ECP not interested in failed clutch

[Harlequin]

not sure where to go from here - bought a clutch from carparts4less (ECP ebay shop) , the wrong release bearing was sent - they sent a LUK one , well it started failing after 4 months.

sadly circumstances meant it had to wait till nowq to be changed (15 months later)

contacted the company who have point blank said ` 12 month warranty` and that's there opinion.

any idea`s? SOGA maybe?

[Oldpug]

I think you are wasting your time,the part had a 12 month warranty and your complaining after 15 months.Why didn't you claim for warranty when it was 4 months old? its not their fault the claim has been delayed.
By the way,the way your post is written it looks as if you have fitted the incorrect Luke bearing.

[Harlequin]

It's the correct bearing. It would seem the clutch itself is actually ok it's the guide tube that was the problem.

[wurlycorner]

Yep, I'm afraid if you didn't claim at 4 months, 15 months down the line, there's not a lot you can expect now...

[lexi]

I would bite the bullet and get it stripped before the weather really breaks. You have to hold your hands up on that one I think.
I am not even sure how it goes when wrong parts are supplied. I mean, they supply but you fit. Who is ultimately responsible?
A mate was supplied the wrong size brake discs for a zanty. Suppliers mistake but he was stoopid enough to fit a disc that the brake pads only swept 60% of He ended up with failed mot on braking power. When I stripped them, the pads had a huge step in them. His fault and in an accident and any checks........big trouble.

[Harlequin]

its changed now - got a new guide tube and valeo clutch - the `old` clutch appears to be fine as well

[van ordinaire]

f-w-i-w: theoretically you COULD make a claim after the warranty period - but, you'd have to prove the failure occurred within the period!!!

[MikeT]

Has everyone forgotten the warranty declaration; "Your statutory rights remain unaffacted"?

Warranties are voluntary additions by the manufacturers/retailers to the above said rights. IOW, they do not and cannot override your statutory rights.

The statute of limitations is capped at six years, which the law deems "reasonable" to seek legal resolution.

In UK law, anything sold should be deemed fit for purpose. As clutches are expected to last longer than 12months, I think the OP has a case to fight but IANAL and he should seek legal advice. Trading Standards offers free advice to consumers.

[Harlequin]

hmmm who would I go to for `professional` clutch advice , one acceptable if it goes further?

[dnsey]

It would also depend, I suppose, on what you asked them to supply. Most factors request the VIN inorder to check that the parts are correct for the application. If you decline, and just state the model, I suppose they'd say that you had your chance...

[elma]

There possibly is a sale of goods act case. Considering the cost of having it professionally inspected then the time involved it'd probably be not worth bothering. If you lose the expenses are more than the part was originally and if you win it'll probably still take a little while and further investment to get the money back.
They'll argue that it wasn't professionally fitted, was driven by a loon and that if it was defective it would not have been fitted by a competent person. I think you'd have your work cut out arguing this one.

[Lighty]

If the guide tube was the issue, in what way are you blaming the clutch or bearing ?
Also if you do your research, most clutch suppliers recommend replacement of the guide tube any way, they cost about £5.
Personally I don't think you have the slightest chance of winning any claim against the suppliers or manufacturers of the clutch.

[van ordinaire]

There possibly is a sale of goods act case. Considering the cost of having it professionally inspected then the time involved it'd probably be not worth bothering. If you lose the expenses are more than the part was originally and if you win it'll probably still take a little while and further investment to get the money back.
They'll argue that it wasn't professionally fitted, was driven by a loon and that if it was defective it would not have been fitted by a competent person. I think you'd have your work cut out arguing this one.

Which is why I didn't go beyond relying on the warranty.

However, generally speaking in County Court proceedings the presumption is in favour of the customer. Unless the vendor maintains the goods aren't faulty, there's no need for an expert - & the onus is on them to produce evidence to support their contention.

[Stickyfinger]

For a single item, one that "interacts" with other items is very different.....no chance

[Gibbo2286]

Van Ordinaire your " County Court proceedings the presumption is in favour of the customer." is completely wrong, it is the plaintiff's place to prove his complaint i.e. that the item was faulty, using expert testimony if needed.

County court judges spend all their working lives listening to people lying through their teeth on both sides and will make their own judgment without any presumption either way.