Supplier woes (ATPower) - advice required

[SP72]

Gents, I’d appreciate some advice on the warranty issue with the failed FPR

1. I bought the FPR directly from ATPower in Jan 2019, who are supplied by Racing Lines
2. BSM fitted in Jan/Feb 2019
3. Part identified as failed July/Aug 2019 (replacement part fixes the issue), I collect part from BSM and return directly to Racing Lines under instruction from ATP
4. Racing Lines noticed failed part has witness marks where it has been or attempted to be opened, assuming by BSM (photos I took correlate the witness marks were there on collection)
5. Racing Lines find a “loose internal part”, reattach, test, resulting in normal operation
6. ATP advise “I will leave this with you to discuss payment of your invoice with Racing lines, as we only use their parts with our kits and cannot be held responsible for a problem with their part.”

I’ve not been in this situation before, but believe I shouldn’t be dealing with Racing Lines, as i completed the transaction directly with ATP.

Any thoughts on how to progress?

Cheers folks.

[WP0ZZZ]

Sounds like really bad customer service from ATPower. If they invoiced you for that part, I believe they should be responsible for it.

I was thinking about buying some ITBs + ancillary parts from them but I will now think twice before placing the order.

Hope your problem gets sorted soon.

[Roy M]

Your contract is with ATP so they should sort this out. The situation is, however complicated by the 'opening' issue. They could hide behind this but there is nothing anywhere that indicates that you should be in touch with Racing Lines to rectify the situation.

[ras62]

As said your contract is with ATPower. No idea why you should have an invoice to pay with Racing Lines unless you instructed them to identify why it had failed. Simply ask for a refund from ATPower and if necessary pass it over to c/card claim back dept. Good luck.

[PeterK]

I’m not legal but for my $0.02, I see a number of complications here.

ATP acted as an agent and OP’s original contract was with them.

It is common practice for retailers / resellets / agents to offer ’(return to) manufacturer warranty’. OP returned item to manufacturer as requested.

RL looked at a ’warranty return’ and discovered that it had been opened, which will normally void any warranty. They repaired the problem and as it was out of warranty, can reasonably demand payment for the repairs.

Q - did you request and repairs or a refund due to failure? If you didn’t authorise repair, it is unreasonable to expect you to pay. That said, selling a working, repaired unit will be preferable to having a non-working paperweight.

The challenge for the OP is to either
A) ’prove’ to RL that he and his agents did not open the unit and for expediency had to purchase a replacement, so refund of original unit is appropriate, or
B) ’encourage’ BSM to refund cost as they opened the unit, thereby voiding the warranty

Peter





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GaryH]

Sounds like it was straight-forward right up to the point where someone (BSM?) tried to jemmy it open

[SP72]

Thanks for the comments chaps.  I’ll approach BSM for comment but agree it’s a feckin' mess.

I guess BSM would only have attempted to open the part had it been faulty, but they didn’t disclose this or seek my go ahead.

I approached ATP to send a replacement after BSM sent me a video showing fuel escaping from the vacuum port.  ATP sent a replacement very quickly, directly to BSM.

Thanks for the support

[GrahamTompkins]

You sure are not having a good run of luck Shirish 😥.

the normal route of subrogation is indeed back to Racing  Lines, however, one can’t expect them to accept responsibility if the unit has been tampered with. Assuming no one else has touched the car, it must be BSM .  They didn’t do it deliberately , and quite possibly unknowingly , but I can’t see that BSM have any choice but to “suck it up”

seem very odd they are being so unhelpful

[mean in green]

This time in particular?!

[Beaky]

Unfortunately I think this scenario needs real legal counsel input as there are several technical points of contract law that apply but also can be contested due to the nature of the events - you can envisage the blame pingpong between all three parties. 

As a matter of principle you should seek the right and ethical resolution, that said, it's going to take time and effort (solicitors letters, small claims court application) with what probability of success.

Sorry to sound so bleak but you have to weigh up is it really worth it.

