Cam Chain snapped on new van after 20 months / 114k miles

[des8]

Agree with Pezza54
Trouble with ombudsman is he is not an engineer and decides according to what he thinks is fair.
Also he seems confused as to whether it is a car or a van, and doesn't he realise that if one is running a business (perhaps delivering goods?) a van standing still is a wasted asset.
Driving 5,000miles plus a month doesn't make the chain fail quicker (in mileage terms) than driving 2000 miles a month
A timing chain is not a wear and tear item (unless the vehicle has been neglected) , it is a failure if it snaps


Regarding longevity of timing chains I have an MGB engine with its original chain driven over 350,000 miles!

[WhiteVanMan5]

No point in going back to the ombudsman. The case was closed last July.
Interestingly the case investigator referred to CRA, unaware that you used the van for business purposes and therefore not regarded as a consumer under CRA
I am surprised about this. A van with very high mileage? Did the investigator ask you what you bought the van for?

The ombudsman has gone against the inspector's report which stated the chain should not have failed when it did, and was expected to last 150k to 250k miles, provided the van was regularly serviced in accordance with the van's maintenance schedule. Driving in optimum conditions covers driving in UK and Europe.

My advice is to start a court claim against the credit card company as sole defendant under CCA 74 Section 75 for breach of contract by the dealer under the Sale of Goods Act (see my post 8)

No, I don't believe the question of the purpose of the use of the van ever came up. That should have been pretty obvious though, as you suggested.

I will follow your advice. Do I do it straight away given the response from the credit card company that their view has not changed and they won't enter into any more correspondance or do I still give them the original 14 days?

[Pezza54]

You should follow pre-action protocol and write a LBA to the ccc, giving them 14 days to respond

[WhiteVanMan5]

Agree with Pezza54
Trouble with ombudsman is he is not an engineer and decides according to what he thinks is fair.
Also he seems confused as to whether it is a car or a van, and doesn't he realise that if one is running a business (perhaps delivering goods?) a van standing still is a wasted asset.
Driving 5,000miles plus a month doesn't make the chain fail quicker (in mileage terms) than driving 2000 miles a month
A timing chain is not a wear and tear item (unless the vehicle has been neglected) , it is a failure if it snaps


Regarding longevity of timing chains I have an MGB engine with its original chain driven over 350,000 miles!

I actually made that exact comment after the second judgement to the Ombudsman. I sent:

Thank you again for your considered attention to this case. Whilst I obviously don’t like, nor agree, with the decision you have reached, I continue to appreciate your professionalism in the matter.

Could I double check one paragraph with you, quoted below:
“Ultimately for us to be able to say that there has been a clear breach of contract, we have to be able to show that the engine failure was down to an inherent manufacturing fault. The inspector has clearly shown that the timing chain failed but what he hasn’t shown is that the timing chain didn’t fail due to wear and tear. While timing chains can last past the 100,000-mile mark but when they do it is down to regular servicing and ideal conditions and use. The fact is that it is hard to argue that the van has been used in the ideal conditions and use given that it has completed so many miles in such a short period of time.”
As a non-mechanical person, one error I kept making was confusing a Timing Belt and Timing Chain. Indeed, Tesco clearly made the same mistake multiple times in their correspondence. Is it possible you are making the same error we were? 100,000 miles would be typical for the durability of a Timing Belt, however not for a Timing Chain. In this case, the Timing Belt was in good condition and had not failed. A Timing Chain should not be subject to the same “wear and tear” considerations that a Timing Belt would be.

I also don’t accept that the speed at which the van has put on miles is significant. Indeed, if it is significant, it is significant in that it is a lot more than normal of “low stress” motorway miles. I would argue that 5,500 miles per month is not significant, the only significance is the approx. 114,000 miles in total. Catastrophic failure after 114,000 miles must be unacceptable on a new commercial diesel vehicle that has been properly maintained, on a part not subject to “wear and tear” concerns.

I then followed that up with a clarification:

I am not sure I expressed the point well that I really wanted to make in a succinct manner. So if you will forgive me, I will try again, very briefly.

The timing chain is not a user maintained part of the vehicle that is commonly replaced. To all intents and purposes, it is not a part that should be considered subject to wear and tear considerations, much less after only 114k miles. It only failed because it has not been manufactured to a sufficiently durable standard, as can be seen by what is clearly a relatively high failure rate.

