VW Jetta Has Had 2 Major Faults in 5 Years. What Are My Rights?

Update: so I guess no one thinks I have a chance, which is really the info I wanted. Since it hasn't been done before, I will still fight for it and then fall back on a full repair.

Update2: I have received a call from the service tech, they have offered to repair the car for free (no $1000 diagnostic charge). They have claimed this is the final offer. I am still planning to take action against the company through ACCC and also VW. However I will let them repair my car because I need it for work and it is costing me money being off the road. Thankyou to all the kind Ozbargainers who private messaged me with their stories and how they received full refunds. I really appreciate your support! I have contacted ACCC through facebook to get advice on how to proceed. I believe this is a systematic plan by the dealer and possibly VW to take money from customers illegally. I don't know how widespread this is, but they told me if I contributed money to the repairs I would be covered by a 2 year warranty on the gearbox. However because I haven't done this, they won't be covering this. I do have a friend who worked for consumer protection years ago, I will find out if she has any connections I can work with.

1) I have sent an email to VW headoffice asking for a major resolution and also clarified whether charging diagnostic fees is regular practice when dealing with manufacturing faults.
2) I have sent an email to the WA consumer protection office, detailing everything that was happening and to uncover whether I have a leg to stand on.

I wonder if someone who wasn't as assertive would have got this resolution. Based on the comments in the thread, I doubt it.

Update3: I probably won't take this to small claims court to demand a major remedy because of the time, effort and stress, however I passionately and wholeheartedly believe that I would have a case and maybe even win. Especially if all the people who commented about having DSG issues with the jetta sent me a copy of their fault report/warranty repairs. However if I get enough evidence, I will try to set precedence. I just need to show that this has been covered up and that this is a over-represented fault that would have stopped most reasonable individuals from purchasing the car. 118TSI models.

If anyone wants to send me fault reports on their DSG/VW Gearbox/Piston issues:

Please send them to [email protected] (this is my new real working email).


I will not be paying anyone $1000 to fix a fault that is covered by the manufacturers. I am fairly sure this is not legal. It would be like Apple charging you $200 to take your phone apart before diagnosing a power issue internally that was a manufacturing fault.

My opinion still is that VW made the systematic decision to use Rubbish parts in this car and it has had wide spread known issues that have resulted in two major faults. The car was and is not suitable for purpose.

I will then pay to get someone to do a full check on the car and either sell it or

I tried to keep this short and simple… skip to the end for the summary.

My parents purchased a NEW VW Jetta 118TSI from a large dealership in March 2013 for just under $30,000. The car came with 3 years of warranty.

2 years ago:
Major fault with the pistons in the engine, resulting in VW repairing the car for free. I am not completely across what the issue was as I wasn't involved at the time.

1 year ago:
Whenever I borrowed the car infrequently, I noticed that once a traffic light turns green and you accelerate. The car will jerk forward as if skipping a gear. I informed my parents, however they said nothing was picked up during any of the perfect service history. My father either did not believe or realise this was a fault. VW also stated they did not recognise a fault.

2 months ago: I purchased exclusive use of the car from my parents for the trade-in value at the time. They remain the owners.

Last week: I was driving around in the country and after attempting to drive off at a green traffic light, the car failed to shift through gears and the accelerator failed to work. The car started flashing with engine lights etc. I managed to drive back, because I was able to trick the car into shifting gears and once at 100km/h the car was able to cruise along fine.

Now i've taken it to the dealer. They told me that they would only assess it if we payed them $1000+. We accepted this on the condition that if it was a manufacturers fault, the car would be repaired for free.

The diagnostics has uncovered that the car has a major gearbox issue, which has led to a part of the gearbox detaching and leading to shrapnel. They need to completely remove and repair this part. The service tech has told me it is a Major Fault. VW has agreed to cover the costs of parts and labour.

Now we get to the fun bit…

The dealer has come back to us, told us that we still need to pay the $1000 for labour diagnostics. Despite it clearly being a manufacturers fault (VW accepted to repair it?). We have rejected this and told them that the car has had two major faults since 2013. All their new cars offer a 5 year warranty. We expected the car to $30,000 european car to last at least 5 years if not more. VW has already accepted fault by agreeing to repair the car.

The car has done 50,000km in 5 years.

I do not think it is reasonable for this car to have two major faults within 5 years. I have no faith in their repair process and I do not feel safe driving the car following the previous incident. I also believe this issue has been present for much longer and they never picked it up through servicing the car.

I asked the service tech if the first repair and now this repair are deemed major faults. He agreed. I then asked him for a major remedy - refund or replacement under ACL.

The service tech, has told me that it is unreasonable to think the car should last this long without an breaking down. "Do you think every car should last forever without breaking down" - My answer was no, I think my car should last for a reasonable amount of time. He also told me that I had a 3 year warranty and it was now out of warranty. In addition to this he lied to my and told me that the car was a USED car. He then changed his mind and said it was a EX Demo car. The contract says NEW in black and white.

I am not going to lie down, because I think this is a clear cut case of them selling a lemon and then refusing to abide by ACL.

I told him that if he can't authorise a remedy for a major fault. I want to speak to someone who can. He said his manager will call me tomorrow. Following my chat today with the service tech, he hung up on me mid sentence.

I wouldn't mind perspectives and advice. Do I have a foot to stand on. Two major faults within 5 years… I don't think this is acceptable personally.

TLDR: Car is 5 years old, 2 major faults (accepted terminology by VW and Dealer). New incident with gearbox last week. Repairs labour and parts covered by VW as manufacturing fault. Dealer trying to charge $1000 for diagnostics. I want a major remedy under ACL.

closed Comments

  • +20

    the car is 2 years out of warranty, VW is paying for the repair and parts, I would accept this before they change their mind, if you had to cover the cost of this repair yourself you are looking at around $3,000 to $5000 + more through VW.

    • +2

      I agree it will cost more. But I don't agree with your take on the number of years warranty they decided on. Would you be happy if a $30,000 car had two major faults in 5 years?

      • +5

        They offer a warranty for a certain time period, after that they no longer owe you anything. Car parts wear out eventually and need to be replaced. You should consider yourself lucky they are offering you anything.

