Faulty Temp Sensor cost me €1,500 Approx

declans

:mad: Please advise

In Feb this year traded a 04 Peugeot 307 1.4 HDI(Lovely Car - Wish I still had it) for a Ford Mondeo 1.8 Petrol (Young Family need more space) . My job had changed and I was not due to drive as much but it turned I had drive a considerable amount since Feb
From Day 1 ,I regetted buying it as the fuel efficency was extremely poor bordering on depressing ,I have never really calculated but drving on the M4 at 120KM I could actually see the needle drop , I estimate now I was getting about 20-25MPG and I have put 15,500 miles on the clock , On Average I was putting €100 a week into it . I just accepted that I had made a rather expensive mistake and I was trying to get over it , I am actually in negtiations to but a Focus CMAX 1.6 but the guy is screwing me on the trade in as you would accept ,
But To-day I brought the car for a diagnostic and it has a faulty heat sensor and the mechanic described as if it was 15 year old car running with the choke out all the time
What are my chances of compensation as there was no warning light and when I offered to bring the car back for a check over at 1000 KM I was told to wait until the first service @ 20,000 KM ,

I reckon I am out of pocket by €1,500 to €2,000

Any Comments

crosstownk

If, as you say, it was a faulty temp sensor then it is quite possible that this would not show up as a fault. Generally, when temp sensors go faulty they read the wrong temperature. For example, when your engine was at 90C the sensor read 30C - this would cause extra fuel to be consumed as the ECU would assume a cold running mapped program. Both of these readings are within tolerance for the sensor so the OBD would not have detected a fault. However, if you had mentioned high fuel consumption then maybe the dealer/garage would have gone looking further, but in a regular service only faults would be checked - not the specific readings of each and every sensor.

As readings would have been in tolerance then no fault light would have come on.

I feel your pain wrt the excess fuel consumption - but if you didn't specifically complain about it then it most likely wasn't detected.

declans

Thanks for the reply but when is a fault not a fault ? ,
This problem existed from Day 1 , I just assumed that I had purchased an extremely inefficent car , I am not a mechanic and the only time a lay person would bring a car back to the garage is if there was a strange noise or a warning light on the dash , I expected the car to arrive to time in complete working order, They must take some blame for this , I offered to bring the car back at 1000KM but was told no need to return until 20,000 KM , If I did bring it back at 100KM I would surely have mentioned it beacuase I sure as hell did at 20,000 KM ,
The truth is I felt terrible for changing my Peugeot for this Car and dreaded even passing the Garage as it was eating me up inside having to deal with poor fuel performance , ( It was costing me a Fortune)

I will be calling FORD Customer Service on Monday Moring .

Please guys give me some ammo !!

crosstownk

declans wrote:

Thanks for the reply but when is a fault not a fault ? ,
I will be calling FORD Customer Service on Monday Moring .

Please guys give me some ammo !!

Let me try an explain it further. Most cars have set limits for temperature. Lets say -30c to +130C. Once the temperature is between those limits then no fault will be recorded. If, however, the temp sensor short circuits it will either go to maximum or minimum and then a fault will be recorded.

Now, during a regular service the dealer/garage will only check for stored faults. In your case there was a malfunction, but no recorded fault. On the other hand, had you told them that you felt there was a problem with excessive fuel consumption then they may have delved further and looked at the 'live' readings of all the relevant sensors.

I hope that helps explain it somewhat. But realistically, if you felt there was a fuel consumption problem then you should have mentioned it to the dealer. I do understand that you expected the dealer to spot this during a service but be aware that a service is only routine maintenance, not a full blown diagnostic check up. If a car has a specific fault then the driver/owner needs to ba able to point the mechanic in the right direction. Similar to how one would explain symptoms to a doctor.

Mr.Diagnostic

Hi,

If the temp sender had been faulty for the whole time and was bad enough to cause it to use so much fuel, then the car could not have been running well. Did you not notice anything wrong? Also the catalytic converter could not have lasted 15.5k miles. Why did you decide to get it checked?

You have said that you did not calculate the MPG so you really cannot be sure. I doubt you have a leg to stand on but good luck with it.

fletch

Surely the engine didn't sound right?

declans

Mr.Diagnostic wrote:

Hi,

If the temp sender had been faulty for the whole time and was bad enough to cause it to use so much fuel, then the car could not have been running well. Did you not notice anything wrong? Also the catalytic converter could not have lasted 15.5k miles. Why did you decide to get it checked?

You have said that you did not calculate the MPG so you really cannot be sure. I doubt you have a leg to stand on but good luck with it.

Thanks for the reply but I am not a mechanic , I bought a spanking new car and was told to come back at 20K , How the hell I am supposed to diagnose a fault without any indication , I install/maintain Computer Networks for a living I dont have time to monitor my car , I paid for a new car and expected it to arrive in perfect working order , It did not so who is to blame ?