 

[David Gander]

Jesus Shirish, you certainly have annoyed the Gods!....or your forefathers have! For the outlay that you’ve put out, you certainly deserve blissful carefree driving. My heart goes out to you, and it’s a testimony to your INTESTINAL FORTITUDE that you persevere! Hang in there Mate.

regards,

David

[jevvy]

How much was the FPR?

[ALEX P]

11 minutes ago, jevvy said:

How much was the FPR?

Exactly what I was thinking. If it was not £££ then just lose it in the noise of engine R&D £££.

Having said that, for all of his/their talents BSM never seem to come out of any of these development woes sucking up anything other than yet another invoice  I realise that you are balls deep in this and have limited options with such a specialist build but at some point they should shoulder something IMHO.

[SP72]

1 hour ago, Beaky said:

Sorry to sound so bleak but you have to weigh up is it really worth it.

I agree to an extent - it just doesn’t feel right picking up the bill 

25 minutes ago, David Gander said:

Jesus Shirish, you certainly have annoyed the Gods!....or your forefathers have!

The Gods of ‘don’t 🤐 with your car’

17 minutes ago, jevvy said:

How much was the FPR?

ATP sent a replacement FPR immediately at no cost to me - i had to foot the bill for diagnosis and R&R - £300

2 minutes ago, ALEX P said:

Having said that, for all of his/their talents BSM never seem to come out of any of these development woes sucking up anything other than yet another invoice  I realise that you are balls deep in this and have limited options with such a specialist build but at some point they should shoulder something IMHO.

True dat - add to the list my cracked front bumper, the deep scratches on the back of my passenger Recaro PP, the rattly exhaust- neither of which i can prove was them, but by feck, i’m 100% sure it was.

If anyone else has any suggestions, which doesn’t involve poisoning BSMs resident dogs, i’d welcome your thoughts.

[Phill]

20 hours ago, SP72 said:

Gents, I’d appreciate some advice on the warranty issue with the failed FPR

1. I bought the FPR directly from ATPower in Jan 2019, who are supplied by Racing Lines
2. BSM fitted in Jan/Feb 2019
3. Part identified as failed July/Aug 2019 (replacement part fixes the issue), I collect part from BSM and return directly to Racing Lines under instruction from ATP
4. Racing Lines noticed failed part has witness marks where it has been or attempted to be opened, assuming by BSM (photos I took correlate the witness marks were there on collection)
5. Racing Lines find a “loose internal part”, reattach, test, resulting in normal operation
6. ATP advise “I will leave this with you to discuss payment of your invoice with Racing lines, as we only use their parts with our kits and cannot be held responsible for a problem with their part.”

I’ve not been in this situation before, but believe I shouldn’t be dealing with Racing Lines, as i completed the transaction directly with ATP.

Any thoughts on how to progress?

Cheers folks.

If this were me I would want some clarification around "Racing Lines noticed failed part has witness marks where it has been or attempted to be opened" Has it been opened or not. Attempted is not opened and therefore if the part was loose inside then it was faulty. I don't think they can prove otherwise as they would have been more forthright in the first place. As such if they cannot prove it was opened, other than by them when they did the diagnosis, then don't pay for the replacement part.

Did you specifically ask for diagnosis of the part? If not then don't pay for any diagnosis.

What invoice have you been issued with? If it was a simple replacement for a faulty part there should be no invoice?

BSM fitted the original part and you did not handle it any way shape or form therefore if it was opened then it is they who did - their responsibility.

ATP are responsible for the part as supplied by them. I'm sure this is covered by consumer rights.

I appreciate this is another pain in a long series of pains but you need to say enough is enough. Tell RL you are not paying for the replacement. Tell BSM you are not paying for any remedial work done. Wait for any threatening letter and deal with it then. As I said above I don't think RL will have a leg to stand on. You are in the stronger position in that you are not trying to get them to give you money but the other way round. I hope you paid by credit card?

 

[Busybee]

Guess the problem is AT have replaced the part FOC. Yes it was faulty. Can't see them paying for diagnosis work.

In fairness BSM diagnosed it for you (BSM - Isn't that British School of Motoring btw? 😂) while the other lot were chasing sensors. 

