I’m not mistaken.
So in what world should a transmission maintained according to the manufacturers requirements fail after 7 years and 130,000 if it is durable and most would expect decades of life out of it (rhetorical)?
Really, the moral of the story or lesson should be to change fluids much more frequently than the service schedule states because too often an oil change has never killed a gearbox or engine… Much easier than fighting a recalcitrant manufacturer who no longer gives a ****.
(Sticking to the service schedule doesn‘t absolve the manufacturer‘s responsibility that their product is durable… but it can cause headaches for the owner)
* I think the cracked oil pump was a 6L45E issue (so VE?) but not sure
Last edited: