40 replies to this topic

[b1g_dav3]

Thank you for checking out this thread, it would be much appreciated if you could spare the time to read over this post, and if possible any replies that people have left and maybe leave some input of your own. There will be a poll for this, asking people to tick which alloy wheels they have had buckled, corresponding with their car model.

I am completely aware of the mass of threads about this topic, however most seem to be just complaining about them rather than actually grouping together on the matter in hand. There are steps we can take! However, let's discuss the topic first.

Basically it seems there is a large number of us here (seems mainly to be the Zetec S and Titanium owners) who're having hassle with our alloy wheels buckling and getting flat spots, now sometimes these are repairable, sometimes they're not serious enough and then other times the only action is to replace the wheel itself, now even with the first 2 options, should we really be going through this? Did you buy your Fiesta to be messing around every few months about the alloy wheels?

My story is this; I felt a vibration through the steering wheel of my Fiesta and within a couple of days went to Kwikfit to have what I thought was my wheels rebalanced as I and my dad (a mechanic for 40+ years) thought I'd lost a wheel weight. To my horror, when the wheels had been inspected, one wheel was terribly buckled, and the other had a less serious but unrepairable buckle as well. I was advised not to drive hard and to avoid motorways, effectively meaning really I need to get new wheels or take the car off the road as it's unsafe. My problem is, I don't just have £400 odd in my pocket to splash out, and also I only have 1 spare wheel. The thing is this wasn't all Kwikfit said, the mechanic said he see's Fiesta's in all of the time, and when I said about Corsa's he says they're fine, it's just the Fiesta's. To back this up, a lot of us on here have posted multiple threads.

So, I take the car in to Evans Halshaw (who in all of this I can give no fault too) to have their verdict, 2 new wheels and tyres. So I then go back home and give Ford a ring, well let's just say I have never had such an experience with a company, who takes £15,000 off someone, just to treat them like they're something off the bottom of their boot? They said there is no problem with the wheels and that I must have hit pot holes. Well, in that case why do I have two front wheels gone? To which the person on the phone said 'Exactly, why is it only the front two and not the back?' To which I replied, 'Well after all, the front wheels do have the full weight of a diesel engine over them...' and then there was a momentary silence from them, followed by being told I would have to find the money to pay for the wheels myself if I wanted the problem sorting, and when I said about not having heaps of cash lying round, that I would either have to borrow the money from friends and family, or take the car off the road. I genuinely couldn't believe what I was being told, I was being told that because they're putting wheels on cars that are unfit for purpose that I would have to take a 9 month old vehicle off the road?

So, here I am now. I'm posting so hopefully we can get together and do something about this, I'm thinking of contacting trading standards and hopefully Watchdog if we get enough support here. I aim to keep this thread alive so that anyone can chip in and hopefully get some help with the issue, so please post your experiences and thoughts on this, and let's try and get somewhere!

I have also posted on Ford UK's Facebook, which I urge anyone to do over this;
https://www.facebook.com/forduk

Thank you for your time.


Posts to read;
antman99 - Post 2

[antman99]

I am one of those people you say about that is not taking action, That simply is not true, having spent over 12 months dealing with Ford let me tell you what I have been doing,

Dealer x 2 - Tell me and Ford the damage to the wheel was caused by impact damage to the inner part of the rim, This is obvious we are not disputing that they buckled when driving on the M5 we are saying they are not fit for britains road.

Ford CRC - The usual, as you have already experienced, blame everyone but Ford.

Ford Executive Team (Work Directly for the CEO) - Had my car in twice to look at them at the two dealerships and they simply reiterate what CRC say.

Trust me when I say this I have tried the majority of things and throughout I have made it clear that there are a lot of people including those on this forum who are having issues.

I am not a lawyer but for a year at Uni I studied Science in Court which means I do know how we stand here.

Trading standard, MAY, be interested, the issue here is that there are many many Fords on the road and even the 100+ people who voted would only make a tiny proportion.

So are they fit for purpose, in my personal opinion, No, in a legal sense where only a tiny proprtion either notice or report it maybe not.

I am aware of a watchdog rep contacted some members about this previously but they did not take it any further.

My car is at Ford today and I am awaiting to here back from the executive team again, if they tell me what I expect to here then I will be doing the following.