        • +5

          This car part did not wear out from frequent use. The car part broke off within the inside of the gearbox. It is a known issue. The issue was present when the car was designed and sold to me. It took time on the road for this issue to come to light. Therefore the warranty period is irrelevant.

          Just an question… how long is the popular consensus for the lifespan of a gearbox? km? years?

        • +5

          This is only half true; outside of warranty the ACL still applies. OP's plan to complain to the ACCC is definitely worth it, although it seems that they're a bit of a paper tiger.

          • +1

            @ely: haha paper tiger just saved $1000 by his papercuts, which is a lot of money to me anyway.

            • +3

              @hypie: Oh definitely; the threat of the tiger works well. I've lost count of the number of times I've mentioned the various ombudsmen, but I've only actually had too follow through once, the threat is almost better than the thing itself :D

              • @ely: The pen is mightier than the sword, but with car dealerships and manufacturers it looks like you need both and probably some nuclear arms.

    • +4

      The VW is probably still within warranty as far as the consumer law is concerned, but I am no lawyer. A recent court case ended badly for range rover, where they had to refund $283,000 because the car was shitheap and the buyer was able to argue and win that the car was "unfit for purpose".

      https://www.bay939.com.au/news/local-news/98809-couple-puts-…

      • That car was bought in 2015. Couldn't have been more than 3 years old, certainly not over 5 years old like OP's car here.

        Also many more major issues than OP's car.

        Basically other than the heading, two completely incomparable cases.

        • +8

          And also comparing a top of the line luxury car owned by a a rich, cashed up woman with a powerful husband to OP, who bought one of the cheapest VW models on the market and an OzBargain account…

          But, as an ex-Land Rover mechanic, can confirm, Range Rovers are shit boxes…

          • -2

            @pegaxs: I would suggest $30,000 for a car isn't cheap. But yes it might be one of the cheaper VW's on the market.

            It sounds like every mechanic thinks every brand is a Sh!t box, unless it's Jap. I don't doubt it, but why do people still buy those cars?

            • +4

              @hypie: I was making reference to comparing the 2 year old, $280,000 Range Rover owned by a wealthy woman and her husband with your case, being that of an average priced car that is over 5 years old. They are not even remotely related.

              And no, not all mechanics think that. I happen to think that BMW make a nice car, so do Hyundai, Kia, Lamborghini, Porsche and a host of other non-Japanese car makers. Unfortunately, Land Rover are not one of them, neither is VW.

              And why do people keep buying those cars? Who knows, with all the bad press and terrible ownership stories of these vehicles, I will never understand why people buy into it… some are more easily lead into marketing bullshit than other, I guess…

              • -3

                @pegaxs: Yes, I know what you were referring too. But I dispute that $30,000 should be considered a cheap car! mo' money.

                • +3

                  @hypie: For a European car, I would absolutely consider it a cheap car. VW make some expensive cars, yours is not one of them. It is no more expensive than an equivalent Hyundai.

                  Sure, compared to a packet of Tim Tams, it is expensive, but compared to other similar makes and models at the time, it was about average, so no, it’s not an expensive car when considering where it fits into the market.

                  Your parents obviously thought it was cheap enough and good value for money when they purchased it, so, I will still argue, it’s a cheap car. If it wasn’t, they would have bought something else…

                  • @pegaxs: I disagree, I accept your perspective. The median income in Australia is roughly $44,000. I think $30,000 can be considered significant in anyone's eyes. Yes I know more expensive cars exist. But that doesn't make this a cheap car.

                    • +13

                      @hypie: Neg me all you want, it doesn’t make it an expensive car. At $30,000, it is about average price for your typical new family sedan.

                      I could sit here and reel off car after car after car that fits in this price bracket. It isnt expensive when you consider what you are buying. It’s price was about market average for a brand new car of its type.

                      The other point is, YOU didn’t pay $30k for it and you paid your parents for it, so in the end, it isnt a $30k car after all. It’s $30k - your contribution…

                      $30k is only expensive if it is relative to something. You are comparing buying a car for $30k and $30k for just being what it is. It just doesn’t work like that. Is $30k expensive for a bicycle? yes. It’s hellishly expensive. Is $30k expensive for your average family sized European sedan, no. It’s about market value. For the same reason companies don’t sell many $30k bicycles, if VW tried to sell this car at what people considered “expensive”, they would not sell any.

                      And negging me doesn’t make me wrong, it just shows you’re all butt hurt. Pffft, people and their fake internet points…

                      I disagree, I accept your perspective.

                      Yeah, nah. I’ll put that in the “I’m not a racist, buuut…” genre of sayings… if you accepted my perspective, you would have said that and left it.

                      • -3

                        @pegaxs: Sorry that was an accident and I can't take it back unfortunately. You can have a nice shiny plus here since it upset you so much.

                        It still is a lot of money.

                        You get a 2 year warranty on your $300 mobile phone.

                        Why is it acceptable for you to get 3 years warranty on a $30,000 car.

                        Also… $30,000 is expensive no matter what argument you make. Also as a consumer you expect more reliability and durability from a major brand name manufacturer with a 80 year history of producing cars. I would say $17-22,000 would be the price for an 4 seater sedan entry level car like this? So people have obviously payed a significant premium for this particular model/brand.

                        Also your argument about who paid what is irrelevant. The car still has it's original owner registered on the stamp duty.

                        • +5

                          @hypie: Are you seriously comparing a phone to a car with regards to warranty expectations?

                          Do you treat your car the same way you treat your phone? Do you know how many moving parts and systems there are in a car? There is about 3 moving parts in your average phone. Also, one of these things fits in your pocket, the other does not.

                          While we are at silly comparisons, do you leave your phone outside on the road, close to the gutter when you go shopping? It’s only $300… your car is in the thousands, why would you just leave something that expensive just sitting around outside?

                          See how silly the comparison sounds now?

                          And $30,000 is expensive, no matter what arguments I make? Ok, I’ll happily offer this… if you were offered a nice 4 bedroom home on Sydney’s north shore, say Mossman, for $30,000, is that expensive? Should I try and get a better deal?