As much as I think BSM should be a lot more customer focussed, £300 in the scheme of a build like this is a small amount really. Might be worth swallowing it just to keep them on side as they know your engine better than anyone.  I'd keep them marginally on side so you can go back for advice or work if needed rather than souring the whole thing for £300. Just my 

[GrahamTompkins]

Just a thought,, has it occurred to you that the part may have been faulty when originally fitted back at the beginning of the year? I recall you complaining some way back of fuel smell when you got the car back? 

[SP72]

Just to clarify, 

1) my car breaks down, and is recovered to BSM

2) BSM confirm FPR at fault - request I call ATP to send replacement

3) ATP get RL to send replacement directly to BSM (no cost to me)

3) BSM issue me with an invoice for problem diagnosis, advising I had to recover the costs from ATPower as their part failed. I paid this invoice £300, using bank transfer..

So I want to recover the £300 BSM invoiced me - was going to be from ATP, but if BSM have opened it, it gets messy.

33 minutes ago, GrahamTompkins said:

Just a thought,, has it occurred to you that the part may have been faulty when originally fitted back at the beginning of the year? I recall you complaining some way back of fuel smell when you got the car back? 

I thought the same but have the same issue with the new part fitted.  It might be an oily smell mixed in, coming from the oil catch tank.

[Busybee]

10 minutes ago, SP72 said:

Just to clarify, 

1) my car breaks down, and is recovered to BSM

2) BSM confirm FPR at fault - request I call ATP to send replacement

3) ATP get RL to send replacement directly to BSM (no cost to me)

3) BSM issue me with an invoice for problem diagnosis, advising I had to recover the costs from ATPower as their part failed. I paid this invoice £300, using bank transfer..

So I want to recover the £300 BSM invoiced me - was going to be from ATP, but if BSM have opened it, it gets messy.

Thing is Shirish, the FPR failure isn't BSM's fault, right? Will ATP or RL pay as well as replace the part FOC? I'd call ATP with the above and explain it has cost you £300 in diagnosis fees to find out the part they supplied in Jan failed. People are generally nicer on the phone. Explain the cost was for a break down recovery and diagnosis at BSM following the FPR failure. Offer to invoice them. Makes it officially a request for payment for a cost incurred. You never know, ATP might just pay up or make a contribution offer. 

[jevvy]

That clarification is much clearer, thanks.

Its fairly common to bust something apart while fault finding on a car once you get a hunch the part is faulty. Some things are repairable so its often worth cracking things open to find a failed connection or solder joint like in a DME relay. I haven't seen a pic of the FPR in question so cant comment on its suitability to be opened and fixed but the fact ATP managed to do so would indicate to me that BSM opened it in good faith and just didn't have the ability or knowledge to repair it and therefore declared it as fubared.

[GrahamTompkins]

2 minutes ago, jevvy said:

That clarification is much clearer, thanks.

Its fairly common to bust something apart while fault finding on a car once you get a hunch the part is faulty. Some things are repairable so its often worth cracking things open to find a failed connection or solder joint like in a DME relay. I haven't seen a pic of the FPR in question so cant comment on its suitability to be opened and fixed but the fact ATP managed to do so would indicate to me that BSM opened it in good faith and just didn't have the ability or knowledge to repair it and therefore declared it as fubared.

Yep I’d say that just about sums it up. Unless BSM admit to having fiddled with it , I think you’re up the proverbial gumtree without a paddle. .You could try Haith’s suggestion , worth a phone call, as he says, better on the phone, and you never know it may work, but the part has been replaced foc, so RL and ATP are the good guys. The baddies are BSM . Guess you had to pay them to get the car back.!

if you have to suck it up, I’d be inclined to find someone else to look after the car.

 

 

[Phill]

Aha, got it now. Agree with Jev. I think you are going to find this a very difficult one now you have paid BSM (rotten stinking scheisters). Worst case scenario is that you will end up with a spare FPR. I'd like to hope RL will give you some sort of good faith compensation.