Mr.Diagnostic

declans wrote:

Thanks for the reply but I am not a mechanic , I bought a spanking new car and was told to come back at 20K , How the hell I am supposed to diagnose a fault without any indication , I install/maintain Computer Networks for a living I dont have time to monitor my car , I paid for a new car and expected it to arrive in perfect working order , It did not so who is to blame ?

Hi,

As my name suggests, I specialise in Diagnostics. Every day I have non-mechanic customers who know something is wrong without any warning light. The point I was trying to make (badly) was that the faulty sender must have caused symptoms, i.e. the way the car ran.
Also the cat would not have lived that long with such a fault.
Based on this I would suspect that the sensor was not faulty for the whole life of the car. Obviously I have not seen the car so this is just an educated guess.
It seems to me that you have based your findings on a guess. You do not understand the management system and you did not record the mileages.
If you had recorded the mileages and complained constantly about the returns then they would most likely have done something about it. Without any evidence both they and you dont know what actually happened.

Sorry, I know it is not what you wanted to hear.

crosstownk

At what point did you realise it was consuming too much fuel?

pauldave

Mr.Diagnostic wrote:

Hi,

As my name suggests, I specialise in Diagnostics. Every day I have non-mechanic customers who know something is wrong without any warning light. The point I was trying to make (badly) was that the faulty sender must have caused symptoms, i.e. the way the car ran.
Also the cat would not have lived that long with such a fault.
Based on this I would suspect that the sensor was not faulty for the whole life of the car. Obviously I have not seen the car so this is just an educated guess.
It seems to me that you have based your findings on a guess. You do not understand the management system and you did not record the mileages.
If you had recorded the mileages and complained constantly about the returns then they would most likely have done something about it. Without any evidence both they and you dont know what actually happened.

Sorry, I know it is not what you wanted to hear.

Hi i was going to reply to this when i started reading the post. I am a diagnostic specialist also and Mr D here has said it all for me, I really cant think of any more to add. Apart from the fact that from day 1 you would have noticed a depressing difference between a 1.4HDi and a Ford 1.8 petrol. Ford never were known for their economy and you were giving up one of the most economical cars delivering a massive 60+mpg.
I think you should just come to terms with the fact that you made an expensive mistake.

declans

crosstownk wrote:

At what point did you realise it was consuming too much fuel?

To-Day - Most of the replies have come from members of the vehicle industry , I am a consumer and I purchased a product which turns out not fit for the purpose intended , Its not my role to monitor performance , I have my own job to do , somebody in ford was not doing their's , I bought a car that had a fault from Day 1 , I as a lay person was not able to diagnose but now 6 months later I want to return the car,
Also when I left the car ticking over People would comment to me that it was extremely noisy , This was another dagger in my back , I am raging and the response of the replys leaves me feeling that the whole motor industry is against the driver,
We are not technical - I expect what i bought to work as described in the fuel consumption reports I printed from the web before I bought the car.

It has left a serious dent in my pocket and someone will pay I assure , Please somebody see my point of view !

maidhc

declans wrote:

Thanks for the reply but I am not a mechanic , I bought a spanking new car and was told to come back at 20K , How the hell I am supposed to diagnose a fault without any indication , I install/maintain Computer Networks for a living I dont have time to monitor my car , I paid for a new car and expected it to arrive in perfect working order , It did not so who is to blame ?

While the temp sender shouldnt have broken, such is life.

I would have thought though that someone who works at computer networks would understand full well the massive difference between "should work perfect" and "works perfect".

Your car was under warranty, you were free to bring it back at any time and complain and a full diagnostic check would have been carried out. However if you have a decent collection of receipts for fuel, you should have a good chance of getting satisfaction.

Mr.Diagnostic

"" Most of the replies have come from members of the vehicle industry ""
I am independent and have no connection with any dealerships or manufacturers. Also I have very little time for any of the dealers.


"" I am raging and the response of the replys leaves me feeling that the whole motor industry is against the driver, "" and "" Please somebody see my point of view ""
It kinda seems to me that you only want people to agree with you. This suggests that you think my reply is biased. You asked for advise and that is what you got. Had I known that you only wanted posts that agreed with you I could have saved myself the bother of replying.


At the end of my first reply to you i wished you good luck. That was because I actually do wish you good luck.

TempestSabre

I would have that thought that excessive fuel consumption would be extremely obvious considering you've done that mileage in such a short space of time. By ignoring the fault for so long, I can't imagine the garage (not Ford) is at fault, for excessive costs incurred due to ignoring a problem.

If you have perfect records for the fuel costs over the period, you might be able to prove the car was faulty from when you took ownership. but without that, and because you've driven it so much, I dbout that you'll get much joy from this.

