Car problems

[olliegjw]

My sister has come across a problem with her new car, and wondered if any of you have any suggestions.

 

She just bought a used car in MN. It came with a Limited Warranty that includes engine repair, transmission problems, drive axle, brakes, steering, and other misc items. Well, she drove it from MN to WI and immediately had problems. She called her dealer, and they agreed to pay for a tow to the dealer nearest to us.

 

They diagnosed the problem as broken turbo charge. They offered to split the bill. I do not know much about cars, but it would seem that the turbo charge would be part of the engine, and would be fully covered. The warranty mentions the following under covered Gasoline Engine - All lubricated engine parts, intake manifolds, engine block, and cylinder gear, rotary engine housing, and ring gear.

 

So, my question is, has anyone experienced similar problems with a "new" used car, or have any knowledge as to what exactly the turbo charge does?

[BREWCREW5]

I would be happy with that.

[SquirrelMaster]

The turbocharger (which is what I'm assuming you mean when you say "turbo charge"), is definitely a lubricated engine part. Splitting the bill wouldn't be good enough for me, as it says in your warranty that it should be covered.

 

The turbo uses the exhaust gases that the car makes, spinning a compressor, and compressing the intake air on the other side of the turbocharger. Compressed air = more oxygen molecules = more power. Kind of a simple way of explaining it...

[Teatoe993]

I think it is a little bit arguable that the turbo is part of the engine. Technically it is mounted outside of the motor. It is lubricated by oil but it's only connected to the engine in the similar kind of way that an exhaust would be connected. If they're willing to split the bill, I'd take it and not argue. What kind of car is it? I'm hoping that it isn't a Saab 9-5 or a Volkswagen with a 1.8 Turbo. I've seen a ton of bad ones with oil sludge and turbo problems.

[olliegjw]

It is a 99 Passat. By doing just a little research, it is not a used car that one should buy. Too late for that. I think she will fight to have the whole thing covered. The warranty also lists things that aren't covered, and the turbo charger would not fit into any of those categories.

[JaDerHeyski]

I also think its pretty reasonable that they will split the bill (and they paid for the tow?)

 

If you actually read the finprint it will tell you at length what it covers. Sometimes it will cover engine work, but not any of the gaskets or replacement screws. That's how some dealerships can get you for a few extra bucks.

 

I could tell you nightmare stories about the last car I bought, but not everyone goes through that. I say if they are going to work with you, it's awesome. Keep in mind, if what they offer is not enough, it doesn't hurt to ask for more. The worst they can say is no.

[bullox]

IMO, the turbo technically is not part of the engine as the car will run fine without it. The engine still gets air in the intake, just not as much as if the turbo was forcing air into it.

[owbc]

Just the fact that they are willing to split the bill suggests that they should be paying the whole thing. They would probably have offered to do nothing if it wasn't in the warranty.

[Houlie24x]

I would agree with those saying she should be happy to split the bill if it were months over even weeks down the road, but she was driving it home just after buying it. A dealership should have known the turbo had problems when they had it. At the same time though she should have had it checked out by a mechanic. I don't know if cars are sold as is as seen in MN like WI, but I'm assuming they are. Either way, I wouldn't blame anyone that would want the whole thing to be paid for when it broke down on the ride home.

[dadofandrew]

If it's not listed on what is not covered, I'd say it's covered. I agree, if they are offering to split it, they are just hoping she takes it, as they know they should pay it. If it was a wizzy widget, and the non-covered list said wizzy widgets, they would not be offering to pay 50% "just to be nice."

[stoops17]

IMO, the turbo technically is not part of the engine as the car will run fine without it. The engine still gets air in the intake, just not as much as if the turbo was forcing air into it.

I agree it is technically not part of the engine, but the engine is designed to use the turbocharger for it's intake source. In fact without the turbocharger, the car would probably be very underpowered and struggle to accelerate, it may even switch the engine's pc into limp mode which would make the car undrivable.

I think it should be completely covered by the warranty. The engine will not function properly if the turbo isn't fixed.

[Gobias Industries]

They're not even actually covering 50% of the repair. That is how most 30 day, 50/50 warranties work on used lots. They will just double the price on the bill, and the customer picks up the actual cost of the bill.

