Engine: 2.5: 44k engine blown, warranty company not interested

[wimorrison]

What is the ECU data that they refer to - if there are error codes listed then you must find out what they are since they could be what the are basing their case upon, especially if this information provides a history of oil level or pressure.

Their case seems to be based around excessive wear of No1 cylinder and the failure of the rings however 'bore wash' is common in some diesels especially the Volvo D5 engine as excess fuel is injected to clean the DPF and this often ends up in the sump.

Make sure you have all the information before you instigate any action excepting a discussion with CA to establish the veracity of your case.

[Phandy]

Originally Posted by TheLeeds

Although the complaints team may not know this, their decision is not final at all. A court decision is final.

A very good point. I have often had to remind people of the same thing when dealing with disputes in the motor industry.

[TheLeeds]

The assessor seems to like using the word 'unfavourable' doesn't he ?

I note the wording which says, "The Insurer will not cover claims caused by, or arising from or in connection with the following: 5e) progressive failures;" however, the assessor has stated as fact something which may be simply his own opinion, (unless the ecu data can be used to verify it), when he says, the cause of failure in is general soot contamination etc etc .... persistently unfavourable engine operation regime etc etc ........ and ....... several years of persistently unfavourable operating conditions.
Whatever ecu data might be available, and regardless of what it may tell you about what was going on in the engine, the "persistently unfavourable" operation regime etc is only an assumption based on this, because no-one but the driver can really say for sure how hard that engine has ever been worked, used or abused.

On the other hand, if he's referring to ecu data and suggesting the problem had built up over a period of time, as his opinion suggests, was the car always serviced at the same place ? If so, could it be said that the servicing garage should, or could have spotted a problem in time to remedy it before it became terminal
? If the answer to this is yes, then you could add the garage as second defendants to any civil claim, and let a judge decide who pays what.

[id5]

Originally Posted by jjkenya

...
The next "step" is the FSA and Ombudsman... I wonder if anyone thinks it's worth it?

The FSA operate on a document only process on the person side but do talk to the insurance company direct. It is an inequitable process that is skewed to benefit the industry not the individual. You are likely to get a financial amount back but it will not be the total amount. Compromise is how it prefers to work. It decision is not final though and you can still take the insurance company to court but it will be harder to prove your case if the ombudsman went against you.

'Every year or 'x' many miles whichever comes first'

If you can prove that

• you have had the car serviced as per the manufacturers instructions, and if it says every year, then it needs to have been serviced every year even if it has only done 1 mile.
• you need to prove the servicing company have not advised you of any progressive failures or advisories and if they have that you have acted on them
• you have applied any other conditions in the contract

If you can't prove the above, for example it states every year and you waited instead until the mileage occurred or if you do a lot of miles and did not declare it to the insurance company or something similar then you are unlikely to win in court.

If you can do the above then you are very likely to win in court especially if you have provided the proof of the above to the insurance company and its solicitors. You are unlikely to get the full amount as you have to take your costs into consideration such as the day off for court, etc but if you win you will get more than the FSA. Put all of your proof together and go Citizen's Advice and then go and see a couple of different solicitors for a free consultation, learning what to ask the next from the first. Ask every question you can think of but mainly ask if it is a worthwhile case if it is winnable.

[jjkenya]

Originally Posted by wimorrison

What is the ECU data that they refer to

I'm seeking this from the Warranty company... perhaps it holds the key although I don't think it will.

Regards bore wash, according to my garage, and also Google, if there was any notable bore-wash that was of significance, the engine performance would be affected and more obviously there would be black smoke form the exhaust, which was not the case. Any Bore-wash/piston ring damage experts out there?

[jjkenya]

Originally Posted by id5

T
If you can prove that

• you have had the car serviced as per the manufacturers instructions, and if it says every year, then it needs to have been serviced every year even if it has only done 1 mile.
• you need to prove the servicing company have not advised you of any progressive failures or advisories and if they have that you have acted on them
• you have applied any other conditions in the contract

1. The car has an annual stamp which is what is required despite the mileage being much lower than the "service interval mileage".
2. No progressive failures are mentioned and the MOT advisories do not mention emissions or engine related issues
3. We have complied with the contract.

It's hard to explain but this argument is essentially coming down to a technical opinion so I think our only real option is to get our own report done.

Appreciate the help / comments so far.

[NigelDay]

Originally Posted by jjkenya

I'm seeking this from the Warranty company... perhaps it holds the key although I don't think it will.

Regards bore wash, according to my garage, and also Google, if there was any notable bore-wash that was of significance, the engine performance would be affected and more obviously there would be black smoke form the exhaust, which was not the case. Any Bore-wash/piston ring damage experts out there?

You certainly need the ECU data downloaded by your own engineer. I just hope their engineer has not wiped it !

[wimorrison]

Bore wash literally means that the cylinder bores have had the oil on them washed off. This oil comes from the sump and is controlled by the oil ring on the piston. The phenomenon is seen because of engine over-fuelling (as I described above) or incorrect ignition or designation leading to the fuel being unburned and subsequently washing down the cylinder bores, removing the oil and ending up in the sump.

This is commonly seen as blackening of the oil in the sump.

However - and a big however - this does not always lead to excessive wear, especially on Diesel engines as diesel is a very good lunrucation oil - unlike perol which does destroy the lubricative properties of oil very quickly.

Volvo have for several years known of issues with overfuelling on d5 engines and The resultant increase in sump oil. They have since reduced the amount of fuel used to clean the DPF, altered the injection timing for it, and reduced the oil in the sump to compensate for the washing of diesel into the sump.

The inspector could only say it has caused an issue after removing the head of the engine and checking the note diameters demonstrating that NO1 cylinder is worn excessively over the others, that the oil scraper ring was damaged and that the oil had degraded sufficiently to remove the lubrication properties.

[jjkenya]

Reply from Mapfre on the ECU information:

“A basic OBD-II diagnostic device was connected to the Electronic Control Unit (ECU) but returned error codes generally attributable to the dismantled state of the engine rather than suggestive of causes of failure. The unit indicated that the most recent error code clear command had been sent to the ECU 14600km prior to this inspection – indicating that significant errors had not been generated for some time.”

The car was serviced after the Code Clear... I have also asked for the error codes in question.

For clarity, and I apologise for the inaccuracy:
The odometer reading at the time of service was 33430 miles, and the reading at the time of the engine failure was 39947 miles (not 44k as suggested in the thread title).
Between servicing in January and the engine failure in September, the vehicle had traveled 6517 miles.

[wimorrison]

Reading what you say it appears that theer are no codes listed and that the last time the codes had been cleared were 9125 miles before the reading when the inpsector was there - that would suggest that someone had cleared the codes before the last service with the inference being that they were cleared between services at 30882 miles - do you know who did this?

They are liable to argue using this in their defences as something (unkown) that has contributed towards the incident. They cannot prove there was a fault code present, but they can suggest that was one and make it difficult, though the inpsetcor does say positoivley that significant codes hadn't been generated for a long time.

Most definately a need for you to seek legal advice about what to do.