Fey!

Firstly, I'm not in the motor industry.
Secondly, I feel that you should offer some kind of apology to Mr Diagnostic and Pauldave; they are specialists who went to the trouble of answering your post as best they could with the information you provided, and you have essentially shot them down without a word of thanks for their troubles (at least that's the feeling I get from your posts).

You're always going to find a difference in economy between a petrol and a diesel engine; I've recently gonr from an urban 45mpg in a 2.0 diesel 206 to 28mpg urban in a 1.4 petrol Rover 45, but I expected the difference dur to the nature of the beasts.

Seeing as you're doing 23,250 miles per annum (based on 15,500 miles since February), why did you opt for a petrol engine? Also, are you doing primarily urban or rural miles; that can make a huge difference to economy. According to your OP, you have put almost €3,400 into your tank which, averaging petrol prices at €1.10 per litre over the period, amounts to about 3,091 litres of petrol, giving you about 22.5mpg, far lower than the mpg you quoted above. Are you sure a) that you are really spending as much as you say or b) that you've calculated your mpg correctly (miles/litres*4.5)?
Also, if the car was so loud, why did you not take it to the garage? I'm mechanically dyslexic, but even I know that loud noises = trip to garage!

A 1.8 Mondeo is never going to be frugal and, IIRC, a friends 2000 Mondeo 2.0 used to give similar figures to those which you have quoted when driven exclusively in town.

Conclusion: for your mileage, go back to diesel; you're wallet will thank you! And if you have ANY doubts about something (the motor trade people on here are going to hate me for this!), get straight into the garage - that's what they and your warranty are there for.

I don't think that any garage would take you seriously on this unless you have proof of the amount of petrol used and a record of having contacted the garage about it in the last 8 months; if I was them I'd be asking you why you didn't report it earlier. They'd then probably put you down as being a crank (I'm not saying that you are) due to the number of people who'll chance their arms to get money out of them - I get those kind of people in my business too, so I know what I'm talking about.

In summary, it's been an expensive lesson; learn from it and move on.

End of rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

declans

Sorry for any bad feeling Guys , Not Intended ,But I am really annoyed over this .
But again the fault has now been diagnosed at the Garage where the car was bought(I presume the diagnostic read will give current MPG - The car has yet to be repaired (Part ordered on Friday), Can I get it back out of the Garage and get the MPG Indepenently calculated and from this I could comapre against published figures and claim the difference)
so they must accept that as I expected the car on Delivery to be running at both normal levels of Fuel Consumption and Noise ,
The Noise and Poor Fuel Consumption were evident from Day 1 (At Day 1 the car should have been running perfect) I assumed these were normal , If after 3 Months the excessive noise or Poor Fuel Consumption started all of sudden then I would have brought it in straight away but up until yesterday I presumed this was normal.
This is my 3rd brand new car to buy and with the other 2 (Both Peugeot) the Garage requested me to go back at 1,000 miles to check all was running OK.
But with this Ford I was told all issues would be dealt with @ 20,000 KM.

Looking ahead the Catalytic Converter was mentioned as being possibly faulty now as a result or with the engine making excessive noise. Have either of these been possibly "Damaged" due to theeffects of the Faulty Sensor ? Do I need to get them Replaced under warranty?

With regard to switching Diesel I put up a lot of unexpected miles during visits to my Father in Hospital , (120 miles Round Trip Everday after work for 7 Weeks). My Father unfortunately passed away some weeks ago and now I am driving his old car (99 Avensis 2.0 TD 106k on the clock)while the Ford is in the Garage, I am using for the last 3 days and the gauge is still showing almost full ( Yesterday I had to drive 120 miles round trip to visit a client) where as If I was using the Mondeo I would be half empty st this stage!

So to sum up I need to know is there any possible consequential damage that I need to press the Garage on , I am quite a persistent/argumentative person and in disputes like this I generally get my way please let me know youy very sonsidered opinions

Declan

overdriver

If I were you, I'd sell the Mondeo as soon as possible and just drive the Avensis. A new car is not neccessarily a better car.

As for the garage, bear in mind that if you decide to take legal action, it will be a lengthy and costly process, as a friend of mine found out to his cost.
In his case, the dispute ended up being not with the garage, but with Ford themselves, who had much more resources than he - unsurprisingly.

That would cost you much more than 1500 quid if you lose. Tell them you will give it back to them, but the price had better be right.