And this was the response

Thank you for your patience while I have considered what you have said. So you referenced the confusion, or possible confusion between the timing belt and timing chain.

So you are correct that they are not the same think.

The first thing to say is that there is no specific industry standard that says a timing belt of chain has to or will last a certain mileage but the general expectation is that either one lasts about 100,000 miles and of course that means that some will last longer and some won't.

If you look online you tend to get answers to how long either one lasts as I have demonstrated below.

A timing belt although they do the same job. re the life span of a timing belt - 'Cambelts or timing belts usually need to be replaced, usually between 40,000 and 100,000 miles. Alternatively, for lower mileage cars, the belt is advised to be replaced around four or five years. However, it all depends on the car and manufacturer.'

'Unless there is a specific fault, the timing chain should be replaced between 80,000 and 120,000 miles. Chain problems are frequent in automobiles with increasing mileage. If you're driving an older car or one with a lot of miles on it, keep an eye out for signs that the timing chain is failing.'
Both of these quotes fit with our understanding and experience of how these things tend to go.
What I would also note however is that most engines will only have either a Timing chain of a timing belt, not both. they may on occasion have two of one but never a mixture unless it is a hand built customer car. A main manufacture doesn't make engines like that. The belt you maybe referring to could be an auxiliary belt.
Ultimately however re the distance travel to failure, it is generally accepted that any vehicle that has completed the kind of distance your van has is going to be hard to show that the issue lies at the door of the manufacturer. If the van was say 8 years old there wold be no chance that we could ever say that the issue was down to the manufacturer. the reason that option remained for you was due to the age but the hurdle of showing the car was unsatisfactory at the point of sale gets higher the more mileage it does. This is why I came down on the side I did. The report isn't clear in stating that the issue wasn't down to wear and tear.
In know you said that 'The timing chain is not a user maintained part of the vehicle that is commonly replaced. To all intents and purposes, it is not a part that should be considered subject to wear and tear considerations, much less after only 114k miles' and you are correct it is not a directly maintained by a driver, but the other maintenance of the car supports the way it runs. I also can't argue that it is not a component subject to wear and tear as the chain is used every time you turn the engine on and drive the van. The chain is subject to wear from the moment you pick up the van.
In terms of what you have said about how you have used the van, I completely accept that argument, the difficulty is that the timing chain is a part subject to wear and tear. I would have been very content to have upheld this case as the vans failure caused no end of stress inconvenience and cost to you, but I am considering the case against the finance provider and as such I have to be able to fairly say as an impartial assessment that there is clear evidence to show the finance provider is liable and the evidence doesn't do that from my view.
So I accept and appreciate that this is not the outcome you want, but I can assure you that if there was any reasonable avenue to uphold the case I would have done.

I then followed that up with this:

Apologies for the delayed response to this, however I am beyond my technical understanding and am reliant on the explanations of others for my understanding. In the past week, my understanding has evolved.

In the last week I have come to understand that the terms “Timing Chain” and “Cam Chain” are widely used interchangeably, but that they are not the same thing. In the case of my van, I have a timing belt which was in good condition when the engine was stripped down, and was not involved in this failure and a cam chain which is the part that failed, destroying the engine. I acknowledge that both myself and my expert report have used the term “Timing Chain” in relation to my vehicle, it seems incorrectly.

Your internet searches specify that the timing chain should be replaced at between 80,000 and 120,000. This does not apply to the cam chain on my vehicle.

I refer you to my expert report, which I suggest should be more authoritative than general internet searches. Specifically, section 6.1 of the 24^th May 2024 report which states that “chains such as this should last the lifetime of the engine and a failure such as this is very unusual”. Whilst failures such as this are unusual, they are not that unusual, it would appear on this engine and I refer you to section 5.0 of the same report which states “there appears to be a well-established situation where there is a known fault and inherent defect with this engine which in my opinion was present from when the vehicle was produced”. I maintain my previous statement that the failed chain on my vehicle was not a user serviceable part and should have lasted the lifetime of the vehicle if it had been produced to sufficient quality. In the services I had done with Vauxhall, no mention was ever made of changing the chain.

I appreciate your consideration of this perspective,

And this was his response to that:

Thank you for your patience while I have considered your email.

