Nightmare at jaguar (xkr 2003 model) - latest update (PART ONE)
#1
09-21-2009, 01:37 AM
Nightmare at jaguar (xkr 2003 model) - latest update (PART ONE)
Good day to all Jaguar Car fans,
It is a bleak and sad day for me to have to resort to this, however Jaguar have left me no choice...
Further to my original post made on 08-21-2009 (03:28 PM) I attach hereto my letter to Jaguar Malaysia which has been completely ignored. Despite my pleas to my local dealer, no one from Jaguar has even attempted to contact me.
Appropriate action will therefore be taken as expressed in my letter (i.e. carbon copies will be sent out to Watchdog, UK Ombudsman for Motor Transport industry, etc., etc.).
For all Jaguar fans, I am very sorry about this but I have to now publish my letter here in this forum so that Jaguar owners can know about how Jaguar treats their clients.
I had given my dealer and Jaguar 3 weeks to respond to my letter so as to save Jaguar the embarrassment, however my goodwill is obviously not appreciated.
The Letter:
E & OE.
ATTENTION: Mr. Syed Khalil bin Syed Ibrahim,
Director
Sisma Auto (M) Sdn Bhd
344-0-1 Vista Damai
Jalan Tun Razak
50400, Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia.
Tel : 603-2775 5155.
Fax : 603-2775 2955
Mob: 6012-303-7266
Mr. Syed Khalil,
RE: 2003 Model Jaguar XKR,
Malaysian registration plate number: WLJ 123,
VIN Number: SAJAC41R333A32903.
I refer to the "Letter of Demand" dated 3 July 2008 (hereto attached for your ease of reference) that was issued to Sisma Auto Sdn Bhd (Sole Distributors and authorized garage for Jaguar Cars in Malaysia) by my Solicitors (Messrs. Rostam, M.P. Raja and Associates, Advocates and Solicitors). Please note that the said "Letter of Demand" was sent out merely weeks after I recieved my car back from Sisma Auto Sdn. Bhd.'s garages (where the car was kept in repairs for more than 5 months in a single stretch and returned AGAIN without any improvements at all).
Mr. Syed Khalil, despite the melodramatic claims, guarantees and assurances that the car had been diligently repaired, the indisputable facts and evidence exhibit that the car is indeed STILL defective and faulty.
Please note that in Parts I and II of my solicitor's "Letter of Demand"; we clearly emphasize that the vehicle's latest (4th) gearbox that was replaced under Jaguar CAWR in May 2008 showed the exact same defects that the previous three gearboxes had. ALL FOUR (4) gearboxes installed into the car have shown the exact "squawking/ooking" noise during 'kick-down'. In addition to the "squawking/ooking" noise during kick-down, this 'new' gearbox also now exhibits problems of lurching and rough noisy gearshifts.
Research on the internet show there are countless numbers of complaints from disgruntled owners who own cars (Jaguar XKR, Jaguar S-Type R, BMW's and Mercedes') that were fitted with this particular model of gearbox. This clearly indicates that these gearbox problems is a common defect on the ZF Gearbox model in question. One expects Jaguar to act ethically and accept their legal liabilities, imagine the disappointment and anti-climax when my experience and countless articles on the internet demonstrate Jaguar's vigorous preference to have their clients pay for the defects and/or accept such defects as "acceptable". The Jaguar slogan "Jaguar client's strive for excellence" is therefore obviously a caption used to deceive the buyer into the allusion that Jaguar is a product that should be considered as 'par excellence'. However, the reality is quite the opposite. It appears very much that it is the Jaguar client that strives for excellence whilst Jaguar charges an arm and a leg for the privilege of striving to get the car into an excellent condition. Between your solicitors claims in their letter of 26 September 2008, my documented expenses to date and despite 2½ years in Jaguar garages, all past attempts to to remedy this dud car have resulted in a RESOUNDING FAILURE!
Mr. Syed Khalil, may I remind you that two warrantee replacements had been carried out under the car's own natural 3 year warrantee given from date of purchase (in 2005 and in 2006 respectively); and then another replacement carried out under CAWR after more than a year's battling with Jaguar to do the right thing. After my 2nd replacement gearbox failed, I was momentarily relieved when Jaguar finally backed down from their illegal and unethical stand that "the gearbox was replaced under the vehicles original warrantee, therefore said gearbox does not carry its own warrantee; any warrantee covering that this gearbox ended when the vehicles natural three (3) year warrantee expired". Mr. Syed Khalil, this ZF performance gearbox was designed as a completely sealed unit that should be replaced 'wholesale' in the event of any failure. It is loathsome and disconcerting for me to have had to legally threaten SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD before a 3rd gearbox replacement (i.e. vehicle's third gearbox) was done under Jaguar C.A.W.R.