                          “Expensive” is relative. You just don’t get that part. Sure, if you’re a disgruntled, young millennial who thinks the world is unfair, then yes, a $30k car may seem expensive. For a family of 4 looking for a “new” family car, their budget is going to be around $30k. So no, it is not expensive. Expensive is relative to somethings value as perceived by the buyer.

                          You are angry at something. You can’t see things in a relaxed, calm and rational way. This thread is a testament to your emotions running off the hook. You don’t take advice from people and you want to argue tooth and nail with them. Did you come here for advice or to get all worked up and angry?

                          While I agree in some parts with regards to warranty and ACL, cars should last longer considering their price and construction, but after 5 years (2 outside the contracted warranty period your parents signed off on) they came back with a remedy being offered and your out of pocket expense of $1000. Seeking a full refund stinks of entitlement and being petulant. ACL states repair, replace or refund. You don’t get to pick, they just have to offer you one. I know you won’t like hearing it, and it’s evident from your diatribe above that you think having a temper tantrum will fix it.

                          Out of curiosity, have you mentioned anywhere in this post how many KM he car has travelled in this 5 years?

                          • -3

                            @pegaxs: 1) I use my phone every day for about 12 hours a day. Have you noticed how hot these things get when you have them plugged in or forget it and leave it in the car? It still works the next day doesn't it. I don't think its an unfair comparison. But lets move onto dishwashers, washing machines, boats. who cares. They all should be expected to last for a what consumer expectation deems a reasonable amount of time. This is a consumer guarantee. If you don't understand this, then you will never understand it. Maybe you need to read the ACL properly.

                            2) This was exactly my point. If you spend $30,000 you expect it to last longer. You expect it not to have major faults, you also expect these major faults not to be widespread. Maybe you don't, but I do. I also think the average consumer does too. And guess what, this is why warranty periods are becoming more irrelevant or they are getting LONGER to an acceptable level by consumer expectations.

                            3) Your car isn't touching the ground. The tyres are touching the ground. The car was kept in a locked garage. I am not complaining about the paint rusting, I am complaining about two MAJOR FAULTS occuring to what appears to be THOUSANDS of people around the world (based on this small sample size). Also, i could probably leave my phone sitting on the ground outside in the rain and it would be fine. What is your point?

                            3) This whole post is about what the AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC deems a reasonable expectation. I think it is reasonable for the AVERAGE punter earning $44,000 a year, to consider $30,000 expensive. The reason this is about reasonable expectation is because that is what ACL is based on. Not because some fatcat at VW decided they could only economically cover manufacturing faults for 3 years. You clearly are confusing wear and tear with manufacturing faults.

                            4) Your expensive is relative comment/analogy is one of the most irrelevants things I have read in this thread. A car is a car, $30,000 is a significant amount of money for a car. Despite what you might think Mr Gates.

                            5) I'm not angry at anything, except having to waste my time replying to you. This anger should be directed at VW and their systematic breaches of ACL.

                            6) Also you clearly don't know ACL, so stop trying to quote it incorrectly. The law states that the consumer can opt for a REPAIR, REPLACEMENT or REFUND. This is not the choice of the dealer or manufacturer. If it is a major fault covered by consumer guarantees under ACL. You are entitled to a major resolution and the choice is yours. So many people who clearly don't understand the legalities of consumer protection and Australian consumer law make so many incorrect statements. Join the group.

                            7) Oh and millennials are probably disgruntled because they have to put up with baby boomer dealership owners breaking consumer law. Massive corporations covering up systematic and widespread manufacturing faults that make products unsuitable for purpose. I'm sure that Australian made FJ Holden that you owned when you were my age was made a hell of a lot better than the VW Jetta 118TSI MY13.

                            Finally.. the car had done 40,000km when the initial jerkiness was noticed. The car totally failed at 50,000km.

                            How long do you expect a gearbox to last and a $30,000 car. That is the only question you should answer. If your answer is 3 years, then I would have accepted your opinion and you could go back to trolling somewhere else. If when you are buying your next $30,000 car, I tell you that in 5 years it will stop working completely and need a major rebuild. What would you say?

                            oh and just so you don't waste anyone elses time.

                            When there is a major failure to comply
                            with a consumer guarantee, the
                            consumer can choose to
                            :
                            • reject the vehicle and choose a repair,
                            refund or an identical replacement
                            (or one of similar type and value if
                            reasonably available) from whoever
                            supplied the vehicle (e.g. the
                            dealer).

                            Thanks for trying, you can catch the bus back to 8 mile now.

                            • +4

                              @hypie: 1: comparing apples and oranges. Use that "phone" comparison in your defence when you call the ACCC… (Or try the Chewbacca defence. ie: the one you are using now…)

                              2: A car does last longer than a phone. My car is 10 years old. My phone, is not.

                              3: Tyres are part of the car. Ergo, car is touching the ground. (tyres are kind of what makes a car… a car.)

                              3(again??): Then don't buy new cars over $10,000. Car makers will sell none and have to lower prices. Or as a millennial, we could all vote for the socialist party, and that way, equal cars for everyone!!

                              4: Expensive is relative. Significant amount of money =/= expensive. Comparing a car to a phone, that is irrelevant.

                              5: Your 3 page diatribes and emotionally charged responses paint a different story. (see below for more.)

                              6: I know ACL well enough. I deal with it at work on occasions. You are the one that seems out of touch, wanting a full refund on a 5 year old vehicle. Good luck with that.

                              7: Oh boo hoo, big bad baby boomers ruining it for the youth… And in 30 years, the younger generation will be crying… "Oh, boo hoo, the millennials ruined it for us…" Lets all vote socialist party next time! :~( (just for clarity, I'm not a baby boomer, but all millenials think I am.)

                              So, the gear box failed at 50,000km? This is what I would be hinging my ACL on, NOT the 5 years old part. It's the amount of usage you have to look at if you want to tantrum your ACL rights. Trying to push a 3 year warranty out to 5 years will not be an easy task. Making a point that the car failed at 50,000km is a much easier task. How long would I expect a gearbox to last? On a VW, not long. Surprised it lasted that long, actually.

