Citroen C5 VTR 160 HDi fuse box spontanously melted

[Paul-R]

Market Rasen to Milton Keynes: 124 miles and 2h 12m via the A46 and M1 according to Mr Google. Not exactly close unfortunately.

[Gibbo2286]

Market Rasen to Milton Keynes: 124 miles and 2h 12m via the A46 and M1 according to Mr Google. Not exactly close unfortunately.

Likewise to my place 186 miles.

[Sezza]

Hoping Citroen come through for you...

Don't know whereabouts you're based - but if anywhere near Milton Keynes I'm more than happy to try to lend a hand in helping out if you're stuck for transportation until you've got your own car sorted. Just drop me a message here if that would be useful.

I too am hoping that Citroen can help ....

Thank you so much for the offer of help - I could do with it! But as other poster has said, I am too far away, but a kind thought.

Also going to have another go at the insurers as they haven't had any report on the actual damage except my version. They told me they had spoken to the dealer who had advised 'no visible damage', but that statement has several possible issues:-

a) Not least that the dealer says he never spoke to the insurers, and isn't aware of anyone else doing so either!
b) In the time frame that the conversation *may* have taken place i.e. between the car arriving at dealers late on Wednesday afternoon, and my talk with Total Loss agent mid-Thursday afternoon, the dealer had not yet opened the bonnet and looked to see what damage in the engine compartment. (As they had been told insurers were taking charge of the car, so no need for them to look).

It was only on Friday morning when I spoke to the dealer to ask them to commence investigation that they opened bonnet for the first time to take the pictures, followed later in the day by the initial investigation resulting in the quote. So if a conversation had taken place with a person at the dealership, it may have been couched in a way that didn't include the engine compartment, nor any mention that it hadn't been inspected yet. i.e. the insurers may just have asked something like 'This car has purportedly had a fire, what sort of damage apparent', and from an external visual point of view, the answer would accurately be 'None'.

.. and what really rankles is that if I had opened the bonnet during the time it was obviously burning - albeit in a controlled way due to the well-fitting fuse-box cover and consequent lack of oxygen, and had investigated more, the fire could have escalated leading to the 'flames' and 'body damage' that the insurers wanted to see! So by being careful, I have seemingly shot myself in the foot!

Anyway, I feel that at the very least I have to talk to the insurers again. Offer them the pictures + suggest they talk to the dealer again now that they have had a better look.

So a busy time for me on the phone tomorrow!

[bobins]

I learnt the hard way not to trust insurers, so I'd advise you challenge them where you can. When I was hit by another person, Admiral (my insurers) made up the other persons statement in an attempt to share the blame and get me to pay up my share of the excess. It wasn't until the Motor Insurance Bureau got involved that Admiral suddenly realised their 'mistake' (Ha!) and paid up out of their own pocket. Moral of the story - don't trust insurers, they're primarily in business to make money.

[bobins]

Would someone who has better access to Service Citroen than I do look up the frazzled BSI p/n 6580ZN and see if it's shared across other models (all models search ??), please. Is it used in Peugeots as well ?


Edit: I've just had a look on eBay and there's several brand new 6580ZN available for not much money. They seem to share p/n with 9678476980, 1613317180 6570A0 and were fitted to 3008, 308, 407, 5008, Partner, Tepee, RCZ, some B'lingo, some C4, C6. I'm beginning to think that these BSI units getting fried isn't that uncommon and a bit of digging into the DVSA recalls might start to show there's a strong link between the vehicles listed above and the ones on the recalls list.

[Sezza]

ISTR when I used to have third party, fire & theft insurance, the term used in the policy was 'fire self ignition', which this surely was.

No mention in my policy about 'self-ignition' - it just says in the section Fire and Theft :-

"Loss of (or damage to) the car caused by fire, theft or attempted theft"

So no idea if that is good or bad

Sarah

[GiveMeABreak]

Check the associated definitions in your Policy - especially the section on: "What isn't covered - Failures, breakdown or breakages of mechanical, electrical, electronic or computer equipment". If you have anything like that then it may become a battle Sarah.

[Sezza]

Check the associated definitions in your Policy - especially the section on: "What isn't covered - Failures, breakdown or breakages of mechanical, electrical, electronic or computer equipment". If you have anything like that then it may become a battle Sarah.

Yes, I do have that bit in the 'What is not covered' ...

"Mechanical, electronic and computer failures or breakdowns or breakages"

But the way the Total Loss man explained it was that the item that has failed / broken as such is NOT covered, but any consequential damage caused by that first item burning IS.

In most cases of engine compartment fires, once the fire takes hold, it is impossible to tell from the resultant mess what started it all off ... and if they can tell, then that originally failing item would be excluded - so I guess they could try saying that a particular ECU appears to be the source?

So my thoughts are that the fault originated in one of the parts/components within the fuse box - whether it be an ECU or the BSI or whatever which subsequently took out the rest.