You stated that 'I refer you to my expert report, which I suggest should be more authoritative than general internet
searches. Specifically, section 6.1 of the 24th May 2024 report which states that “chains such as this
should last the lifetime of the engine and a failure such as this is very unusual”. Whilst failures such as
this are unusual, they are not that unusual, it would appear on this engine and I refer you to section 5.0
of the same report which states “there appears to be a well-established situation where there is a
known fault and inherent defect with this engine which in my opinion was present from when the
vehicle was produced”. I maintain my previous statement that the failed chain on my vehicle was not a
user serviceable part and should have lasted the lifetime of the vehicle if it had been produced to
sufficient quality. In the services I had done with Vauxhall, no mention was ever made of changing the
chain.'

I agree that a simple internet search is not something that overrules an experts report. However the internet search was provided in an attempt to example the rational behind the overall conclusion.

As a service (and myself) we have built up a strong general knowledge about cars and how they work, but also how they can fail and what is likely to have caused the failure, this is mostly through research and learnt information from expert reports etc over time. However we also rely on a team of mechanically knowledgeable people here who are able to provide offer advise and provide expertise when required.

To be brutally honest regarding the experts comments 'Chains such as this should last the lifetime of the engine and a failure such as this is very unusual.'

It's possible for timing chains to last +100k miles but this is heavily dependant on regular servicing and ideal conditions/use. It's not uncommon for timing chains to display signs of stretching (rattling) around 100k miles and while many manufactures don't specify an interval to change timing chains, continuing to use an engine with a timing rattle can result in the chain jumping off the timing gears or stretching to a point of failure.

Our experience is that the view that the chain should last the life time of the vehicle is optimistic.

In terms of Vauxhall not recommending that the chain be replaced as part of the service, this is because this is not something manufacturers tend to recommend, unless there is a sign that the chain is failing.

While I also accept that the inspector has pointed to the issue being a known issue I was unable to confirm this in any definitive way that could have shown that a) your engine was effected and b) the issue wasn't wear and tear.
I am sorry I am still unable to provide more positive news.

[WhiteVanMan5]

You should follow pre-action protocol and write a LBA to the ccc, giving them 14 days to respond

I sent the LBA on Monday 21st October and they responded pretty quickly with the following:

Your claim under Section 75 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974

Thank you for contacting us.

Our decision remains unchanged as per the decision provided on 14/11/2023 under Section 75.

Since no new information has been provided and this matter was addressed by the ombudsman service on 13th July 2024, we will not respond further.

We would advise you to seek your own independent legal advice.

[Pezza54]

No, I don't believe the question of the purpose of the use of the van ever came up. That should have been pretty obvious though, as you suggested.

I will follow your advice. Do I do it straight away given the response from the credit card company that their view has not changed and they won't enter into any more correspondance or do I still give them the original 14 days?

Yes still write to the ccc complying with pre-action protocol. 14 days to reply is fine

[Pezza54]

So you can start your court claim now
Write short consecutively numbered paragraphs under the headings:
Background
What happened
Breach of contract
Amount of claim
Statement of truth

Do not fall into the trap of writing too much about what happened. At this stage you only need to refer to the conclusions of the reports, Copies of the reports should be provided with your witness statement

Under background include brief details of the van, how Vauxhall's literature describes the van, anything the salesman said about the van
State the date you paid a deposit for the van using the defendant's credit card given to you under agreement dated xxxxxx and how you paid the balance
Say your claim against the defendant is under Section 75 of CCA 74 (refer to clauses that apply) and the defendant has refused your claim

Under what happened
Short paragraphs in chronological order

Under breach of contract
Refer to the relevant clauses in SoGA and type them out. State how the claimant maintains the dealer breached the contract when the new van was found to be not of satisfactory quality as it was insufficiently durable when the timing chain snapped after only 20 months

Under amount of claim
The claimant claims damages as a remedy to the breach of contract by the supplier. The following are the monetary losses suffered by the claimant. List the items as your post 24

You can either start your claim on MCOL and send full PoC to the defendant later, or you can send 2 full copies of the PoC along with 2 copies of the claim form by post to the civil courts business centre
,

[des8]

Quote from ombudsman "What I would also note however is that most engines will only have either a Timing chain of a timing belt, not both. they may on occasion have two of one but never a mixture unless it is a hand built customer car. A main manufacture doesn't make engines like that."

