Bongo Fury

Following an overheating problem last October one of our members had their waterpump, thermostat, temp pressure sensor & head gasket replaced. The work was done by a garage fully familiar with Bongos. All was fine until this week when there was another overheating problem. The garage have pressure tested the system and can find no leaks anywhere.

But here comes the interesting bit. The garage are claiming that because the head gasket has blown, that it must be the gasket itself that was faulty, and want the suppliers of the original gasket to pay for another gasket & bolt set, and all labour costs involved in any subsequent repair.

Surely a head gasket would only blow if there is an underlying over-heating problem? And a faulty gasket would not last 9 months would it?

Sounds very much like the garage are buck passing here. How can it be proved a gasket was faulty after it's blown ? As you rightly point out if it was faulty it would have shown up immediately [ ie 9 months ago ].
A few years ago my father had a similar problem when a local garage said the exact same thing and charged my father for the 2nd new gasket in 3 months until they had a reply from the supplier. Now i can't be sure but strongly suspect that after trousering my father's money they never contacted the supplier. Strangely when i called in and introduced myself and asked to see a copy of their correspondence after a 15 minute fruitless 'search' for said correspondence [ as naturally i offered to wait til they found it ] they gave up and i walked out with a cheque for the full amount.

The member's contract here is very clearly with the garage assuming they supplied the gasket. Therfore any claim for reimbursement from the suppliers must be made by the garage NOT the member. The member should not be asked to contribute to the argument or the bill.

i would advise the member to be robust in their next chat with the garage !

All the above assumes the garage provided the gasket - if the member supplied it for them to fit they should check with trading standards first as to liability. I do agree with Ian though it's unlikely to be a faulty gasket and again difficult if not impossible to prove.
If the bongo shop supplied the gasket it may complicate matters as i would assume the purchaser [ whether member or garage ] to have a contract with the shop even if the shop are only acting as agents.

Again try Trading standards !

The member bought the gasket (and the other parts) from a third party supplier and gave it to the garage to fit.

I would suggest that all is not well with the head and probably wasn't when they fitted the gasket last October.....was it checked for a true flat mating surface.....?????

Which is why the gararage feel they have room to wriggle out of paying for fix.

Just called consumer direct 0845 4040506

they advise that if the gasket is faulty it's the supplier that is liable but the garage if the work is faulty. In other words someone has to prove it !

They advise having the work looked at by an independent garage to confirm fault. The member should check with garage as to their acceptance of this and who pays for inspection. Not conclusive i know but because garage didn't supply parts. If member wants to call Consumer direct the reference is NW4129945.

Could be interesting. I'm pretty sure that under the Sale of Goods Act, if the gasket was less than 6 months old, it would be deemed to be faulty. However, as the gasket was bought more than 6 months ago, the onus is now on the buyer to prove it was faulty - fat chance of that The same probably applies to the work done by the garage, unless they provided a longer warranty on their work. Either way, it's not looking good for the Bongo owner
If it has passed a pressure test, why does the garage think the gasket has gone? I would have thought it's more likely to be a cracked head, with the crack closing as the engine cools - I seem to remember that that has happened to others in the past.
It does make you wonder if it's ever worth just changing the gasket and not the head.

Sound like a No Hoper situation. Bite the bullet, get it fixed & stick in in the file marked " Remember Not To Supply My Own Parts Next Time"

Bin there. Done that.

Twice.

[quote="Ian"] The garage have pressure tested the system and can find no leaks anywhere.

[quote="haydn callow"]I would suggest that all is not well with the head and probably wasn't when they fitted the gasket last October.....was it checked for a true flat mating surface

Correct me if I am wrong...but these heads need to be pressure tested when hot dont they as any small crack will expand a certain degree when hot and contract when cold. I concur with Hayden it does indicate to me as well as a head problem, but what caused it?

An over heating problem is the result of an undercooling problem. Has there been any water loss since the work was done initially? and were the levels monitored regulary?

Personally thinking, is skimming a head a good idea? ok it flattens the contact surface with the block but surley the remainder above it is still not running true.

Playing devils advocate, could the head gasket job have done and the problem still persisted, so rather than take the head off again and do a pressure test Steel Seal or similar was bunged in to mask it and give a false impression of a succesfull repair, then 9 months later......bubble bubble croak ? ........ just a thought.

mister munkey wrote:Sound like a No Hoper situation. Bite the bullet, get it fixed & stick in in the file marked " Remember Not To Supply My Own Parts Next Time"

Bin there. Done that.