Then, imagine my dismay when I was told under no uncertain terms by SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG & JAGUAR CARS LTD that the JAGUAR C.A.W.R. replacement transmission/gearbox would constitute the final replacement under warrantee irrespective of whether the 'new' gearbox fails or not because it was no longer economically viable for SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG & JAGUAR CARS LTD. This statement clearly serves to shirk SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG & JAGUAR CARS LTD of their responsibilities and is an unfair attempt to subdue my legal rights. In anticipation of Sisma's perfect track record of being unreliable and tricky, before the last warrantee replacement work was done on my car's transmission, i demanded your service manager to get SISMA AUTO SDN BHD to issue a letter of undertaking that the warrantee work would have a minimum of 12 months warrantee. I have the letter issued from your now ex-service manager Mr. Nicholas Saw (dated 22nd January 2007 confirming 6 months warrantee on the gearbox and seat squeaking remedial works your company were due to carry out on my car under supervision of PAG.
My solicitors "Letter of Demand" was sent less than 2 months after my car was returned to me in an appalling state (the car was surrendered to your garage in January 2008 and returned sometime around the end of May 2008). As you can see, it took Jaguar, SISMA AUTO SDN BHD and PAG 1 year to organize themselves to repair my car, then another 5 months to actually do the job and in the end it was time completely wasted because my car HAS NOT IMPROVED AT ALL. In fact the car became worse.
May I take a moment to direct your attention to the article attached hereto published by UK's AutoCar Magazine wherein a similar situation was suffered by an Audi owner. The ruling as stated by AutoCar Magazine's article which referred to a court ruling that "a gearbox should last the lifetime of the car" which was determined to be at least 6 years.
SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD now canvass that the gearboxes were in fact never defective; your solicitor's response to my solicitor's "Letter of Demand" states that the "warrantee replacements should not be taken as an admittance of a defect but rather only as a good-will gesture". Such a stand infers that I am a liar and a cheat! If I were to fall for Jaguar's insane 'tripe' regarding this car's history of failed gearboxes, this client can expected to replace a new gearbox every year at a cost of $106,416.00 (per gearbox) for the rest of this clients ownership of the car. I certainly did not sign up for this. No one in their right mind will buy this car from me with such defects and certainly if I had known this to be even a possible problem with the car I would never have bought this car in the first place. I would not wish this nightmare car on my worse enemy!
Part I and II of my solicitor's "Letter of Demand" also gives a list of defects/faults/problems that have not been remedied despite the car being off-road in Jaguar's workshops for more than 2½ in the last 6 years of ownership. Many of the problems have been carried forward from year to year until the vehicle had past its natural warrantee. One can certainly assume that this was deliberately done so that the client ends up spending more money at Jaguar. The dragging of matters for months and years was also the real reason why the last gearbox warrantee replacement was carried out under Jaguar 'CAWR' rather than during my car's original warrantee cover. It is not Jaguar "good-will" which your solicitors are canvassing. Your solicitors statement that "goodwill" is the only reason for the replacement of three gearboxes and so on is a complete lie. I attach hereto secret internal memo's by Jaguar to its dealership network confirms that the ZF Gearbox is a problem.
Your solicitors defend SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD's position by perpetuating lies told by your technical representatives about how the car had been diligently repaired and tested. Your solicitors claim that the vehicle was even tested several times by several PAG Technical advisors (Mr. Danny Hinchin and Mr. James Knowles) for confirmation of the "good-job" SISMA AUTO SDN BHD had done. I wonder why was the vehicle not tested in my presence as i requested? Mr. James Knowles, Mr. Danny Hinchin and Mr. Nicholas Saw have ALL my contact numbers. Why have you refused to go for a test-drive in my car despite many requests by me?
I am sorry to tell you that neither I nor any sane person can except that Jaguar would needlessly replace gearboxes just as a goodwill gesture to my whim and fancies. According to your solicitors, my claims are false and frivolous. I put it to you and Jaguar Group that the indisputable facts cannot be avoided no matter how SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD and legal representatives may try to wriggle, resort to slimy tactics and/or close ranks.
