Further thought - it's not mentioned when the car was purchased and if from a dealer. If a recent dealer purchase, consumer rights would apply - plenty of guides on line eg:

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/the-car-i-bought-has-a-problem-what-are-my-rights-aAnMC5b0ZzJb

 

Hi,

I have just called my Ford dealership to ask them for clarification of the goodwill offer.

There are significant differences to what is stated in video - THE OFFER IS NOT 100% and excludes a replacement engine

They said they never pay 100%.  They use a calculator which is based on loyalty and service history.

In my case the amount came to 43%, but this was only for a replacement timing belt and water pump.

They quoted £1800 to replace the belt and water pump, and I think I could get the repair done much cheaper at my local garage.

So I am not sure I would be any better off.

As engines are much more expensive, that decision is made by head office and they couldnt give me ny indication of the %.

Interesting. Did you ask out of curiosity or because of a problem?

£1800 is a typical dealer quote for belt replacement as a routine service action and would not be covered by this scheme anyway.

What your dealer is saying sounds normal for what members were told before the latest amendment to the scheme (below) which does say 100%.

We have had our Ford Puma for 2 years and it's 3 years old, it only currently has 28,000 miles on the clock also. We recently broke down and Ford have investigated and they have said our Cylinder 2 has low compression and our engine needs replacing. £9,124!! The Warranty ran out February this year. Do you think Ford will help us on this? still waiting a response.

8 minutes ago, Ashton j said:

We have had our Ford Puma for 2 years and it's 3 years old, it only currently has 28,000 miles on the clock also. We recently broke down and Ford have investigated and they have said our Cylinder 2 has low compression and our engine needs replacing. £9,124!! The Warranty ran out February this year. Do you think Ford will help us on this? still waiting a response.

Ford might offer some goodwill in this case.  But not based on the goodwill scheme from above, as that was for the wet timing belt on the older 1.0 EcoBoost engine.

3 minutes ago, TomsFocus said:

Ford might offer some goodwill in this case.  But not based on the goodwill scheme from above, as that was for the wet timing belt on the older 1.0 EcoBoost engine.

Thanks Tom! I really hope so, with it being so close to the Warranty end date. I just hope they don't offer something silly! 

Does anyone have a copy of the Ford letter to the dealers about this issue?

I've spotted this in this week's MoneySaving Expert email from Martin Lewis which could help anyone who may have partially/wholly bought their Ecoboom on a credit card....

"In 2021 I purchased a two-year-old Ford Focus with 20,000 miles on the clock. Earlier this year (4 years later) it suffered a catastrophic engine failure when one of the wet belts delaminated at the grand old age of six years and 50,000 miles. The manual says they should last 10 years and 144,000 miles, but Ford didn't want to know.

"Thanks to your advice, I'd paid a £300 deposit on a credit card (the only thing I've ever used that card for!). I made a Section 75 claim based on the car not meeting the durability standards of the Consumer Rights Act. Lloyds didn't want to know either, claiming it was impossible to prove a fault at the time of sale, but the Financial Ombudsman has instructed Lloyds to reimburse me in full for the cost of a new engine and the diagnostic - £8,000 in total. Lloyds has accepted the decision.

"Your great advice and clear communication is the thing that's saved us being £8,000 out of pocket, which would have been an unbelievably painful pill to swallow. Thank you

 

Latest weekly email: 20 Winter Wallet Savers

I saw that too and must admit I have mixed feelings on it.  Why should the bank be out of pocket for thousands of pounds they didn't even lend?  The law should be pushing Ford (or any other faulty goods manufacturer!) to cover the cost of the faulty items.

If people keep using section 75 in this way I can see banks having to limit credit card eligibility even further, particularly to low earners who are often reliant on them in the current circumstances.

1 hour ago, TomsFocus said:

The law should be pushing Ford (or any other faulty goods manufacturer!) to cover the cost of the faulty items

I absolutely agree. In the meantime, though, maybe the bank should use it's financial clout to try to recover as much as possible from Ford.

My Son's Partner's 2017 Fiesta Titanium 1.0 EcoBoost has low oil pressure, the cause of which has been diagnosed as early degradation of the wet belt causing the sump strainer and oil filter being partially blocked with debris from the belt. She has emailed Ford twice under the Goodwill Scheme, but has been knocked back by them both times. She has had the car from new and has the full service history, both Ford and independent. The car has only 48,467 miles on the clock. Has anyone had their wet belt repaired by Ford under this scheme and can maybe offer advice as to how to proceed please?

3 hours ago, Stoneycrofter said:

Has anyone had their wet belt repaired by Ford under this scheme

Not that anyone on the forum has heard of.

It covers the wet timing belt failure. Very unlikely you would have any chance of winning a case.

New ecoboost engines available from PumaSpeed fully fitted for £3782

https://pumaspeed.co.uk/product-Brand-New-Ford-Service-10-EcoBoost-Engine_18898.jsp

Hi everyone,

I’m writing from Italy because I’m facing a very serious issue with my Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost Hybrid, and I’m trying to understand whether my case may have any connection with the wider 1.0 EcoBoost goodwill / compensation discussions.

My car has around 40,000 km and is less than 4 years old. It has been at an official Ford dealership since April 13 due to a serious engine problem.