Twice.

Agree, move on with life.

haydn callow wrote:I would suggest that all is not well with the head and probably wasn't when they fitted the gasket last October.....was it checked for a true flat mating surface.....?????

I agree++ and I always pray a garage makes the same kind of effort Simon Jones did when doing the job (flatting the block, using gasket sealant even when you are not supposed to need to, though that last one might be contentious).

Hi
O.K......I believe that the customer is the one entitled to have the problem resolved at no expense. Perhaps the time period is a little against the individual in this instance, but it is a matter of expectations of life...clearly one doesn't expect a failure this soon.
Regarding who is ultimately responsible is not an issue...you can't expect the garage to argue that the supplier must be the person who foots the bill, as they, in turn could say it is the responsibility of the manufacturer, and the whole issue could end up with a chase round the world.
It is clearly the responsibility of the garage doing the work.
I had a problem with a major car dealer over a new car. After a month of ownership, i found traces of masking tape on the lip of the rear hatch...(it was upward opening, and not a place normally checked)...I partially removed the tape, and THICK RUST...on a month old car. Looking hard at the paint, I discovered that it had been re-sprayed...and I have an eye for that ...so, I took the car back, and exchanged points of view...at the same time as contacting the manufacturer....and this is where it is relevant to the issue here: The manufacturer said that once the main dealership had taken delivery of the car, it was their property, and it was with the dealer that my argument must take place. In this case they did send a rep to examine the car, and we all agreed a small compensation package, and I got it in writing that the guarantee for rust would be honoured once it had been through the bodyshop ( I established that it was probably only a scratch gone wrong, anyway)
With reference to this, a major manufacturer's legal department has presumably got their wits about them, and I trust they are right....so, I guess that the garage in this case has to compensate, and try to prove that the part was faulty at their own expense, and it is not the task of the consumer to chase a third party.
It may be rough for the garage to lose a few quid, but when in business, this sort of thing happens....either fix the job, or lose reputation...And i reckon there is only one way to ensure that you keep a good name!
Cheers
Helen

It isn't so straightforward unfortunately as the member bought and supplied the parts. Had the garage done so then it would as you say be up to them to take up any faulty goods issues. However because the member provided them it leaves a more difficult problem as to liability. The information i gave was not my opinion but that of consumer direct [ trading standards].

As regards suggestions advising the member to move on it may not be so easy , we don't know the circumstances , maybe he/she can't afford to bite the bullet and pay for expensive repairs themselves. Also if the original and current problem is not properly resolved it will probably reappear. It is sometimes best, i agree, to draw a line if something is in danger of snowballing with little chance of a succesful outcome but i would have thought there may be room for a little manoevering yet and after all if faulty workmanship is suspected is it fair the garage should get off without a bit of a fight ?

Hi
Ah...yes...Ian said the member provided the parts!...no contest, then, EXCEPTING for the fact that the garage should have gone a little further if they are fully conversant with Bongos....It never pans out as a simple gasket job. Once they have got to the point of "failure of gasket", it seems that there is an underlying causative issue that needs attention. A re-fix with reduced labour costs, maybe?
Cheers
Helen

I think that's the snag... the garage don't want to admit an underlying cause rather just blame the gasket suplier for a faulty part. I do think you're right that a compromise will be the only solution on cost as actually proving fault seems a big headache.

It would be interesting to see the garage reaction though if a new gasket was fitted with no investigation into cause as they seem to want and it also fails [ as it surely will ]. Their argument seems to be it is the gasket only so if a new one goes [ but this time source/supplied by them ] then surely they would then see sense. Might be worth our member explaining that to them !

I had what (as far as I can tell) was a head gasket failure at approx 80,000 miles. Pressure in the system was forcing water out the expansion tank. Had head skimmed & pressure tested, stuck it all back together & it was worse than ever. Second pressure test passed ok, but this time I got advise from Bellhill who told me about 'decking the block' & Wellseal gasket compound. Followed their guidance to the letter & over 10,000 miles later, the cooling system is spot on. Slapping a new gasket or head on is not always a guaranteed quick fix.