ALL the faults my solicitors listed are still there, with brand new siblings problems added just for good measure. For example, despite the many disappointments suffered the car was last delivered to me with the roof lining peeling off which I have replaced at my own cost (I have the photographs, witnesses and receipts to prove all my statements). I have had my car independently assessed by Malayan Motors Pty Ltd (Jaguar Singapore), AAM (Automobile Association of Malaysia) and another independent garage (German Motors Sdn Bhd) who ALL support my complaints "wholesale"! I note that your solicitors were quick to offer me a settlement to forget about the inflated and cooked-up $16,544.00 bill (which I categorically dispute) if I were to drop my legal action completely.
Syed Khalil, I dispute the $16,544.00 bill because many of the items listed in the invoice were repair works that were needed as a direct result of your technicians damaging my car (documents and photographs will show my dispute is backed up with hard evidence):
1) As a fix to the problem of my interior and exterior lights flickering (another defect of the car which has carried on since i bought the car from Jaguar) another car battery was replaced - some 6 car batteries replaced and the flickering still is evident. In this last bill you invoiced me for a new battery at a cost of $650.00
2) Reverse sensors were damaged by SISMA technicians when respraying the bumper paint when your technicians damaged my car while it was in SISMA AUTO SDN BHD's care, yet you invoiced me for $1,340.00 and then another $480.00 when the previous $1,340.00 job did not show any results.
3) LHS indicator light was damaged by SISMA technicians, yet you invoice me $191.00 to replace the indicator light.
4) o2 downstream sensor - $60.00 (this is a valid charge).
5) A-Pillar trim - this was damaged by SISMA technicians when they repaired for the squeaking seats, yet you invoiced me $540.00 to repair the trim - the trim should have been replaced, not repaired.
6) Rectification of dents on the car's body panels damaged by SISMA technicians, yet you invoiced me $360.00 to repair said damages.
7) In an attempt to remedy the "movement" i felt from the car when driving over speed bumps, your company replaced the engine mounting, my car still demonstrates said "movement", yet you invoice me for the parts.
8) Replacement of Gasket, Throttle Body and Throttle Body Harness, $4,665.00 (this is a valid charge).
9) Various replacements of brake pads to cure squeaking brakes, brakes still squeaking, yet you invoice me $6,152.00.
My assertion that the majority of the items listed in your latest bill to me for RM$16,544.00 are for repairs (or parts replaced) as a direct result of damages afflicted to my car by your company's slack and irresponsible workers can further be backed-up by cross-referencing my many e-mails expressing my shock and unhappiness in the bad workmanship and physical damages sustained to my car whilst being in your company's care. In the same $16,544.00 invoice and also in some other invoices, SISMA AUTO SDN BHD charged me labor costs to rectify those damages your technicians inflicted on my car. It is SISMA AUTO SDN BHD's policy to never allow a car to leave its yard without the invoices being paid for in full (this can be seen in small fine print on your invoices). Jaguar allowed me to leave its premises without paying for the $16,544.00 bill and your company's bill payments policy was set aside because of the many failed efforts in the past culminating in my refusing to pay anymore bills until I was sure that the car was in 100% tip-top condition. My mistrust in SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD is now proven to be extremely well placed indeed.
I would like to remind you of some expenses that I am very unhappy with - $18,332.00 was paid for the replacement of the vehicle's front and vehicle's rear shock absorbers, anti-roll bar links and dampers to cure the vehicles noise of clanking and squeaking over bumps. The very same clanking and squeaking noises are still there and all I have to show for it is an expense of $18,332.00 that did not achieve the desired results.
An expansion tank on my car was replaced on 14 October 2008 by SISMA AUTO SDN BHD (6 years after I bought the car) however not even 1 year later I have had to replace (in July 2009) the expansion tank again!!!
Is Jaguar replacing my car parts with reconditioned parts?
If the part was not a reconditioned part, then why has this new expansion tank only lasted a few months? I was also advised that my brake pads were worn and needed replacing, now the car pulls to the right under braking after I have been charged for the replacement of all brake pads. I also complained about my rear shock absorber rattling for years which Jaguar never did anything about until the matter deteriorated to the point where my car's rear anti-roll bar bush and anti-roll bar link had to be replaced because they were distorted as a result of being left improperly fitted. I complained about the incessant rattling over bumpy roads many times but Jaguar stolidly brushed my complaints aside. If my complaints were attended to diligently perhaps the anti-roll bar link would not have distorted; in any event the same rattle is there again which indicates that the replacements were not carried out as diligently as your solicitors and technicians claim.