Well the Vauxhall insignia 2.0L certainly had both! Belt at the front of the engine(single cam sprocket) and a drive chain between the 2 cam gears at the other end. So much for their knowledge!

.... and was there any indication (rattles or misfiring) that the chain might have stretched out of spec?
I doubt it!

[WhiteVanMan5]

So you can start your court claim now
Write short consecutively numbered paragraphs under the headings:
Background
What happened
Breach of contract
Amount of claim
Statement of truth

Do not fall into the trap of writing too much about what happened. At this stage you only need to refer to the conclusions of the reports, Copies of the reports should be provided with your witness statement

Under background include brief details of the van, how Vauxhall's literature describes the van, anything the salesman said about the van
State the date you paid a deposit for the van using the defendant's credit card given to you under agreement dated xxxxxx and how you paid the balance
Say your claim against the defendant is under Section 75 of CCA 74 (refer to clauses that apply) and the defendant has refused your claim

Under what happened
Short paragraphs in chronological order

Under breach of contract
Refer to the relevant clauses in SoGA and type them out. State how the claimant maintains the dealer breached the contract when the new van was found to be not of satisfactory quality as it was insufficiently durable when the timing chain snapped after only 20 months

Under amount of claim
The claimant claims damages as a remedy to the breach of contract by the supplier. The following are the monetary losses suffered by the claimant. List the items as your post 24

You can either start your claim on MCOL and send full PoC to the defendant later, or you can send 2 full copies of the PoC along with 2 copies of the claim form by post to the civil courts business centre
,

Thanks - I will get on the case tomorrow (and hopefully get it sorted tomorrow before the start of another working week!). I will post here if that is ok, because I am sure I will get it wrong! I appreciate (truly) your support.

[WhiteVanMan5]

Quote from ombudsman "What I would also note however is that most engines will only have either a Timing chain of a timing belt, not both. they may on occasion have two of one but never a mixture unless it is a hand built customer car. A main manufacture doesn't make engines like that."

Well the Vauxhall insignia 2.0L certainly had both! Belt at the front of the engine(single cam sprocket) and a drive chain between the 2 cam gears at the other end. So much for their knowledge!

.... and was there any indication (rattles or misfiring) that the chain might have stretched out of spec?
I doubt it!

When you put it like that, it is ridiculous!!!

I had no forewarning - however I am not at all mechanically minded, so anything subtle, I'm unlikely to have noticed anyway.

I have actually posted the dashcam footage of the moment it happened on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOjxfxUDHm0

[WhiteVanMan5]

Thanks - I will get on the case tomorrow (and hopefully get it sorted tomorrow before the start of another working week!). I will post here if that is ok, because I am sure I will get it wrong! I appreciate (truly) your support.

Just to check all options are explored and I'm on the best path.

Everything suggests this was a problem with manufacture and is a widespread problem with a lot of "victims" - is there a better pathway to scouring widely motoring forums, finding other "victims" and clubbing together under some kind of "class action" (is that even a thing in the UK?)

Are there any motoring consumer groups who might take the case on "in the public interest"?

How about "no win no fee" legal routes?

Or is MCOL better than all of these possibilities?

[Pezza54]

Yes ok to post for further advice.
IMO court action is the best route. You could wait a long time for class action. Most cases will need individual assessment of the claim, unlike dieselgate
Be wary of MCOL. Lines and numbers of characters in the box for the PoC are limited and you may find your typed characters suddenly stop appearing. This happened to me, so I reverted to paper

[WhiteVanMan5]

I am starting my claim (I hear what you say about MCOL, but I am trying that first as it is a lot easier!).

The bank I am claiming against have their head office in Edinburgh (or at least their published correspondance address), outside England and Wales, so their address is being rejected. How do I deal with that?

[WhiteVanMan5]

Just checked their small print and it says this:

"Applicable law
If your address is in Scotland, Scots law applies to the
contract between us, the dealings we have with a view
to entering into it and any legal case between us will
be referred to the Scottish courts. If your address is
elsewhere, English law will apply and any legal case will
be referred to the English or Welsh courts."

But that doesn't help me put the Defendants Scottish Address on the claim form.

[Pezza54]

The bank operates in England so you should be able to make a claim under English law
Check the bank's terms and conditions to see if there are any clauses about legal jurisdiction
Users of MSE forum faced the same problem and were advised to drop MCOL and make a paper claim