I'll never buy another citroen - door mirror rust.

[vizzo]

Other DS3 owners have experienced a problem with rust under the door mirror. Apparently due to a faulty gasket design.
The car is a 13 reg and was one year old when I bought it from a citroen garage and it had been previously owned by the citroen garage I bought it from as a lease car which it leased to one of its employees.

I took the car to Arnold Clarke Workington last july/august. The guy took some pictures, said it was a problem that he'd seen before and that the claim should be no problem but would take about 4 weeks.
Quite some weeks later he phoned to say that the repair had been approved and that I should get in touch with a bodyshop in Carlisle for the work to be done.(they have no bodyshop at the dealer in Workington).
I got in touch with the bodyshop who said that the car had to be booked in by the dealer, but the dealer kept saying I should contact the bodyshop. I tried to get them to talk to eachother but the bodyshop said that the dealer didn't reply to messages or calls. Other things took my attention and I left it till January. Finally got hold of the guy who I forst spoke to who said that the procedure had now changed and that a new claim needed to be submitted and that he would do so. Many weeks passed and when I got in touch with the dealer again they said they knew nothing about it and that the employee had left. Under pressure from me they did contact the bodyshop who said that they do have an estimateon file for the job from back in the summer.

So Arnold Clarke submitted a claim. They then came back saying I need to send service history. I have had the car serviced by an independent garage and admittedly not necessarily at the EXACT time intervals. In the real world, sensible people would realise that service history is irrelevant to bodywork problems!

Now they've come back to me saying that the claim has been declined. No reason given. I asked Arnold Clarke to find out why - they said I need to contact Citroen customer services. I rang Citroen customer services and guess what - they say I need to get the dealer to contact them.

So- to recap. I've been waiting 9 months for this to be resolved due to the shambles at Arnold Clarke who seem to just be constantly passing the buck and Citroen have declined the claim (I'm guessing because it wasn't serviced at the exact correct intervals by a Citroen Dealer.

No more Citroens for me after this!

[cyclone]

SO you are obligated to have the car serviced when the service is due(not necesarily by Citroen but by someone using original parts) to maintain the warranty on the car. You did not do that. Claim is denied. Sounds reasonable to me. On the other hand all the other miscommunication, confusion, and dithering was absolutely uncalled for.

[BenS]

This seems like more of a "never purchasing from Arnold Clark again" rather than a "never buying a Citroen again".

[lfcrule1972]

Agreed cyclone.

vizzo - you can try and explain the delays to CUK Customer service and appeal to them for a gesture of goodwill, problem is you've given Citroen an out by not having it serviced correctly. They can say that if it had been serviced by a Citroen dealer they'd have picked it up earlier on.

[cyclone]

This seems like more of a "never purchasing from Arnold Clark again" rather than a "never buying a Citroen again".

Absolutely sounds like he was dealing with circus clowns.

[Shauna_H]

I've had my fair share of problems with my DS3 and I think Citroen's customer service is really poor however any manufacturer would be the same in this case. They all will try to find loop holes to save them having to repair something under warranty. I would try goodwill and see how it goes.

[cyclone]

I've had my fair share of problems with my DS3 and I think Citroen's customer service is really poor however any manufacturer would be the same in this case. They all will try to find loop holes to save them having to repair something under warranty. I would try goodwill and see how it goes.

Is it really a loop hole? Or one party "the owner" not complying with his responsibilities in order to maintain the warranty. It is not a secret that if you do not comply the warranty is void. It is all spelled out nothing is hidden. Is it 100% fair no but is is 100% correct. As Shauna said try and see if the dealer will fix it themselves as a goodwill gesture. A very important reason to be nice in your dealings with the handler even in the face of bad news and disappointing service.

[vizzo]

I have had the required number of services done for the mileage, but on a couple of occasions it ended up being a bit later than the schedule.
I'm only assuming this is how they are trying to wriggle out of it, because thus far no one will tell me!

I suppose my biggest beef is that this is a known fault that is clearly due to a design/manufacturing defect and warranty or no warranty, someone who wants my repeat business would think they might put it right!

[cyclone]

wiggle in a repair you mean, but whatever. Keep trying and Keep A Nice Face it's those asshats that can get it taken care of under "Good will"

[Jo67]

I have had the required number of services done for the mileage, but on a couple of occasions it ended up being a bit later than the schedule.

I've been told by more than one dealership/manufacturer that 1000 miles over or 1 month over is quite acceptable. Not sure if that helps you at all.

[StevenRB45]

Given the car is 4 maximum and there are no body inspections in the first 3 years how are people arriving at the conclusion cheap servicing is a valid reason to knock back a claim?

[lfcrule1972]

They're not - we are arriving at the conclusion that the services weren't carried out as scheduled and therefore CUK can use that to avoid dealing with under warranty.

[Shauna_H]

I have had the required number of services done for the mileage, but on a couple of occasions it ended up being a bit later than the schedule.
I'm only assuming this is how they are trying to wriggle out of it, because thus far no one will tell me!

I suppose my biggest beef is that this is a known fault that is clearly due to a design/manufacturing defect and warranty or no warranty, someone who wants my repeat business would think they might put it right!

How much later was the car serviced? Was this once or at every service interval?

[WTF]

It's very black and white with Citroen, on paper imagine if there is an admin tick box on a form -
Claim - paintwork
Did the owner get the car serviced by Citroen at required intervals - No
Outcome - denied

I imagine is something like how it went? It's no reflection on you or where the car was serviced, but just one problem for Citroen to solve amongst many others. You shouldn't feel that this is anything they are doing against YOU, just a name and claim in an office for them to sort through.

This seems like more of a "never purchasing from Arnold Clark again" rather than a "never buying a Citroen again".

Yeah, I was thinking this..... It's like buying mouldy Hovis each time from Sainsburys and saying you'll never shop at Sainsbury's rather than I'll never buy Hovis again.

Given the car is 4 maximum and there are no body inspections in the first 3 years how are people arriving at the conclusion cheap servicing is a valid reason to knock back a claim?

They're not - we are arriving at the conclusion that the services weren't carried out as scheduled and therefore CUK can use that to avoid dealing with under warranty.

Yeah, so to recap.

Bubbling paint
Arnold Clark and the separate bodyshop/Citroen in loggerheads about who should do what and who is responsible.
Citroen look at service history
Denied
Closed


So have you asked Citroen what claim Arnold Clark put to them exactly? For all you know it could just be on a paper as 'Warranty claim' to which the service history would be accountable.

As back up to close the whole service history chapter - do you have receipts from the services that confirm Citroen OEM parts where used? JUST to close this and stop them giving any reason for more questions.

Have you spoken to Citroen directly about the paintwork? NOT about the case Arnold Clark put fwd.

Have you read the service book and warranty guide? Note the first bullet point on page 9







Have you asked Arnold Clark to explain the answer based on the facts in the warranty book?

Your car is ~4 years old - according to the book, it is now due an Anti Perforation Warranty inspection.

Have you been to a Citroen Dealership to ask their opinion?

[vizzo]

So the latest is that there is still no reason for it being declined. However they've now reviewed it and will now contribute 18% to the cost ie I have to pay £545

When I asked the dealer how they come up with 18% he said they take into account age of car, service history, number of previous owners, mileage.

Guy at the dealer says I need to get in touch with Citroen ( who last time I called refused to talk to me about it)