                              LONGER/MAJOR FAULTS/THOUSANDS/REPAIR, REPLACEMENT or REFUND./AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC/AVERAGE
                              repair/refund
                              you could go back to trolling
                              you can catch the bus back to 8 mile now.

                              Caps, bold, assumption of trolling and a crude reference to I don't know what… Yep, no emotion, totally logical and rational discussion. (Nonsense comparisons, name calling, innuendo and aspersions are usually signs that you are in too deep, know you're wrong and are desperately gasping for air as you drown in a discussion you cant win.)

                              I could break everything you said down even further, but you have the red mist and people don't need the wasted space on the first page from your inevitable 4000 word essay reply.

                              • -6

                                @pegaxs: And I'm not a millennial mate. When you proved lack of knowledge on the topic, I stopped taking you seriously and started trolling you back. You clearly lack any knowledge of consumer law and the act.

                                So if you don't know something, just move on. If you don't have any useful input move on

                                You are embarrassing yourself now. I got your south park reference, you don't need to spell it out. Reduces the impact.

                                You and the rest of the responders who don't take a proper moment to read through facts and respond inteligeably are the ones who think I'm out of touch.

                                Anyone who is actually educated in this topic is well aware that we changed the act in 2010 to stop things like this from happening.

                                I just had someone say there was no lemon laws in Australia. What does he think the ACL is?

                                Also expensive is relative. And this conversation is about ACL which is about what someone in Australia would reasonable believe. Because you might be in the top1% driving your Porsche, it really doesn't impact on what the wider majority things is expensive. I based it on the Australian median income. Now drop it. You were wrong.

                                • +3

                                  @hypie:

                                  And I'm not a millennial mate.

                                  Riiiight… Maybe I got it wrong. Perhaps Gen. Whine?

                                  blah blah you dont know, blah blah lacks knowledge…

                                  Could you strawman any harder? You are the one that needs to revisit the ACL.

                                  If you don’t know nuffin'

                                  Seems I know more than you.

                                  Embarrassin' yaself.

                                  Have you read over your replies?

                                  You and everyone else…

                                  So, a majority of people here are telling you the same thing, and you're still arguing? Why did you post if you already know all the answers?

                                  Changed in 2010…

                                  I thought it was 2011 it came into effect. I suppose it was tabled prior to that date.

                                  errr… lemon laws are sooo real.

                                  Australia does not have defined "lemon laws" as such. We have rights afforded to us under ACL. Feel free to post the "Lemon Law" legislation. There is a movement underway at the moment calling for "Lemon Laws", but as of now, so such laws seem to exist.

                                  From the ACCC website:

                                  You can ask a business for your preference of a free repair, replacement or refund, but you are not always entitled to one.

                                  If the business fails to give you a free repair within a reasonable time or cannot fix your problem, you can:
                                  * ask for a replacement
                                  * ask for a refund
                                  * recover compensation for the drop in value below the price paid.

                                  Did the repair they offer take an unreasonable amount of time? Are they unable to fix your problem? VW offered to do the repairs for nothing. The dealer is the one charging you $1000 for "diagnostics".

                                  You don’t get to buy a used car off your parents and claim ACL. If anything, your parents sold you a dud car. Why are you not asking about taking them to court? They sold you a car with a known defect, not the VW dealership. They seemed to have gotten a "really really expensive" Eclipse out of this deal, and you got a cruddy German shitbox with gearbox issues. Sounds like the people stitching you up are your parents.

                                  I purchased exclusive use of the car from my parents

                                  HAHAHAAH… No you didn't. You changed that in the post. No one does that. Purchase exclusive rights. And I bet you're only down as an "occasional driver" on the insurance as well?? lol

                                  I purchased the car off my parents for the trade-in value at the time.

                                  This was the original, and a more truthful version of what you did.

                                  You don't get ACL on private sales.

                                  • -1

                                    @pegaxs: Wow you are getting desperate with your arguments.

                                    1) Cool… If VW and the Dealership can prove that my father sold the car to me. Without any change to the registration details or without a papertrail/bank transfer. Then I will have absolutely no case whatsoever against the dealer. I'll let you know if this happens.

                                    2) Laws came into effect in 2011, therefore anything after 2011 is covered by the current act. It was tabled in 2010.

                                    3) I wrote my replies, and I read your replies.

                                    4) The quote you got from the ACCC website is completely out of context and just wrong. What you quoted was the overarching statement about ACL. It wasn't referencing minor or major fault in particular.

                                    If you have a minor problem with a product or service, the business can choose to give you a free repair instead of a replacement or refund. When you have a major problem with a product, you have the right to ask for your choice of a replacement or refund.

                                    https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees…

                                    This isn't even directly quoted from the Motor ACCC handbook. It is from the website.

                                    Dude you are wrong about this, just let it go. You keep getting it wrong! and you keep trying to quote out of context to make your point. Which is just wrong. I don't know how many more times I need to say wrong before you learn how to use the search function on your browser.

                                    I googled the quote you gave me, it was just above the line I quoted you. Please do your research before arguing with me. I don't need to do it for you.

                                    WHY?

                                    Also if you don't think this is a Lemon Law… what is going to be different about the changes?

                                    A product or good has a major problem when:
                                    it has a problem that would have stopped someone from buying it if they’d known about it - If we knew the car had a gearbox that would fail after 50,000km we would not have purchased this car. If we knew the car would requite an major engine rebuild after 3 years, we would not have purchased this car.
                                    it is significantly different from the sample or description - probably can't argue this one. I'm sure somewhere in the marketing material, they would have claimed it was a SMOOTH drive. I have no evidence.
                                    it is substantially unfit for its common purpose and can’t easily be fixed within a reasonable time - IT is unsuitable for driving, because I can't accelerate anymore. Prior it is unsuitable for purpose because I can't accelerate without feeling an uncontrollable jerk. Finally I don't have the ETA.
                                    it doesn’t do what you asked for and can’t easily be fixed within a reasonable time; or
                                    it is unsafe. - it is unsafe to drive this car. I felt unsafe crossing lanes to turn.

                                    Why is this a major fault you might ask? Well because the service tech said that a full gearbox rebuild was a major fault in any car. It is not a cheap repair and would involve several hours worth of work. It is a major component of the car that can affect the safety.