Another sore point is the $1,014.00 SISMA AUTO SDN BHD charged me for replacing an inlet manifold intake hose that was damaged while the car was in the care SISMA AUTO SDN BHD. The air-inlet manifold was damaged clearly as a result of someone closing the bonnet when a tool of some description was accidentally left on top of the air intake manifold (i have recorded photographs). This particular part is under-cover and protected. It is not a wearing part and certainly could not crack in the way it did without some help.
Perhaps this is how your company has managed to stay afloat despite showing the terribly low market share Jaguar has in Malaysia (not even 10% the sales of BMW or Mercedes). Whilst Jaguar are cheaper internationally as compared to like for like Mercedes and/or BMW models, in Malaysia you have kept the retail prices of Jaguar cars and the cost of maintaining Jaguar cars higher than Mercedes and BMW.
In January 2009, after finally realizing that I was serious about suing SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, you requested that I call off my lawyers and that we find a way to solve the problem amicably. You then verbally offered me a part exchange deal for my car. Your verbal agreement was for a trade-in deal on a brand new (Malaysian tax-exempted) Jaguar XKR (fully optioned and specified) for my current XKR plus RM$125,000.00. Should I opt for the 2010 model Jaguar XKR (with the new 5.0 liter engine) as opposed to the 2008/2009 model Jaguar XKR (with the 4.2 liter engine), I would agree to pay the difference in tax-free pricing between the 4.2 liter engine version to the newer 5.0 liter version. The trade-in offer is subject to the vehicle’s calculated tax dues in Malaysia being no more than RM$100,000.00. If the calculated tax dues were more than $100,000.00, i would top-up the difference. This offer you said would reflect the hell I have gone through. I accepted your verbal offer and requested that you put it to me in writing.
In the meantime, you requested that I show a sign of good will by showing you proof that I discharged my solicitors from the legal suit against your company. You also proceeded to send me an email of a letter that you requested I sign before you were able to put your part exchange offer to me in writing. I note that draft letter you sent to me for my approval was contrived to depose my rights to any claims I have (especially on the defective new gearbox, faulty seats and all the other matters raised in my solicitors "Letter of Demand" as above mentioned). In essence, your proposition would have me sign away my rights just to save myself a disputed bill of $16,544.00 and a opportunity to enter into a part exchange deal "that would take into consideration all the past disappointments with this car". While the 'fair' part exchange deal was a great enticement, the $16,544.00 bill is really not something that would break my bank considering the expensive ride you all have taken me for over the last 6 years!
to be continued in next thread... see title:
Nightmare at Jaguar (xkr 2003 model) - latest update (PART 2)
===============================================
sorry everyone, more to continue in next posting because each thread only allows 25000 characters per posting
===============================================
It is a bleak and sad day for me to have to resort to this, however Jaguar have left me no choice...
Further to my original post made on 08-21-2009 (03:28 PM) I attach hereto my letter to Jaguar Malaysia which has been completely ignored. Despite my pleas to my local dealer, no one from Jaguar has even attempted to contact me.
Appropriate action will therefore be taken as expressed in my letter (i.e. carbon copies will be sent out to Watchdog, UK Ombudsman for Motor Transport industry, etc., etc.).
For all Jaguar fans, I am very sorry about this but I have to now publish my letter here in this forum so that Jaguar owners can know about how Jaguar treats their clients.
I had given my dealer and Jaguar 3 weeks to respond to my letter so as to save Jaguar the embarrassment, however my goodwill is obviously not appreciated.
The Letter:
E & OE.
ATTENTION: Mr. Syed Khalil bin Syed Ibrahim,
Director
Sisma Auto (M) Sdn Bhd
344-0-1 Vista Damai
Jalan Tun Razak
50400, Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia.
Tel : 603-2775 5155.
Fax : 603-2775 2955
Mob: 6012-303-7266
Mr. Syed Khalil,
RE: 2003 Model Jaguar XKR,
Malaysian registration plate number: WLJ 123,
VIN Number: SAJAC41R333A32903.