[Invader3K]

I think they should be paying for the whole thing, seeing how it broke almost immediately after she bought it. Of course, that's not always how things work in the auto world.

[thebruce44]

bullox[/b]]IMO, the turbo technically is not part of the engine as the car will run fine without it. The engine still gets air in the intake, just not as much as if the turbo was forcing air into it.

 

A car that is designed to use a turbo will not run fine without it. Otherwise she wouldn't have noticed a problem in the first place.

 

That would be like saying a naturally aspirated V8 would run fine if 2 cylinders broke because there are V6s out there that work. Sure, you could probably tune the car to run with 6 cylinders just like you could get a factory turboed car to work without a turbo. It is still a necessary part of the designed power-plant of the car and in my opinion part of the engine.

[bullox]

Good points, i would agree with that.

[lodiness]

It all depends on how the warranty is worded. At our lot on certain models we put on a similar warranty that covers virtually the same parts. Our warranty is 50/50 in our shop. Just because they offered to pay 50% right away doesn't necessarily mean that they think they should pay for the whole thing. If it is a new customer, they may be trying to build a repore with her, so she leaves with a better experience than thinking "I just got screwed", and possibly purchasing from them again. Just curious what type of dealership was it? I think that they are trying to make it right the best they can. This seems fair and reasonable. Did she take the vehicle to another service center to have it checked before she bought it? That is fairly common practice. I hope everything turns out well for her.

[lodiness]

They're not even actually covering 50% of the repair. That is how most 30 day, 50/50 warranties work on used lots. They will just double the price on the bill, and the customer picks up the actual cost of the bill.

If that is how you think it works, call up their service department, ask for a quote anonymously, and you'll know if they are screwing you. Even call a different dealer, find out what their labor rate is and compare the two. If that is what happened to me I would be irrate. That is not how most places operate though.

 

[Nottso]

They should cover the entire bill. This isn't some surprise thing that popped up a few months after buying the car. The car was broken when she bought it, and it's plain for all to see. For them to do anything other than pay the entire bill would be the epitome of sleaze in the auto sales industry.

[lodiness]

If she bought a newer car, yes, I could see paying for the whole thing. She bought a car that was over 10 years old. These things do come up, and there is no way of predicting them. I would just like to ask a question. If she bought it from a private individual, how much would they help her repair it? Answer..none, she would be [out of luck]. You can't tell that a car is going to break down, any more than you can tell that your wife is going to cheat on you, if the place did the inspections that they should (I don't know how MN law is). You would have to be a psychic. Some places do sell crap, and they give the industry a bad name. Not every dealer is out to rip people off.

 

(removed acronym with cuss --1992)

[thebruce44]

You can't tell that a car is going to break down, any more than you can tell that your wife is going to cheat on you, if the place did the inspections that they should (I don't know how MN law is). You would have to be a psychic.

This is like your wife cheating on you on the wedding night which you would probably be able to predict since thats pretty slutty.

 

Its an extreme case. It would seem the turbo was broken on the lot. Sure it could have gone bad during the initial drive, but this is very suspicious.

[Menace II Sobriety]

This is like your wife cheating on you on the wedding night which you would probably be able to predict since thats pretty slutty.

 

Its an extreme case. It would seem the turbo was broken on the lot. Sure it could have gone bad during the initial drive, but this is very suspicious.

I don't have to worry about this because my wife is still a virgin. There are some people that are out to make a quick buck but if that were the case they wouldn't offer to help out at all. They would string you along and avoid the situation as long as possible, not tell you they will help remedy the situation on the first contact.

 

Also to say that they knowingly sold the car with a defect would also mean that they knowingly bought the car with a defect. The dealers are going to have the car looked over by one of their people before they buy it at auction or in a trade. If a defect was noticed 99% of the time it would not be bought. It is not like these cars sit around while they debate how to avoid making necessary repairs and still sell the car. The car gets bought, it goes in for a quick check and it is for sale the next day at the latest.

 

This is like getting a flat tire, sometimes it just happens, especially on older cars. That is why warranties are in place. If a company sells a product and it is faulty, and at first notification of the default offered to remedy the situation there is no way they should be considered working in unethical business practices.