                                    You know why I dislike you the most out of everyone who has replied in this post. It's because you keep trying to debate with me by using false and misleading information. Just like VW/Dealership.

                                    • +2

                                      @hypie: Oh good lord. Here I was hoping for an early night… Looks like it’s time to get the crayons out…

                                      1: Your own words were “I bought the car from my parents”. You then later changed your statement to suit your agenda. No one pays their parents for “exclusive rights”.

                                      2: Already confirmed. Re-hashed for??

                                      3: You really should try reading your own replies back to yourself. When you do that, if they sound off, emotional, not on topic or irrelevant, you can pick it up.

                                      4: Quote is from ACCC website. It’s only out of context because it doesn’t suit you.

                                      Then you go on to regurgitate something you cut and pasted to try and justify what ever it is you are hoping to achieve. The fact of the matter is, you purchased the car from your parents. You stated this in your original post, before you moved the goal posts to suit yourself.

                                      The fact remains, you purchased the car from your parents and ACL does not apply to private sale of vehicles.

                                      it has a problem, yadda yadda: You said yourself that it showed signs of failing at least 10~20,000km before it failed. You purchased it anyway. So, that’s your mistake and this doesn’t apply. You bought it knowing it had a fault of some description.

                                      significantly something something: Got a link to the original brochure about the transmission? Pretty sure “crap gearbox” isn’t a feature and was it “significantly” different at the time of purchase?

                                      substantially blah blah: “reasonable amount of time” Have they given you a time frame? Or you just going to continue arguing with them so it draws it out longer?

                                      unsafe: possibly, can’t argue that one as I have not test driven your car.

                                      But then again, under ACL, all of this comes back to my original comments… are they offering a solution? Yes. Are you being petulant about it, yes.

                                      The other fact is that you purchased this car at a “trade in price”, not a retail price. You have saved possibly thousands of dollars off the same vehicle if you were to buy it from a dealer with statutory warranty. VW have said they will pay for the repairs to the transmission and you will be out of pocket for “diagnostics” of $1000. Adding that cost to the cost of buying the car, you are still well out in front of what the car would have cost you otherwise.

                                      And no, the reason you dislike me the most is because I don’t take to people making shit up, spreading false information or changing their story and I will call people out on it. I only tend to rub these types of people up the wrong way when I use facts. People who make up stories tend to get butt hurt with me, because I don’t accept bullshit as fact. I try to gather all the facts and present it as such. The only one issuing up false and misleading information, is you… Your story changes with nearly every iteration of its telling.

                                      Oh, that, and I don’t care about fake internet points. I would rather be right with a thousand neg votes, than to let it slide or agree just for some imaginary green “+” symbols.

                                      • @pegaxs: 1) Cool story bro.

                                        2) I posted this elsewhere:

                                        "Hell if you want the irrelevant TRUTH… I haven't actually paid them a cent. Because the incident happened before I had transferred any money (my company car was getting panel beating repairs so I could pass it on, I had just started using the VW). We made a verbal agreement that I would pay them $6000, however I haven't done it yet."

                                        Ownership has never been changed, they have no provided me a receipt. I have no paid for any goods.

                                        Mod: Removed inflammatory comment.

                                        All of your arguments are not null and void.

                                        3) Mate… YOU ARE WRONG! about acl, about the law, about the website. I don't know how you are still arguing this. It is in black and white on the website. PLEASE READ THE LAW or get a university education.

                                        Oh no… you have no more arguments. cool.

                                        • +2

                                          @hypie: 1: re-read your own original post…

                                          2: really? So, it’s gone from, I purchased the vehicle, to, it’s an exclusive use agreement to this new development? And I’m misleading?

                                          As a health professional, one would think you would be able to keep emotions out of a conversation. Think I’ll pass on your referral…

                                          All of your arguments are not null and void.

                                          I know. That’s why I said them. Yours, however, are. (As well as some are irrelevant and off topic.)

                                          Also, if you are going to make personal attacks or continue to go off topic, then I can no longer be party to this conversation. If you continue to keep changing your story though, I’ll be here.

                            • +3

                              @hypie: It seems pretty clear to me that you have a misunderstanding of how the ACL applies. Warranties implied by the a ACL run for a period determined by the value of the item relative to other similar items. So a $1200 phone relative to a $400 phone. This comparison is NOT made, for what I thought were obvious reasons, between drastically different products. The ACL doesn't imply a 20 year warranty on the $30,000 car because it's ten times the price of a $300 phone with a 2 year warranty. This is a hilariously useless comparison. The warranty also has nothing to do with your annual income and whether you subjectively think the product you bought was expensive - this makes no legal sense.

                              The long and short of it is, relative to other similar products (small sedans) $30,000 is not drastically more expensive than the average, and therefore likely will not have a drastically longer implied warranty than other products in its field.

                              Do I think that the gearbox is a POS and VW should replace it free of charge? Yes. Do I think you should brush up on how the ACL actually works? Also yes.

                          • +1

                            @pegaxs: Laugh all you want. Plenty of people are receiving full refunds or no cost replacements on 3-4-5 year old Ford Focuses due to transmission issues. Myself included after owning the car for 3.5 years, doing 50k km and paying 23k for the car.

                            you are clueless

                            • @j24bauer: I'm not laughing all I want. I owned a Focus shitbox with the dual clutch transmission. Unfortunately, I ended up trading mine in because it was just a shit box. And I agree with seeking some sort of resolution (OP admitted to being offered the transmission be repaired at no cost to them.). I don’t have an issue with people seeking a remedy for their vehicle issues. OP went straight to "I want a full refund!" when VW have offered to fix the problem. OP is looking to make money on this venture, not seek a suitable outcome.

                              You have obviously just skimmed over what was said and gleaned from it what you wanted to read. So, if you're going to troll, have at it, but I'm not indulging you any further.

                              The only one here that is clueless, is you. :)

                              • @pegaxs: Just to clarify things to anyone who is following this post.

                                Pegaxs has private messaged me. He then blocked me from responding to his whinge about grammar? I don't even know what he was referring to.

                                "For what it is worth, I am an ex-dealer mechanic." - Basically he's one of them.