I refer to the "Letter of Demand" dated 3 July 2008 (hereto attached for your ease of reference) that was issued to Sisma Auto Sdn Bhd (Sole Distributors and authorized garage for Jaguar Cars in Malaysia) by my Solicitors (Messrs. Rostam, M.P. Raja and Associates, Advocates and Solicitors). Please note that the said "Letter of Demand" was sent out merely weeks after I recieved my car back from Sisma Auto Sdn. Bhd.'s garages (where the car was kept in repairs for more than 5 months in a single stretch and returned AGAIN without any improvements at all).
Mr. Syed Khalil, despite the melodramatic claims, guarantees and assurances that the car had been diligently repaired, the indisputable facts and evidence exhibit that the car is indeed STILL defective and faulty.
Please note that in Parts I and II of my solicitor's "Letter of Demand"; we clearly emphasize that the vehicle's latest (4th) gearbox that was replaced under Jaguar CAWR in May 2008 showed the exact same defects that the previous three gearboxes had. ALL FOUR (4) gearboxes installed into the car have shown the exact "squawking/ooking" noise during 'kick-down'. In addition to the "squawking/ooking" noise during kick-down, this 'new' gearbox also now exhibits problems of lurching and rough noisy gearshifts.
Research on the internet show there are countless numbers of complaints from disgruntled owners who own cars (Jaguar XKR, Jaguar S-Type R, BMW's and Mercedes') that were fitted with this particular model of gearbox. This clearly indicates that these gearbox problems is a common defect on the ZF Gearbox model in question. One expects Jaguar to act ethically and accept their legal liabilities, imagine the disappointment and anti-climax when my experience and countless articles on the internet demonstrate Jaguar's vigorous preference to have their clients pay for the defects and/or accept such defects as "acceptable". The Jaguar slogan "Jaguar client's strive for excellence" is therefore obviously a caption used to deceive the buyer into the allusion that Jaguar is a product that should be considered as 'par excellence'. However, the reality is quite the opposite. It appears very much that it is the Jaguar client that strives for excellence whilst Jaguar charges an arm and a leg for the privilege of striving to get the car into an excellent condition. Between your solicitors claims in their letter of 26 September 2008, my documented expenses to date and despite 2½ years in Jaguar garages, all past attempts to to remedy this dud car have resulted in a RESOUNDING FAILURE!
Mr. Syed Khalil, may I remind you that two warrantee replacements had been carried out under the car's own natural 3 year warrantee given from date of purchase (in 2005 and in 2006 respectively); and then another replacement carried out under CAWR after more than a year's battling with Jaguar to do the right thing. After my 2nd replacement gearbox failed, I was momentarily relieved when Jaguar finally backed down from their illegal and unethical stand that "the gearbox was replaced under the vehicles original warrantee, therefore said gearbox does not carry its own warrantee; any warrantee covering that this gearbox ended when the vehicles natural three (3) year warrantee expired". Mr. Syed Khalil, this ZF performance gearbox was designed as a completely sealed unit that should be replaced 'wholesale' in the event of any failure. It is loathsome and disconcerting for me to have had to legally threaten SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD before a 3rd gearbox replacement (i.e. vehicle's third gearbox) was done under Jaguar C.A.W.R.
Then, imagine my dismay when I was told under no uncertain terms by SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG & JAGUAR CARS LTD that the JAGUAR C.A.W.R. replacement transmission/gearbox would constitute the final replacement under warrantee irrespective of whether the 'new' gearbox fails or not because it was no longer economically viable for SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG & JAGUAR CARS LTD. This statement clearly serves to shirk SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG & JAGUAR CARS LTD of their responsibilities and is an unfair attempt to subdue my legal rights. In anticipation of Sisma's perfect track record of being unreliable and tricky, before the last warrantee replacement work was done on my car's transmission, i demanded your service manager to get SISMA AUTO SDN BHD to issue a letter of undertaking that the warrantee work would have a minimum of 12 months warrantee. I have the letter issued from your now ex-service manager Mr. Nicholas Saw (dated 22nd January 2007 confirming 6 months warrantee on the gearbox and seat squeaking remedial works your company were due to carry out on my car under supervision of PAG.
My solicitors "Letter of Demand" was sent less than 2 months after my car was returned to me in an appalling state (the car was surrendered to your garage in January 2008 and returned sometime around the end of May 2008). As you can see, it took Jaguar, SISMA AUTO SDN BHD and PAG 1 year to organize themselves to repair my car, then another 5 months to actually do the job and in the end it was time completely wasted because my car HAS NOT IMPROVED AT ALL. In fact the car became worse.