- Contacting Auto Express with the statistics I collected in my thread, and see if they will contact Ford, they usually take it more seriously especially when the same magazine is often praising their cars.

- Continue my verbal disagreement with the decision of the Ford Executive Team.

- Potentially taking to twitter/ facebook to ensure it gets noticed, being careful of Libel and Slander.

So although your comment was a bit selfish when you say others have done nothing, I still agree 100% with your cause and I wish you all the best.

Keep us up to date if you do make any progress.

[b1g_dav3]

Didn't mean everyone was doing nothing, just a lot don't and just pay out, it is good that there are some of us going down every route and I do apologise if you thought I was trying to say nobody is doing anything, just want to try and get everyone to voice an opinion on a single thread that's kept up-to date .

[itsrelfy]

Hi

I to have had problems with my wheels. All four of mine were replaced 3 months after I bought the car. The car was just 1 year old when I bought it.

My problems started in France on a summer holiday. I pulled into a layby for lunch and as I was looking in my rear view mirror to see if the other car in our little convoy had seen me pull in there was a almighty bang and I couldn't realistically have been going more than 25mph

My drivers side wheel was badly bent I finished the last 200 miles at about 50mph and then had the car towed to a garage where somehow they managed to at least get it usable wether they balanced it or bent it back out I'm unsure but I managed to get back home with it

I then booked it into ford when I got home. This is when I found out all four wheels were damaged and needed replacing. I phoned ford and discussed it with them and got the same seemingly standard reply "our wheels are fine and we wont pay out"

I argued my case with my dealer and admitted that I had damaged one wheel. And was told that I must have hit pot holes and damaged the rest. I pointed out that I'd only had the car 3 months and that I was a careful driver and in the 9 years I had been driving I had never damaged a wheel on any of my previous 4 cars. I also said I do not drive down pot holes I go to great lengths to avoid them.

The dealer retaliated by saying that it must be my driving as when I bought the car as part of the prep work a safety check was done and the wheels were checked for roundness. So I asked for proof of this and low and behold they could not find this paperwork.

At this point the dealer manager came out and I argued with him and he agreed to pay for two and I paid for the other two. I wasn't happy with this but it was better than nothing.

I was contacted by a lady from watchdog I'm not sure of her name now and I helped her as far as I could but it went no further.

In my view the wheels must be weak. It's worth also mentioning that one of the wheels that I had replaced was itself a replacement as the date stamp was after the car was built.

But ford won't help even though I'm sure they know there is an issue. If they did it would cost a fortune and they have the perfect excuse in the state of our roads.

Regards
Adrian.

[antman99]

Dave, Don't worry I did not take it personally, I understand your anger, the whole thing is a joke and to be honest I have decided that my next car will not be another Ford, it may seem stupid over wheels but think about it in context.

The only thing that makes contact with the road (via the tire) and it has a high proportion of failure, that to me is simply unacceptable.

Combined with the door seals being stuck on with Blu-Tac and my seat that is either already broken or will shortly break I cannot stand the hassle that comes attached to these cars.

[b1g_dav3]

Yeah, I was really considering an ST, either a Fiesta or Focus and I've been truly put off, I'll probably end up going for something more problem free.

[Stoney871]

The situation should be them proving the problem is not their fault not you having to prove it is.
Take your evidence to trading standards.

[antman99]

Stoney you are indeed correct and something that will need discussion with trading standards about, what does make it interesting is the Sale of Goods act says it should be fit for purpose, considering the purpose of a car is to drive on the roads that the car is purchased in (we are an island after all) the question is how is it Ford are getting a way with it, I will endeavour to find out.

[Stoney871]

As you say, sale of goods act does apply.
The wheels must be fit for purpose.
Ford are unlikely to admit liability, if they had to recall all wheels imagine how much that would cost them.
They'll keep fobbing people off until the problem goes away.
I suggest a online petition and all the names going to a list which can be presented to Ford and trading standards.
Let the masses speak.

[iNath]

The situation should be them proving the problem is not their fault not you having to prove it is.

With you being a man of the law I'm shocked to here you say this, that's not how it works. Ford are innocent until proven guilty. Don't get me wrong, having 3 buckled 17" wheels myself I'm not happy with them and there is a big problem. But the law of the land says you prove the fault, not them prove their innocence.