                                Also Johnno, everything you have said is wrong about the ACL. It does not give predetermined time frames, it is a vague law. The consumer guarantee law is also not based on the time period given by a manufacturing warranty.

                                No one suggested anything you said about 20 year warranties.

                                I said it was reasonable to expect a middle-high range european car to last more than 50,000km and 5 years without 2 major faults that cause the car to be unsuitable for purpose, unsafe to drive and had I known about these issues. Both you and I would not have bought this car.

                                Finally.

                                Whether or not you believe $30,000 is more or less expensive for the car is really up to you. The law is based on what a reasonable person would expect. A reasonable person would expect a european manufacturer who prides themselves on quality and has a strong reputation within the market to last longer than saw a Great Wall sedan.

                                I keep getting people to ask me to clear up on my ACL knowledge when they are clearly wrong.

                                Mate it is irrelevant what you think I deserve. If the issue is considered a MAJOR FAULT under the ACT (the dealer mechanic has said this is a phone conversation twice). Then guess what… it is a major fault and it comes under that banner within the legislation.

                                For anyone who has entered this conversation without research or knowledge.

                                https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-takes-action-agai…
                                https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/volkswagen-undertakes-…

                                Quote from choice: :But if all else fails, remember that famous saying: if life gives you lemons, then fully explore your refund and replacement rights under the Australian Consumer Laws.">

                                News article: The ACCC said complaints about new car manufacturers and retailers have risen to more than 10,000 over the past two years, highlighting widespread consumer issues in the industry.>

                                In one case cited in the report, a female buyer with transmission problems was told by a Ford dealer she should "drive more like a man" after her attempts to have a known problem fixed.

                                "That's extraordinary and it reflects a range of social attitudes that's for sure. To say that to someone shows a fair bit of disdain for the customer," Mr Sims said.< - Basically what people have been saying about driving the DSG. Don't creep etc, you are breaking your own car etc. I don't doubt this is not true.

                                I have quoted this so many times… but one more time.

                                Warranties against defects are always provided in addition to the consumer guarantees contained in the ACL.

                                In some instances a warranty against defects will provide the consumer with remedies that exceed those provided by the consumer guarantees. However, in other cases, consumers may be entitled to a remedy under the consumer guarantees after a warranty against defects period has expired.

                                You must take care to ensure that consumers are not misled, either through oral representations or in the words of a warranty against defects, into thinking that their rights are limited to the remedies or timeframe set out in a written warranty against defects.

                                • @hypie:

                                  A reasonable person would expect a european manufacturer who prides themselves on quality

                                  every few consumers expects euro vehicle manufacturers to produce quality vehicles. no reasonable consumer would purchase a vw. sales figures shows that australian consumers have more confident in ford, kia and suburu than vw.
                                  https://infogram.com/1pwe9z56gddplnhvl57vnd7nqgb9939lywx
                                  https://www.caradvice.com.au/691800/vfacts-september-2018/

                                  • @whooah1979: VW is the second largest car manufacturer in the world after Toyota. I think my point is fair.

                                    In 2018 VW reclaimed it's spot at the top of the brand loyalty list, above Toyota. This was the first time since the emissions saga. Prior to this, VW was always on top for consumer confidence surveys and brand loyalty.

                                    I think it is reasonable to expect the car would last more than 5 years.

                              • @pegaxs:

                                OP went straight to "I want a full refund!"

                                Haha, man this guy… Just decides when he wants to make up things whenever he wants. I guess that's what you get taught at dealer mechanic school.

                                I actually simply asked them for a resolution, a repair. They refused to assess the car without me agreeing to pay $1000 for diagnostics. This was only agreed on the condition that they waive the $1000 if it is proven to be a manufacturing fault covered by VW. It was.

                                When they came back to me with the offer for full parts and repairs covered by VW, but still attempted to charge me diagnostics for something that was a warranty repair. I told them this was not acceptable. They then offered me the reduced rate of $300. I told them again this was not acceptable because VW has offered to cover the repairs and labour 100% because it is a well known fault. Following this I told them because this is a MAJOR fault, I would like a MAJOR remedy under ACL. This remedy would involve a full refund or replacement vehicle depending on my preference.

                                They then came back saying 100% waiving of the diagnostic costs and all repairs is the final offer they will give me. I asked him how will I know that the car and/or this part won't fail in less than 2 years. He could not give me any guarantees. He said that VW would normally give you a 2 year warranty on the gearbox rebuild, however this will only happen if you contribute to the repair costs. I asked him if I could clarify this with VW, he said I don't need to (sounds like bs). I told him this was not acceptable. I then clarified that this incident was a major fault and that I was requesting a major remedy under the Australian consumer and competition act 2010. He declared that he had given me his final offer.

                                I gave him a counter offer at this point. I wanted a full diagnostic mechanical workup of the car to ensure no future manufacturing faults are missed. I said that I would accept these terms, however I need everything documented. He accepted this offer and said he would call me back on the same day to give me the ETA on repairs. I have not yet heard back from him.

    • Yeah, I wrote a dummy query. But I'm waiting to hear what the manager says.

  • Seems to be a good deal to me too - was the car full VW service history?

    • Full complete history.

  • +3

    sounds like they've done you a favour a copped most of the cost of replacement the gearbox out of warranty. 1k to replace this from a VW service centre would be like 1/4 of the cost.

    what do you think ACL is going to do for you? VW didn't sell you that car, your parents did.

    • +1

      I'm representing my parents, they are still the owners. They are dealing directly with the manufacturer.

      • +6

        2 months ago: I purchased the car off my parents

        Which is it?

        • -4

          I'm not following?

          • -2

            @hypie: You said you purchased the car off your parents and are now claiming your parents own it.

            Is it hard to follow your own story?

        • +15

          Maybe OP gave money to the parents in exchange for exclusive use of the vehicle but the ownership was never signed over. It sometimes happens between family.

          • @abb: So then the OP did not purchase it as they claimed they had.

            • @[Deactivated]: Eh, close enough. If the parents ever tried to take it back without his permission I think he'd have a good legal case to retain it (as long as he could prove the payment happened).

              Of course, I'm only guessing and maybe OP is indeed full of shit, who knows.