May I take a moment to direct your attention to the article attached hereto published by UK's AutoCar Magazine wherein a similar situation was suffered by an Audi owner. The ruling as stated by AutoCar Magazine's article which referred to a court ruling that "a gearbox should last the lifetime of the car" which was determined to be at least 6 years.
SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD now canvass that the gearboxes were in fact never defective; your solicitor's response to my solicitor's "Letter of Demand" states that the "warrantee replacements should not be taken as an admittance of a defect but rather only as a good-will gesture". Such a stand infers that I am a liar and a cheat! If I were to fall for Jaguar's insane 'tripe' regarding this car's history of failed gearboxes, this client can expected to replace a new gearbox every year at a cost of $106,416.00 (per gearbox) for the rest of this clients ownership of the car. I certainly did not sign up for this. No one in their right mind will buy this car from me with such defects and certainly if I had known this to be even a possible problem with the car I would never have bought this car in the first place. I would not wish this nightmare car on my worse enemy!
Part I and II of my solicitor's "Letter of Demand" also gives a list of defects/faults/problems that have not been remedied despite the car being off-road in Jaguar's workshops for more than 2½ in the last 6 years of ownership. Many of the problems have been carried forward from year to year until the vehicle had past its natural warrantee. One can certainly assume that this was deliberately done so that the client ends up spending more money at Jaguar. The dragging of matters for months and years was also the real reason why the last gearbox warrantee replacement was carried out under Jaguar 'CAWR' rather than during my car's original warrantee cover. It is not Jaguar "good-will" which your solicitors are canvassing. Your solicitors statement that "goodwill" is the only reason for the replacement of three gearboxes and so on is a complete lie. I attach hereto secret internal memo's by Jaguar to its dealership network confirms that the ZF Gearbox is a problem.
Your solicitors defend SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD's position by perpetuating lies told by your technical representatives about how the car had been diligently repaired and tested. Your solicitors claim that the vehicle was even tested several times by several PAG Technical advisors (Mr. Danny Hinchin and Mr. James Knowles) for confirmation of the "good-job" SISMA AUTO SDN BHD had done. I wonder why was the vehicle not tested in my presence as i requested? Mr. James Knowles, Mr. Danny Hinchin and Mr. Nicholas Saw have ALL my contact numbers. Why have you refused to go for a test-drive in my car despite many requests by me?
I am sorry to tell you that neither I nor any sane person can except that Jaguar would needlessly replace gearboxes just as a goodwill gesture to my whim and fancies. According to your solicitors, my claims are false and frivolous. I put it to you and Jaguar Group that the indisputable facts cannot be avoided no matter how SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD and legal representatives may try to wriggle, resort to slimy tactics and/or close ranks.
ALL the faults my solicitors listed are still there, with brand new siblings problems added just for good measure. For example, despite the many disappointments suffered the car was last delivered to me with the roof lining peeling off which I have replaced at my own cost (I have the photographs, witnesses and receipts to prove all my statements). I have had my car independently assessed by Malayan Motors Pty Ltd (Jaguar Singapore), AAM (Automobile Association of Malaysia) and another independent garage (German Motors Sdn Bhd) who ALL support my complaints "wholesale"! I note that your solicitors were quick to offer me a settlement to forget about the inflated and cooked-up $16,544.00 bill (which I categorically dispute) if I were to drop my legal action completely.
Syed Khalil, I dispute the $16,544.00 bill because many of the items listed in the invoice were repair works that were needed as a direct result of your technicians damaging my car (documents and photographs will show my dispute is backed up with hard evidence):
1) As a fix to the problem of my interior and exterior lights flickering (another defect of the car which has carried on since i bought the car from Jaguar) another car battery was replaced - some 6 car batteries replaced and the flickering still is evident. In this last bill you invoiced me for a new battery at a cost of $650.00
2) Reverse sensors were damaged by SISMA technicians when respraying the bumper paint when your technicians damaged my car while it was in SISMA AUTO SDN BHD's care, yet you invoiced me for $1,340.00 and then another $480.00 when the previous $1,340.00 job did not show any results.
3) LHS indicator light was damaged by SISMA technicians, yet you invoice me $191.00 to replace the indicator light.
4) o2 downstream sensor - $60.00 (this is a valid charge).
