Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: JLR ordered to pay back $283K to buyer of L405

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    168
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Having previously been at VCAT (with Jaguar Land Rover Australia) its an interesting process... My understanding/opinion from my process is the following:

    Although not court, the process is still very legalistic. The onus of proof of defect is on the owner, and in many cases (no different to court) you will need an 'expert witness' to confirm/support your claim so its not your word/opinion against the other. Particularly if you are trying to prove the entire car is 'not fit for purpose', as a manufacturer will likely prefer to continue investigate and fix an issue under warranty provisions.

    This is obviously where an engineers report is required, written in the particular style for a legal claim process. These individuals can obviously be expensive, particularly if they also have to find the fault symptoms or root cause as part via a detailed whole car engineering examination (lots of physical measurements and checks against factory specs/tolerances, not just listening for 'noises' or 'vibrations' per se) as well as then writing the very detailed report.

    Depending of the quantum of claim you can represent yourself, and then the defendant also is unlikely to be allowed lawyers in the hearing IIRC. Above a certain quantum its likely you'd want lawyers and then they would too... Like a court process costs can be awarded, so if they offer a settlement, and you are not awarded more than the settlement you may be up for some of their legal costs too. Although when I went my process started with a mediation type process at VCAT between the parties

    Its been some years, and this is my dusty recollection from my personal experience, would recommend anyone wanting to go to VCAT do their own research prior as things and the process may likely have changed in 8 or 9 years....

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    2,574
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 2nd Rower View Post
    Having previously been at VCAT (with Jaguar Land Rover Australia) its an interesting process... My understanding/opinion from my process is the following:

    Although not court, the process is still very legalistic. ..
    Yes, despite the tribunals having been set up to be non-legalistic they have become mini-courts - a couple of years ago I and some neighbours objected to a planning approval given to a local restaurant and when we went to VCAT found ourselves facing a barrister hired by the council ... not exactly informal.
    Arapiles
    2014 D4 HSE

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Adelaide Hills. South Australia
    Posts
    13,145
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I bet the Council said something like......... "But we didn't know the bloke was a Barrister, but since he is here now can we just get on?"

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    780
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Historic Legal Loss for JLR Australia

    This decision especially after the Ford decision is a major game changer for JLR Australia's warranty claims

    We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph


    This couple’s successful battle for justice over their dud car is changing the way automakers treat customers.

    Jaguar Land Rover Australia (JLRA) has not only had to refund Sally and James Morphy the $280,000 they paid for the top of the line Range Rover Autobiography, it has been made to cover the Geelong couple’s legal expenses of $140,000 following a lengthy consumer tribunal battle.

    JLRA has also been forced to pay the dealer’s litigation costs of $150,000.


    Then there’s the estimated $100,000 outlaid for its own failed defence.

    All up that’s a $670,000 bill for this lemon, which an expert’s report said risked “sudden and catastrophic engine failure” because 10 litres of coolant had leaked into the oil.


    James and Sally Morphy of Barrabool in Victoria with the 2016 Range Rover they purchased for $260,000 and which has had serious mechanical problems. Picture: Andrew Henshaw
    The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) found the vehicle unfit for even the most basic functions, let alone towing a horse float, which was what it was bought for.

    The Geelong couple’s case is now being used by other car manufacturers as an example of how not to treat owners.

    It recently featured in a presentation to 800 Volkswagen executives and dealers at a “customer experience” conference in Brisbane.

    VW marketing director Jason Bradshaw said the case was “cited to reinforce the importance of getting it right (because) there are real examples of dealerships and brands getting it wrong.”

    Consumer law expert Gene Schirripa of Snedden Hall & Gallop in Canberra said car companies could not afford to ignore the ruling


    The Morphy case referenced at the Volkswagen Customer Experience conference in Brisbane in February 2019. Picture: Supplied
    “Because this was such a landmark decision in terms of the Australian Consumer Law as it applies to motor vehicles and because JLRA is a major player I think you will see behavioural shift in terms of the other manufacturers,” Mr Schirripa said.

    The firm Mills Oakley, which represented the dealer in the Morphy case, has since been contacted by at least three consumers alleging “major failures” and seeking to rely on the ruling to receive a full refund from the manufacturer, not the dealership.

    “If this pattern reflects a broader trend, it certainly suggests that manufacturers may be more likely to engage with consumers who make the allegation of ‘major failure’ with their vehicles so as to avoid the risk that the vehicle can be rejected and then the manufacturer being held liable for the costs of a replacement vehicle and legal costs,” said partner James Tobin.

    In October last year VCAT member Blair Ussher found that “repetitive and undiagnosed failures made the car unreliable … and the prospect of the defect leading to a sudden and catastrophic engine failure rendered the motor car unfit for its basic purpose”.


    James and Sally Morphy are calling for a strengthening of the consumer protection law. Picture: Andrew Henshaw
    Then in a separate costs ruling in January this year he again ruled for the couple, mainly because in the original case they had “won entirely” and JLRA had “lost entirely”.

    “I consider that this disparity is sufficient to support a costs award in (the Morphys’) favour,” Mr Ussher said.