I don't come up to you and say, "prove you didn't murder this person", you say "prove I did".

[Stoney871]

Of course the law is that someone is innocent until proved guilty, but by that measure then you could argue that Ford are stating that drivers are guilty of misusing the wheels which leads to damage.



Criminal law has a different burden of proof that contractural law.



The sale of goods act states -



Satisfactory quality, s 14(2)^[11]

The quality of the goods sold must be satisfactory (prior to 1994, this provision required 'merchantable' quality; this requirement has been retained in most Commonwealth versions of the Act). The Act provides an objective test to determine satisfactory quality; the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price, description and any other relevant factors.^[12] The courts have identified certain factors that may raise or lower the expectation of satisfaction. Second hand goods, per Bernstien v. Pamson Motors Ltd.,^[13] will attract a lower expectation. On the other hand goods of a reputable brand may attract a higher expectation, the judge in Bernstien used the example of a small ping on a Rolls-Royce being unsatisfactory. 'Other relevant factors' may include advertising in the case of consumer contracts.^[14]



Fitness for purpose, s14(3)

If the buyer expressly or impliedly makes his purpose for the goods known to the seller, the seller is obliged to make sure the goods provided are fit for that purpose, if it is reasonable for the buyer to rely on the seller's expertise. An example of the application of this provision can be found in Godley v Perry<sup>[15]

Source http://en.wikipedia...._Goods_Act_1979</sup>

Full legislation.

^{http://www.legislati...k/ukpga/1979/54}

[Jwsturner]

I have 17" street pack alloys and all 4 were buckled. One was bad enough that it needed replacing at a coat of £150. The others could do with changing too, but I'm waiting until I have to change them. I'm also concerned that the new ones will get buckled too. I try my best to avoid pot holes, but it's difficult with the road being so bad. My local tire fitter says nearly all fords he has in have bucked alloys, old and new cars. I've had about 20 cars up to now and have never ever had buckled alloys. Maybe it should be the local council I look to for replacing them? But put me down for a petition against ford!

[b1g_dav3]

I have 17" street pack alloys and all 4 were buckled. One was bad enough that it needed replacing at a coat of £150. The others could do with changing too, but I'm waiting until I have to change them. I'm also concerned that the new ones will get buckled too. I try my best to avoid pot holes, but it's difficult with the road being so bad. My local tire fitter says nearly all fords he has in have bucked alloys, old and new cars. I've had about 20 cars up to now and have never ever had buckled alloys. Maybe it should be the local council I look to for replacing them? But put me down for a petition against ford!

The big problem with going after the council, is think about where you travel to in a week, month, etc; where did you buckle the wheels? Do you even know? That's the big problem we all face, we can't prove where we did it, we have no evidence of which pot hole we hit and are left with going after Ford due to their poor quality wheels.

When the RAC man came yesterday he said he sees a lot of Fiesta's like this, and quite often one cause is the mini-speed bumps with buckled inside edges.

[Stoney871]

Those mini bumps are no use whatsoever to normal drivers.
Take a look at many of them and you will see digs in the road before and after them where people jam on the anchors and then accellerate after them damaging the road surface which is weakened when the bumps are cut into the tarmac.
Most of them also have big scuffs on the top from someones sump or exhaust.
They only stop boy racers with excessively lowered cars, but they tend to drive down the middle of the road instead to avoid them, which is more dangerous.
I've lost count of how many wheels i've buckled or tyres i've pushed off their rims from going on a blue run and hitting the !Removed! things.
As a serving Police Officer i am obliged to state that they are an effective and necessary traffic calming device around schools and residential areas.
(As a private citizen i am free to state that they are a bane on my life and are the worst designed thing ever, why do councils spend millions of our council tax money every year to attempt to keep roads smooth and servicable only to put a !Removed! great bump in it afterwards.)
Rant over--

[antman99]

Off topic here, but Clive, you are a policemen, better watch what I say now, Joke, I must say you are the first police officer that I have seen that has Superchips remap and Blue/White Side bulbs.

But hey I agree about the speed bumps although to be fair the same applys how many people drive over tham without buckling their alloys.