5) A-Pillar trim - this was damaged by SISMA technicians when they repaired for the squeaking seats, yet you invoiced me $540.00 to repair the trim - the trim should have been replaced, not repaired.
6) Rectification of dents on the car's body panels damaged by SISMA technicians, yet you invoiced me $360.00 to repair said damages.
7) In an attempt to remedy the "movement" i felt from the car when driving over speed bumps, your company replaced the engine mounting, my car still demonstrates said "movement", yet you invoice me for the parts.
8) Replacement of Gasket, Throttle Body and Throttle Body Harness, $4,665.00 (this is a valid charge).
9) Various replacements of brake pads to cure squeaking brakes, brakes still squeaking, yet you invoice me $6,152.00.
My assertion that the majority of the items listed in your latest bill to me for RM$16,544.00 are for repairs (or parts replaced) as a direct result of damages afflicted to my car by your company's slack and irresponsible workers can further be backed-up by cross-referencing my many e-mails expressing my shock and unhappiness in the bad workmanship and physical damages sustained to my car whilst being in your company's care. In the same $16,544.00 invoice and also in some other invoices, SISMA AUTO SDN BHD charged me labor costs to rectify those damages your technicians inflicted on my car. It is SISMA AUTO SDN BHD's policy to never allow a car to leave its yard without the invoices being paid for in full (this can be seen in small fine print on your invoices). Jaguar allowed me to leave its premises without paying for the $16,544.00 bill and your company's bill payments policy was set aside because of the many failed efforts in the past culminating in my refusing to pay anymore bills until I was sure that the car was in 100% tip-top condition. My mistrust in SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, JAGUAR LAND ROVER, PAG and JAGUAR CARS LTD is now proven to be extremely well placed indeed.
I would like to remind you of some expenses that I am very unhappy with - $18,332.00 was paid for the replacement of the vehicle's front and vehicle's rear shock absorbers, anti-roll bar links and dampers to cure the vehicles noise of clanking and squeaking over bumps. The very same clanking and squeaking noises are still there and all I have to show for it is an expense of $18,332.00 that did not achieve the desired results.
An expansion tank on my car was replaced on 14 October 2008 by SISMA AUTO SDN BHD (6 years after I bought the car) however not even 1 year later I have had to replace (in July 2009) the expansion tank again!!!
Is Jaguar replacing my car parts with reconditioned parts?
If the part was not a reconditioned part, then why has this new expansion tank only lasted a few months? I was also advised that my brake pads were worn and needed replacing, now the car pulls to the right under braking after I have been charged for the replacement of all brake pads. I also complained about my rear shock absorber rattling for years which Jaguar never did anything about until the matter deteriorated to the point where my car's rear anti-roll bar bush and anti-roll bar link had to be replaced because they were distorted as a result of being left improperly fitted. I complained about the incessant rattling over bumpy roads many times but Jaguar stolidly brushed my complaints aside. If my complaints were attended to diligently perhaps the anti-roll bar link would not have distorted; in any event the same rattle is there again which indicates that the replacements were not carried out as diligently as your solicitors and technicians claim.
Another sore point is the $1,014.00 SISMA AUTO SDN BHD charged me for replacing an inlet manifold intake hose that was damaged while the car was in the care SISMA AUTO SDN BHD. The air-inlet manifold was damaged clearly as a result of someone closing the bonnet when a tool of some description was accidentally left on top of the air intake manifold (i have recorded photographs). This particular part is under-cover and protected. It is not a wearing part and certainly could not crack in the way it did without some help.
Perhaps this is how your company has managed to stay afloat despite showing the terribly low market share Jaguar has in Malaysia (not even 10% the sales of BMW or Mercedes). Whilst Jaguar are cheaper internationally as compared to like for like Mercedes and/or BMW models, in Malaysia you have kept the retail prices of Jaguar cars and the cost of maintaining Jaguar cars higher than Mercedes and BMW.
In January 2009, after finally realizing that I was serious about suing SISMA AUTO SDN BHD, you requested that I call off my lawyers and that we find a way to solve the problem amicably. You then verbally offered me a part exchange deal for my car. Your verbal agreement was for a trade-in deal on a brand new (Malaysian tax-exempted) Jaguar XKR (fully optioned and specified) for my current XKR plus RM$125,000.00. Should I opt for the 2010 model Jaguar XKR (with the new 5.0 liter engine) as opposed to the 2008/2009 model Jaguar XKR (with the 4.2 liter engine), I would agree to pay the difference in tax-free pricing between the 4.2 liter engine version to the newer 5.0 liter version. The trade-in offer is subject to the vehicle’s calculated tax dues in Malaysia being no more than RM$100,000.00. If the calculated tax dues were more than $100,000.00, i would top-up the difference. This offer you said would reflect the hell I have gone through. I accepted your verbal offer and requested that you put it to me in writing.