I still keep feeling that it seems ridiculous that had say thrown open the bonnet at the start which would have likely worsened the fire, leading to burnt body parts, then the claim would have been settled without any worry at all! (He kept concentrating on asking me how high the flames were and how bad was the damage to the bonnet, wing, etc. ) So how can it be fair that I tried to sensible and safe by not looking into the bonnet, and so minimising damage (and danger and mess and the fire brigade call out, etc.) only to be penalised now?

I realise that the insurers are likely to continue to be difficult, but knowing that they only have my non-technical version of what state the car is in (and that opinion given prior to anyone looking at it apart from me and the RAC man at the scene), so no knowledgeable opinion from the dealer etc. that they are just trying it on at this stage.

Maybe Citroen UK will be more helpful?

[bobins]

Sarah, you said previously that.....

Citroen still saying nothing too much but confirm that if the failure not due to wear and tear; lack of maintenance; or unusual activity then they would likely fund the repairs - but of course no promise until they get report from the dealer.

.....but then we hit the problem that Citroen couldn't obtain of one of the parts so wouldn't be able to do the repairs. If the missing part is the BSI part number 6580ZN, then you might want to consider offering to Citroen that you supply and pay for that part boxed and brand new, if they supply and fix all the other bits*. 6580ZN is available via eBay for around £130. It'd be cheaper than paying your insurance excess !!!

*- There's still quite a long way to go before you'd be in a position to negotiate with Citroen, but it's worth bearing in mind.

[Sezza]

Update so far .......

Spoke to the insurers again this morning. They are refuting the claim as fire claims only relate to damage to the body of the car - not components in the engine bay. Yes, I would have a claim had an engine component started the fire which had spread to the car and damaged it, but even then, the claim would only cover repair / replacement of the damaged body parts - not the damaged engine - or in the case the wiring. So no luck there.

Have again spoken to Citroen UK (although only just now at 15.00 managed to talk to the person I lodged the call with). They have said that the dealer needs to raise a 'Thermal Incident' with Citroen Tech. Services to get the ball rolling, and that they will contact dealer to ask them to do that if not done already. Told it could take some time before I hear anything back from that (likely end of the week at the earliest). I asked what was I supposed to do meanwhile without a car, and C.UK said they would see if dealer could provide me with a courtesy car meanwhile.

If they can't, then I will have to follow up on cheap local car offered to me (anyone know anything about 2004 Passat 2.0 S Petrol estates - reviews say OK albeit unexciting cars??).

So all not yet completely lost, but looks as if it is going to take a long time to resolve ........

Sarah

[MikeT]

Update so far .......

Spoke to the insurers again this morning. They are refuting the claim as fire claims only relate to damage to the body of the car - not components in the engine bay. Yes, I would have a claim had an engine component started the fire which had spread to the car and damaged it, but even then, the claim would only cover repair / replacement of the damaged body parts - not the damaged engine - or in the case the wiring. So no luck there.
Sarah

I would be asking them to show the smallprint that defines "fire".

[Richard_C]

Are you speaking to the insurer or a 3rd party loss adjuster appointed by the insurer? Their job is to keep their costs down by making claims go away and I suspect they get rewarded in some indirect way for so doing. One approach might be to speak to the insurer and say you believe their loss adjuster has misinterpreted the situation and the rules, please will they provide you with their rules on fire cover, a written explanation of why the claim has been denied, and a copy of their complaints procedure. Be very polite but give the message that bending the rules in the insurers favour will be more trouble than its worth.

[GiveMeABreak]

I think you'll find that it is very similar to most insurance companies - they will cover 'knock-on' / secondary peripheral damage caused by actual fire, but not the actual electronic module / circuit / computer that caused the meltdown - as that is deemed mechanical / electrical failure. And if that was claimable, we would all be able to claim for mechanical failure....

[Sezza]

... one bit I forgot to mention was that C UK said that one of their lines of investigation could be for them to contact my insurers to 'negotiate'?! Not sure how that works as they don't have my insurance details! But C UK said that they had access to insurance details in the same way police do so could find out. Although no idea what they might work out?

Similarly, before the insurers outright turned me down, they had mentioned that they would be contacting Citroen UK if they thought the problem caused by a manufacturing issue. So maybe more behind the scenes info / blame sharing occurs than I (we?) realise?

Sarah

[bobins]

... one bit I forgot to mention was that C UK said that one of their lines of investigation could be for them to contact my insurers to 'negotiate'?! Not sure how that works as they don't have my insurance details! But C UK said that they had access to insurance details in the same way police do so could find out. Although no idea what they might work out?

Finding out other people's insurance details is actually very easy - there's nothing sneaky behind what they've said.

Similarly, before the insurers outright turned me down, they had mentioned that they would be contacting Citroen UK if they thought the problem caused by a manufacturing issue. So maybe more behind the scenes info / blame sharing occurs than I (we?) realise?

Sarah

The chances of it being due to a 'manufacturing issue' are extremely high - the chances of any car manufacturer or importer openly admitting to that are extremely low.........