    In a rewrite of history, a JLRA spokesman said it had provided the refund “without challenge”, demonstrating the company’s “desire to comply at all times with Australian consumer law and operate at the highest standards morally and ethically”.

    Following a 2017 investigation, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) described the new car retailing industry’s attitude to its obligations under consumer law as “deeply concerning”.

    The Morphys are now driving a Porsche Cayenne.

    LAND ROVER OWNER: ‘I’M NOT SIGNING A GAG ORDER’
    A Land Rover owner has refused to sign a “gag order” the automaker attempted to impose after it finally agreed to a $70,000 refund.

    The ACCC has repeatedly said nondisclosure agreements are not on, but that hasn’t stopped recalcitrants within the industry from trying to silence unhappy customers such as Dee Caldicott.

    The engine of his Discovery Sport had to be removed after doing just 18,000km.

    An expert’s report found “very high” amounts of metal in the oil, indicating “severe” engine wear.

    Despite requesting a no-cost replacement or full refund, at one point the Mackay man faced having to fork out $30,000 towards another vehicle.

    He refused and eventually won a full refund from Jaguar Land Rover Australia (JLRA) after mediation at the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

    “Then they tried to impose a gag order,” Mr Caldicott said.

    “I said ‘I’m not doing it’.


    The lemon Land Rover Discovery Sport owned by Dee Caldicott of Mackay. Picture: Supplied
    “I told them I’d take them to the District Court if they didn’t pay on time.”

    Payment was made two hours before the deadline.

    A JLRA spokesman said it couldn’t be “drawn to comment on the specifics … other than to say a refund is at times accompanied with an agreement that slanderous and defamatory commentary cease now that an amicable agreement has been reached. This is not a gag order.”

    During mediation Mr Caldicott presented a document he had found on an internet forum that purported to be a memo by a top executive of the parent company Jaguar Land Rover about a “balancer shaft whine” affecting hundreds of thousands of vehicles and requiring “remedial action with the least amount of delay”.

    The JLRA spokesman confirmed the authenticity of the memo but said it was referred to a “customer comfort improvement on a limited number of vehicles.

    “There are no consequences should the improved parts not be installed other than the possibility that a customer may perceive a whining sound from the engine under particular loads and conditions,” the spokesman said.

    “There have been no product failures reported in conjunction with the replacement or recommended replacement of this part.”


    Let's hope those who were cast aside by JLR Warranty can now seek recourse in the Courts with this legal precedent!!

    Laurie

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    7,768
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Thanks for posting that up Laurie.

    While the consumer protection laws are there, you have to be able to afford the legal costs of having them applied.

    My 2007 RRV was literally unroadworthy as I drove it out of the showroom, but as I would find out, I needed to be able to cover up $100,000 in legal expenses, just to force LRA to honour the warranty I paid for when I bought my RRV new.

    The cost did not guarantee that if I won, I would get my legal costs back. I my case, the vehicle was just not worth the risk.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ballarat,Vic,Aus
    Posts
    3,580
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I can't read the linked article without subscribing. What interests me more than anything is the media has NOT picked this up from what I can tell. There appears to be nothing in any of the major papers.
    Proper cars--
    '92 Range Rover 3.8V8 ... 5spd manual
    '85 Series II CX2500 GTi Turbo I :burnrubber:
    '63 ID19 x 2 :wheelchair:
    '72 DS21 ie 5spd pallas
    Modern Junk:
    '07 Poogoe 407 HDi 6spd manual :zzz:
    '11 Poogoe RCZ HDI 6spd manual

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    262
    Total Downloaded
    0
    This raises a number of issues. Was this behavior endorsed by JLR or was it a reflection of the Ethos of that dealership?
    All dealings I've had with JLR regarding Warranty issues have been well handled with a satisfactory outcome, having said that I wonder how it would have been handled if the entire engine had the issues these people experienced.
    Thankfully precedent now exists and consumer rights have been upheld.
    Defender MY 2015 110

    Adventures so far!!
    Cape York 2016 Bloomfield,OTT(Gunshot), Frenchmans,Border Ranges, Fraser Isl,Moreton Isl, Tassie(pyengana Jeep track & Montezuma falls).1770

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    2,411
    Total Downloaded
    0
    From what I have been told by people who have worked for both JLR(UK) and JLR(Aus), they are chalk and cheese as far as company ethos goes. We are sadly underdone here in Australia.
    Life is just a series of obstacles preventing you from taking a nap.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    7,768
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by cripesamighty View Post
    From what I have been told by people who have worked for both JLR(UK) and JLR(Aus), they are chalk and cheese as far as company ethos goes. We are sadly underdone here in Australia.
    I totally agree with that.


    When Land Rover in the UK found out about the condition of my RRV, they contacted LRA and asked them to fix my RRV.


    LRA refused to do anything and just sent me a loverly e-mail, virtually telling me bad luck for buying a Land Rover.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Tewantin (NOOSA area)
    Posts
    636
    Total Downloaded
    0

    JLRA getting "whatfor" in Court :0)

    See press clipping from other week's Oz below, re JLRA getting done over with consumer law in Court. Couldn't happen to nicer people.

    Cheers and apologies, couldn't get it up right after loading???? (Was to start)

    Rick F


    . 20190914_134659.jpg

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!