              • @abb: Yeah but which is it? Did the OP, or did they not buy the car from their parents?

                These are the questions that politicians are too scared to ask.
                We need Tracy Grimshaw on this case!

          • +4

            @abb: This is correct. They still have ownership, I use the car. I have paid them for use of the car. I don't care about ownership of the car.

            Why are we arguing about my parents taking my car? Why would they do that? why would I even care if they did? I've been using their brand new Mitsubishi Exceed for the last week while I have been without a car. We are a family.

            I paid them for the car, they put it towards a new car. Why the hell does it need to be under my name? It's not my pride and joy. It's a car that needs to get me by for 2 years until my position within my company changes and I no longer need a car.

            • -1

              @hypie: It needs to be in your name so that you are not being dodgy with insurance.

              • +7

                @Greihawk: No it doesn't. He can insure it under his name and list his parents as the owners. This conversation went way off track so easily.

                • +3

                  @S2: Haha… yeah. I don't think that is correct Greihawk. I'm an insured driver on all of the family cars (we have 3). None are under my name.

                  • -2

                    @hypie: My point exactly, you are saying you are an insured driver, is that because your parents are paying insurance and listing you as an extra driver, or are you paying for insurance as the primary owner/driver, the difference can be huge.

                    • +2

                      @Greihawk: Why does it even matter and how is it relevant to the initial case?

                    • @Greihawk: Tell me more? according to the insurance policy, I don't have to be the owner to be the primary driver?

                • @S2:

                  This conversation went way off track so easily.

                  I agree, people are just trolling OP. After pegasus had his rant and whinge.

                  Most people would trust their parents enough to pay them money without making them sign papers to prove you paid them etc.

      • Ahh, so you’re dodging paying the stamp duty.

        Gotcha

        • Why would you change the ownership details of your parents car to your name? Who benefits? I can still be listed as the primary driver for insurance purposes?

          In what situations is it beneficial for me to have this car under my name? Other than claiming depreciation for tax purposes? I am more than happy to change it officially later when I am concerned about this and saving a bit on tax.

          • -4

            @hypie: I’d change it because once I paid for it, it became my car.

            But I follow the law and pay my taxes.

            • @YellowDieselGolf: You can pay for something and not have the ownership change. I gave them a $6000 gift which they have put towards the new car. They have declared this as income. We had a verbal agreement that they retain ownership of the car and I have access to the car.

              You are implying that I don't pay taxes and that I don't follow the law. Let me know if I'm doing something illegal here?

              Hell if you want the irrelevant TRUTH… I haven't actually paid them a cent. Because the incident happened before I had transferred any money (my company car was getting panel beating repairs so I could pass it on, I had just started using the VW). We made a verbal agreement that I would pay them $6000, however I haven't done it yet.

              Now what?

              • +1

                @hypie:

                We had a verbal agreement that they retain ownership of the car and I have access to the car.

                You own the vehicle while your parent is the registered operator. This is perfectly legal in nsw.

            • @YellowDieselGolf:

              I’d change it because once I paid for it, it became my car.

              In nsw the owner of a vehicle and the registered operator of a vehicle can be two different entities. Op can own the vehicle while their parent remain the registered operator.

              • +1

                @whooah1979: From :

                https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/registration/transfer/index…

                You need to transfer a vehicle’s registration into your name when it comes into your possession or management, for example if you buy a vehicle or inherit one.

                note:buy a vehicle & become responsible for its management

                Important: Roads and Maritime Services record the registered operator of a vehicle but do not record ownership of that vehicle. The registered operator is not necessarily the ‘owner’ of the vehicle but the person who assumes responsibility for the vehicle under road transport law.

                op has responsibility for the car as he’s organising repairs and has exclusive use

                • +1

                  @YellowDieselGolf: Just stop. OP does not need to transfer the vehicle. He is well within his rights to drive the car without registering it in his name. His insurance is legit and he's properly covered. He's not breaking any laws. If there is a safe, legal option for you to pay the government less duties, you should take it.

                  • -1

                    @johnno07: You’re all welcome to show me where it says that this situation is legal. Until then, I still take the position that OP is obligated to pay the stamp duty.

                    Also: just stop? I’ve replied once to my original position and provided evidence. That’s not excessive.

                    • +3

                      @YellowDieselGolf: stamp duty is due when they change the registered operator. Op isn't required to pay stamp duty because they haven't changed the registered operator.

                    • @YellowDieselGolf: He doesn't have to show you it is legal, you need to show that it is illegal.

                      I have a presumption of innocence.

                      Since this was a legal point and not a civil one.

  • +3

    so you want a refund or a replacement car , while they already offered to fix it out of warranty ?

    hehehe

    • +2

      Yes. They said it was a major fault. They offered to cover it. I want a major remedy as defined in the Competition and Consumer act 2010.

      Tbh.. I would accept the stupid repair. But the attempt to charge me $1000 For a diagnostics. For a fault that is covered by VW as a manufacturing fault.

      • I pretty much agree with above. After 5 years you don't deserve a replacement, but I do think consumer law is on your side regarding the gearbox breaking down. It's reasonable to expect a gearbox to last for a very long time.

        • The gearbox didn't actually fail. A component of the gearbox was not attached correctly. By breaking apart from the gearbox internally it turned into shrapnel over time and caused irreversible damage to the gearbox.

          How long do you think a gearbox should last? I don't think you should really base it on time? 10,000km, 20,000, 100,000? I have just had a bit of a google and it's hard to tell. But most suggest over 80,000km?

          • @hypie: That would be called 'splitting hairs' right there, the gearbox didn't fail - internal parts broke apart and damaged it …

            I think a gearbox should last over 100,000 km or 10 years before you even need to change the fluid.

            • @bmerigan: He said this was a common fault, but I agree. The gearbox did not fail. The part failed and caused other catastrophic damage.

              Hey, I don't know anything about cars or gearboxes. So i will take your word for it. All I know is I'm clearly not the only one (based on this thread, my ozbargain inbox and the service tech).

  • +5

    VW Jettas are awful.

    move on OP.

      • +6

        Bwahahaha… Full refund… OMG. Best. Troll. Today!!