Initially, the dealership gave me a repair estimate of around €3,400. After I contacted Ford Italy, Ford offered a goodwill contribution of about €900, reducing my share to around €1,900. I accepted those conditions in writing and was waiting for the payment details to pay the deposit and start the repair.

However, after my written acceptance, the repair did not start. The dealership then decided to carry out an engine oil analysis, which had not previously been presented to me as a condition for the estimate or for starting the work. I was told it was an internal check / verification.

Before the oil analysis, the dealership had already given me a technical explanation: during timing chain disassembly, they said they found damage to the bushings of the camshaft phasers / variable timing actuators. According to them, this caused friction and ferrous metal filings, which allegedly damaged the parts listed in the first estimate.

After the oil analysis, the diagnosis changed and became much broader: poor lubrication, wear metals, additional engine components, and turbocharger involvement. The total repair estimate is now over €7,000, with more than €5,500 including VAT charged to me.

What I find difficult to understand is that Ford has now increased its goodwill contribution to around €2,500. To me, this seems contradictory: if Ford believed the problem was simply caused by poor maintenance or a wrong oil service, I would have expected them to deny goodwill support altogether, not increase it.

My main question is this: if Ford and the dealer had already reviewed the service documentation and approved a goodwill contribution, and later even increased that contribution, how can the case now be treated as if the customer should still carry most of the repair cost?

I understand that many EcoBoost wet belt discussions may concern older 1.0 EcoBoost engines, especially pre-2019 models, and my Puma 1.0 EcoBoost Hybrid may not be technically identical. Still, I would really appreciate any advice from people familiar with Ford goodwill cases, EcoBoost lubrication issues, timing belt / timing chain related failures, cam phaser damage, oil contamination, oil dilution, wear metals, turbocharger damage, or similar situations.

I’m also considering an independent technical inspection. I have contacted a consumer association and spoken with a lawyer, but I would prefer to keep legal action as a last option. If anyone has experience with Ford goodwill support, compensation schemes, technical inspections, or how to challenge an unclear diagnosis like this, any advice would be extremely useful.

Thank you.

19 minutes ago, Maria00001 said:

I’m writing from Italy because I’m facing a very serious issue with my Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost Hybrid, and I’m trying to understand whether my case may have any connection with the wider 1.0 EcoBoost goodwill / compensation discussions.

The UK scheme mentioned in this thread (below) was specifically related to the earlier engines with a wet timing belt. Afaik they have not come up with anything for the later engines with timing chain as fitted to the Puma.

1 minute ago, Maria00001 said:

Initially, the dealership gave me a repair estimate of around €3,400. After I contacted Ford Italy, Ford offered a goodwill contribution of about €900, reducing my s

33 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

The UK scheme mentioned in this thread (below) was specifically related to the earlier engines with a wet timing belt. Afaik they have not come up with anything for the later engines with timing chain as fitted to the Puma.

Someone on Reddit pointed me to this thread specifically to ask for more information, because my case involves a later Puma 1.0 EcoBoost Hybrid with timing chain, not the earlier wet belt engine. If I’m going off topic, I apologize. I’m honestly desperate and just trying to understand whether anyone has seen similar failures or goodwill cases on the later chain-driven engines.

I can fully understand your frustration with this.

This is mainly a UK based site and unfortunately we do not see a lot of success with goodwill claims from Ford generally. Their policy in markets other than the UK may differ, as no doubt does consumer law.

The failure of the wet cam belt engines usually results in total engine failure, engine replacement rather than repair is the only solution. The turbocharger is also normally damaged due to oil starvation and/or metal particles.

Unlike the early wet belt cam drive versions, we have not seen many issues with the chain cam drive engine so far on here, and they tend to involve the oil pump drive which is still by a wet belt.

It may have been better to post a separate topic in the Puma section on this site rather than add to this one (which relates to the earlier engine), as there is more chance that owners of the later engine might see it and comment: https://www.fordownersclub.com/forums/forum/35-ford-puma-club/

There is also a separate Puma site (not related to this one) where the topic has been raised.

Ford Puma Forum

Dead Engine

Dead Engine Faults and Technical chat for the Ford Puma - Ford Puma Forum

I see you have now posted on the pumaforums.co.uk site.

Just to add to earlier comments, many members on this site believe that an underlying issue (other than possible poor design) is Fords recommended service intervals. I believe in Italy this is 2 years or 30,000km, which is similar to the UK.

Many of us stayed with annual oil and filter changes on 1.0 ecoboosts of both wet belt and chain cam drive variety.

The same point has been made on pumaforums.co.uk.

On 5/9/2026 at 7:33 PM, Eric Bloodaxe said:

I see you have now posted on the pumaforums.co.uk site.

Just to add to earlier comments, many members on this site believe that an underlying issue (other than possible poor design) is Fords recommended service intervals. I believe in Italy this is 2 years or 30,000km, which is similar to the UK.

Many of us stayed with annual oil and filter changes on 1.0 ecoboosts of both wet belt and chain cam drive variety.

The same point has been made on pumaforums.co.uk.

Thanks, could you link me to the thread where they discuss this hypothesis?

1 hour ago, Maria00001 said:

Thanks, could you link me to the thread where they discuss this hypothesis?

The same thread linked above and which you have already posted in. See posts by Smartguy67.

https://www.pumaforums.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2972