# Our workmanship conundrum!



## Sundial (May 11, 2005)

Please forgive the length of this post, but it is all relevant.
Last May, our front airbags finally gave up the ghost....more than six years old as they were on the truck at purchase. We had them replaced at Pentegon Mercedes of Poole. As they are aftermarket parts, our truck was in servicing for more than three weeks. Happy that we were back on the road, we paid the rather high bill of £852.
During our trip to France at the end of August this year, one bag started to leak air. Driving and pumping up got us to a supermarket where a cycle repair kit was bought. This effected a temporary repair where the airbag held ...ish.....until we returned home. A stressful event that we did not expect with new airbags.
Booking the truck into Pentegon again, it was discovered that both bags were fouling the chassis! New bags were sourced from a local motor factors and fitted. It was found that the fitting was incorrect the first time. On collection we were informed there was no charge.
Yesterday, a month later, a letter and Bill dropped onto the door mat. Pentegon state that the bags were damaged because of fouling the chassis and that Mercedes Benz refused to replace the bags under warranty. (Of course, not their problem anyway as they did not supply them!). "In the circumstances " Pentegon have NOT charged for the labour and deducted 10% of the cost of the replacement airbags making the bill £399.
We are stunned! If the airbags had been correctly fitted they should have lasted at least seven more years! 
Your thoughts, before we make any decision on our position, would be MUCH appreciated. 

Sundial


----------



## Charisma (Apr 17, 2008)

Talk to the Service Manager at Pentegon and explain that you were told that there would be no charge as the original air bags had been incorrectly fitted and that you are not going to pay the invoice. See what he says.....


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

I agree with charisma, except I would put that in writing, and enclose the bill with it. Keep all copies for records. :wink:


cabby


----------



## rayc (Jun 3, 2008)

If Pentagon were asked to supply and fit then it is all down to them. It was them who fitted them incorrectly so why are you being asked to pay for replacements? You are in a strong position as at least you have your motorhome in your possession. My suggestion is to write them a letter setting out your refusal to accept their invoice and the reasons. The ball is then in their court.


----------



## dalspa (Jul 1, 2008)

Send them a letter asking them to put in writing how they were (incorectly) fitted the first time, and what changes they made to the fitting of the new bags. Unlikely to get a reply as either way would shoot them in the foot. Lets hope they have fitted them properly this time.

DavidL


----------



## Penquin (Oct 15, 2007)

I would go along with not paying the bill as you were told "no charge" and that if they wish to pursue it you will be counter-claiming for dangerously shoddy work done incorrectly which has cost you the use of the vehicle since their inept fitting.....

Dave


----------



## coppo (May 27, 2009)

Pentegon are out of pocket because when they took the damaged bags off Mercedes have refused to credit them for the bags. They are trying to pass the cost onto someone and you are the only one they can think off.

Their fault, they should have known at the time of fitting they were fouling the chassis.

Their fault totally, don't pay.

Paul.


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

I wouldn't enter into discussion with them beyond pointing out that you used their services as professionals to have the correct airbags correctly fitted. You note the reason given for Mercedes not being willing to replace them free of charge and that as fouling the chassis caused the failure then either the wrong parts were used or the correct parts were incorrectly fitted. Tell them that either way the fault was theirs and it was up to them to remedy it which they willingly did at first, only changing their minds months later. Finish by saying that you have no intention of picking up the cost of a regrettable failure on their part and that their original statement that there would be no charge was the reasonable response, Alan.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

I reckon Alan (erneboy) has got it spot on. 

You paid them to rectify a problem, they clearly EITHER used the wrong parts or fitted them incorrectly. Their problem not yours. If they (Pentagon) had employed a plumber to fit a new toilet and the plumber don't fit it correctly would they pay the plumber for any repair ??

Don't think so.

Andy


----------



## rosalan (Aug 24, 2009)

Any writing should include the words "Without prejudice" I believe.
A couple of obvious points.... what if any warranty would be expected or offered for the air bags when they were fitted?

Citizens advice may be able to help.

"Which" magazine, if you are a member could give you legal support.

I am mindful of a car trailer company a while back, who caused considerable damage to the 'toad', admitted their fault then changed their mind and as far as I can recall, never did pay up.

Attributing blame and responsibility and getting someone to pay-up, can be two different things.

Alan


----------



## frankia2014 (Sep 15, 2014)

Hi Sundial, Your first post say's that the air bags were after market
and that the replacement bags were sourced from a local factor
therefor what would that have to do with Mercedes. I think that brings
Pentegon's report into disrepute. Having been in the commercial motor trade for 50 years and run our own workshop for 40 of those years I know that mistakes are made by fitters and when that happens you need to stand up and put it right and not try and pass the cost on to the customer.


----------



## Bubblehead (Mar 5, 2007)

The original bags were 6 years old before failing, this means that they were fitted correctly and functioned correctly. Therefore they were the correct ones for your van. Replacements lasted days few which would suggest that there was an error in fitting or the wrong parts were fitted. Both of these issues were due to the garage and not you, act as already posted above and write to them rejecting their bill and stating the reasons why.


----------



## tyreman1 (Apr 18, 2008)

Sounds like it's just a 'try on',they're probably hoping you will just pay up and roll over....they supplied and fitted the bags if there is fault it is theirs and up to them to deal with any warranty issues with whoever the parts came from but they have admitted a fitting fault so there will be no warranty anyway.......contact them and tell them that your not paying but you are going to bill them for the time,grief and hassle that their poor workmanship has caused you....do not even think about having to pay this bill.


----------



## Sundial (May 11, 2005)

*Our conundrum*

 As always, MHF members are full of useful, sound advice.

We have decided to delay our reply for a few days, after all they have taken over a month to send their letter & bill.

We intend to include all the points raised in the replies, including Without Prejudice .... good call.

I will post an update when I have a reply!

Many thanks one and all....

Sundial


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

Advice on why/how to use "Without Prejudice" in letters............

http://www.bakermckenzie.com/files/...fd920a38/ar_london_withoutprejudice_jan13.pdf

http://www.wisewouldmahony.com.au/index.php?id=308

http://www.settlementagreements.org/articles/without-prejudice/


----------



## Sundial (May 11, 2005)

*Our conundrum*

Thank you Stanner for those links. It is clear that we do not need to use this statement as we will be more than happy for Pentegon to bring our reply to any jurisdiction!

Sundial


----------



## Sundial (May 11, 2005)

*Workmanship conundrum updated!*

 well, we contacted CAB And Trading Standards and followed their......and MHF members......advice. We quoted the Goods And Services Act 1982 etc and explained our reasons for refusing to pay their Bill and returned it to them.

Today we had a reply....!!

"Thank you for your letter dated 20th October the contents of which we have duly noted. Due to the inconvenience, we will write-off the parts cost for the airbags."

Result! Thank you to all those who gave advice......

Sundial


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

Write off the parts cost? Do they expect you to pay the labour? Alan.


----------



## Sundial (May 11, 2005)

*Our conundrum*

........the bill detailed all the work done, but for which there was no charge. They were just expecting us to pay, less 10%, the cost of the airbags!

Sundial


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

*Re: Our conundrum*



> ........the bill detailed all the work done, but for which there was no charge. They were just expecting us to pay, less 10%, the cost of the airbags!
> 
> Sundial


Good result as you say then. Sorry I probably read the above in your earlier post and managed to forget it, Alan.


----------