        5yo car and you want a full refund. Best you could hope for is a remedy, which they seem to have offered you.

        Full refund after 5 years if usage. Priceless.

    • +9

      VW's suck ass.

      Mod: Removed personal attack.

      • +1

        That isn't the point and I don't dispute it.

        Also… without telling you my whole backstory. If this car lasted me 2 years from September 2017. I Would have bean around $35,000 better off before tax. I think it was a decent risk.

        • Just because their new cars now have 5 year warranty doesnt mean you will get 5 year warranty or what it implies. If it wasnt reasonable, your parents wouldnt have bought it.

          You should definitely push to get the $1000 waived, or to push on them to try and claim it from VW. But I think you made a big mistake in quoting ACL to them, when it now makes you look like an a-hole and they will be inclined to help you less.

          Do you have any more information on what exactly the first "major" fault was? Without specifics thats all hearsay

          • +5

            @k-rokfm: I think they were being aholes for charging me $1000 For diagnostics when the computer was quite aware of the issue and then once it was accepted to be a manufacturing issue which was reimbursed by VW, they still wanted it.

            The first major fault was a cracked piston in the engine which resulted in a full engine rebuild and 4 pistons replaced.

            I was not aware this had happened at the time.

            I have had a few commentators claim this happened to their cars as well.

    • +1

      VW still offers 3 year warranty, you might be referring to a dealer extended warranty.
      https://www.volkswagen.com.au/en/owners/warranty.html

      • Fair enough, I asked the service tech and he said 5 years. So maybe that is the warrant they provide. Many other manufacturers now offer 5 and 7 year warranties.

    • +3

      Not sure why the down-votes. A car that is regularly service should not have a major fault within the first 5 years.

      • +2

        Right?

        How does a gear box fall apart leading to shrapnel damaging the internals.

        How does a piston crack and require a full rebuild.

        These flaws must have been apparent when the car was manufactured. It was a matter of time until it actually occurred.

        Many commentators claim similar issues with the gearbox and engine for this model.

      • There are many reasons, just from the op's story, it may be that due to their particular driving style, extra wear and tear has occurred and combined with a manufacturing fault, has led to a breakdown, after all the op's father never noticed any problems when taking off at the lights, only the op.

    • +2

      It sounds like most of you don't understand ACL.

      Or possibly, you don't understand the ACL. What you think is reasonable isn't relevant. Here's the ACCC's own guide:

      https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Motor-vehicle-sales-and…

      All timeframes I see refer to 18 months, 2 years, or 3 years. So your "5 year" time frame? Apparently not reasonable according to the govt body that administers and enforces the ACL.

      • +1

        If a consumer uses a vehicle normally,
        and its condition deteriorates faster or
        to a greater extent than would usually
        be expected, then the vehicle may
        have failed to meet the guarantee of
        acceptable quality and the consumer may
        be entitled to a remedy

        A warranty does not change your
        responsibilities under the ACL. The
        consumer guarantees apply in the same
        way regardless of whether a vehicle is
        covered by a manufacturer’s warranty,
        an express warranty or an extended
        warranty, or whether those warranties
        have expired.

        Those are examples presented. However ACL is not limited to examples presented in the document. It is decided on a case by case basis. It is reasonable to think that someone who infrequently drives a car, but maintains it actively and appropriately should expect the car to last significantly longer than the provided manufacturing warranty.

        Also thank you for that link! that is so useful. I have found all the information I need. Cheers.

        • It is reasonable to think that someone who infrequently drives a car, but maintains it actively and appropriately should expect the car to last significantly longer than the provided manufacturing warranty.

          This is irrelevant, the “provided factory warranty” is completely seperate from any significant point you have raised. Your contracted warranty was for 3 years, and that lapsed two years ago.

          My view on your point of “2 MAJOR FAULTS”, it’s up to a jury ofc, but since you’re farming for opinions, the first (pistons) is a moot point considering it happened well within warranty and was fixed. The second, a gearbox breakdown, very well known with VW 7-speed DSG’s, and they’ve offered you an out of warranty remedy, which is specific to the gearbox.

          In the scheme of things, cars are expected to breakdown, in the past 5 years you’ve probably for the most part had a working vehicle, I strongly doubt you’d be able to get a full refund on your Jetta because of gearbox issues after 5 years. It’s specific to the gearbox, the remedy offered is to fix the gearbox, you can choose to get cash value of the gearbox and be left with a broken down Jetta, either way I personally don’t see this being a full refund, but of course if you are taking this to court anything can happen.

  • +1

    My parents had a 118TSI 2012 I think, it had to have the gearbox wiring loom (or was it the gearbox computer) replaced because there was a fault that caused it to burn out the bands and clutch plates.

  • +8

    Car has major engine work - probably the cause of the faults and you dont know anything about or aren't willing to fully disclose

    You knew car had issues accelerating and with gearbox but still went ahead buying it from them

    You bought the car but parents still own it an in their names

    • +1

      I'm not having an issue with my parents. I can get the money back from them $5000. Irrelevant.

      Yes I just found out from them.

      2016 crack in piston. All 4 replaced.

        • +1

          What?

            • @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Right, now I understand.

              You think I'm doing a terrible job by fighting for my consumer rights sure.

              Let's do a case study.

              65INCH Brand name TV paid $2700. 12 month warranty.
              Light bleed on the panel after 12 months.. repaired and panel replaced.
              Light bleed appears again 2 years after the initial incident.

              What would you do?

                • +3

                  @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Thanks John Hughes.

                  Thanks for your overwhelmingly useless input to this discussion.

                  • -3

                    @hypie: Don't wait 5 years next time and hold that victim card,….

                        • @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: My contract is with the retailer. I don't have any rights against VW unless they breach the consumer protection act (import unsafe items etc).

                          That being said. I will be contacting them. If not only to find out how the dealer justifys charging me for diagnostics on something covered by VW under manufacturers guarantee.

                          Fyi. I had my 3 year old Samsung TV refunded fully for that incident. I put the money to a Sony Oled with no backlight issues.

                          • @hypie: "I will be contacting them"

                            Should have done this before, I expect this to be done first thing in the morning and an update on the message board.

Login or Join to leave a comment