In the meantime, you requested that I show a sign of good will by showing you proof that I discharged my solicitors from the legal suit against your company. You also proceeded to send me an email of a letter that you requested I sign before you were able to put your part exchange offer to me in writing. I note that draft letter you sent to me for my approval was contrived to depose my rights to any claims I have (especially on the defective new gearbox, faulty seats and all the other matters raised in my solicitors "Letter of Demand" as above mentioned). In essence, your proposition would have me sign away my rights just to save myself a disputed bill of $16,544.00 and a opportunity to enter into a part exchange deal "that would take into consideration all the past disappointments with this car". While the 'fair' part exchange deal was a great enticement, the $16,544.00 bill is really not something that would break my bank considering the expensive ride you all have taken me for over the last 6 years!
to be continued in next thread... see title:
Nightmare at Jaguar (xkr 2003 model) - latest update (PART 2)
===============================================
sorry everyone, more to continue in next posting because each thread only allows 25000 characters per posting
===============================================
Last edited by dafelix; 09-21-2009 at 01:59 AM.
#3
09-23-2009, 02:27 AM
Sorry,I don't think your feel your fight should be on this forum,your an angry man striking out and are trying to spread your anger.I think you need to see a professional person to listen to you. If you want a car that is perfect,get a boring Lexus,their dealers are used to uptight complainers.Just my view...
I love my Jags !!They have less defects then me..
I love my Jags !!They have less defects then me..
You may not have a problem with your Jaguar, but if your philosophy is to dissuade people like me from airing the truth, soon your Jaguar will also be up **** creek and you won't have a paddle ha ha ha.
Your only consolation was that you qualified your comment that Jaguar's have less defects than you do... only a defective person would say I should not air my fight here in this forum.
Last edited by dafelix; 09-23-2009 at 02:53 AM.
#4
09-24-2009, 10:38 AM
Veteran Member
I have to agree with Eagle. Your fight is with your dealership, or their service department. Don't insult me by dragging me into it. You said your piece, it was allowed. Now WE get to comment. Take your fight to the members involved. I'm not, nor do I want to be.
Your opinion has been aired. Sorry if you don't like the opinions that others hold, but I do expect you to be as tolerant with theirs as we were with yours.
Your opinion has been aired. Sorry if you don't like the opinions that others hold, but I do expect you to be as tolerant with theirs as we were with yours.
#5
12-10-2014, 08:08 PM
You need a lawyer and keep your evidence,my old xk8 had receipts for parts replaced multiple times and I found evidence of tampering of some of my cooling hoses, by someone using a propane torch on them slightly to make them fail soon, while at the dealership for a no start, and they quoted me a compression check then a brand new engine, when all I ha d was cylinder wash.
I went to get me car, the battery was dead, someone left my headlights on, purposely.
I told Jaguar, I am documenting my findings and will send this to the attorney general, BBB and local court if they ever tamper with my car again. They offered to "work with me" for service,by first contacting Jaguar customer service, but I sold the car after fixing it myself with the help of the forum.
I like my car, but I tell you, the company is cash strapped.
I went to get me car, the battery was dead, someone left my headlights on, purposely.
I told Jaguar, I am documenting my findings and will send this to the attorney general, BBB and local court if they ever tamper with my car again. They offered to "work with me" for service,by first contacting Jaguar customer service, but I sold the car after fixing it myself with the help of the forum.
I like my car, but I tell you, the company is cash strapped.
Last edited by aode06; 12-10-2014 at 08:10 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
FS[NorthEast]: Jaguar XKR Wheels for Sale
Griffbritgreen
PRIVATE For Sale / Trade or Buy Classifieds
13
07-27-2016 05:43 AM
Vector
US Lower Atlantic
0
08-26-2015 05:36 AM
FS[SouthEast]: 2005 Jaguar XKR Convertible Supercharged
divingmom
PRIVATE For Sale / Trade or Buy Classifieds
0
08-25-2015 07:54 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)