Seth Brundle

declans wrote:

But again the fault has now been diagnosed at the Garage where the car was bought(I presume the diagnostic read will give current MPG - The car has yet to be repaired (Part ordered on Friday), Can I get it back out of the Garage and get the MPG Indepenently calculated and from this I could comapre against published figures and claim the difference)
so they must accept that as I expected the car on Delivery to be running at both normal levels of Fuel Consumption and Noise ,

Call into the garage and ask them not to repair the car as you want it assessed. They will oblige you.
However, an independant test will show you current mpg which means nothing as it will always be different from published figures, requires driving it for some period of time (at your cost) and does not prove when the poor mpg started.

declans wrote:

The Noise and Poor Fuel Consumption were evident from Day 1 (At Day 1 the car should have been running perfect) I assumed these were normal

So you kept receipts to prove you purchased the fuel you did?

declans wrote:

Looking ahead the Catalytic Converter was mentioned as being possibly faulty now as a result or with the engine making excessive noise. Have either of these been possibly "Damaged" due to theeffects of the Faulty Sensor ? Do I need to get them Replaced under warranty?

Possibly - no real way of knowing without opening them.

declans wrote:

My Father unfortunately passed away some weeks ago and now I am driving his old car (99 Avensis 2.0 TD 106k on the clock)while the Ford is in the Garage, I am using for the last 3 days and the gauge is still showing almost full ( Yesterday I had to drive 120 miles round trip to visit a client) where as If I was using the Mondeo I would be half empty st this stage!

Sorry to hear about your father. However, you are again comparind diesel against a petrol. Diesels generally give much better consumption than a petrol.

declans wrote:

So to sum up I need to know is there any possible consequential damage that I need to press the Garage on , I am quite a persistent/argumentative person and in disputes like this I generally get my way please let me know youy very sonsidered opinions

Im not doubting you but all you have to prove yur case is your memories. You have no receipts, no previous complaints of the fault, no infor from the 1K service, etc. You have nothing to go on. My advice - chalk it down to experience and sell the ford and if possible use the avensis!

Mr.Diagnostic

declans wrote:

Looking ahead the Catalytic Converter was mentioned as being possibly faulty now as a result or with the engine making excessive noise. Have either of these been possibly "Damaged" due to theeffects of the Faulty Sensor ? Do I need to get them Replaced under warranty?

Hi,

It was me who mentioned the cat. Yes, it should be checked after the repair has been completed. My point was that the cat would not live for 15.5 k miles with the engine running as rich as it was. That was one thing that made me doubt that you are correct about the fault being there since day one.
The Diagnostic check will not tell anything about MPG figures either past or present.
A faulty CTS (coolant temp sensor) will not, in itself, cause an engine noise, The noise could be a completely seperate issue. Did the dealer agree that the engine was noisy? If so, what did they say was the cause?

Trampas

crosstownk wrote:

If, as you say, it was a faulty temp sensor then it is quite possible that this would not show up as a fault. Generally, when temp sensors go faulty they read the wrong temperature. For example, when your engine was at 90C the sensor read 30C - this would cause extra fuel to be consumed as the ECU would assume a cold running mapped program. Both of these readings are within tolerance for the sensor so the OBD would not have detected a fault. However, if you had mentioned high fuel consumption then maybe the dealer/garage would have gone looking further, but in a regular service only faults would be checked - not the specific readings of each and every sensor.

As readings would have been in tolerance then no fault light would have come on.

I feel your pain wrt the excess fuel consumption - but if you didn't specifically complain about it then it most likely wasn't detected.

I had this problem in my car. Last St Stephens Day the car just gave up. The car was due its service in a couple of weeks. So brought it when it opened again. They thought it was the sensor gone. Changed there and then and didn't have to pay until my car was getting serviced. Cost €50 in the end

maidhc

declans wrote:

So to sum up I need to know is there any possible consequential damage that I need to press the Garage on , I am quite a persistent/argumentative person and in disputes like this I generally get my way please let me know youy very sonsidered opinions

You can only claim for consequential damage if it was forseeable by the defendant that the damage would occur and affect you in a particular way. If we assume Ford could have forseen the damage, it is also required that you took reasonable steps to mitigate that damage. This would normally require that when you copped on that there may be a potential problem that you brought the car in for repair.

The best you can do really is file a complaint with the small claims court. Their jurisdiction covers you, and it won't cost anything in legal fees. However I really wouldn't think your chances are great, since you ingnored the fact the engine wasn't running right and were not paricularly thorough in keeping records of MPG.

Darragh29

declans wrote:

From Day 1, I regetted buying it as the fuel efficency was extremely poor bordering on depressing , I have never really calculated but drving on the M4 at 120KM I could actually see the needle drop, I estimate now I was getting about 20-25MPG...

While I feel your pain on this one as a layman as you have described yourself, you're not expected to know when a fault exists. Having said that, when you have a 1.8 engine and you can see the fuel gauge dropping in front of your eyes, doing 20-25 MPG you ought to know you have a problem on your hands. A huge number of possible engine faults don't return ECU fault codes and cause the engine warning lamp on the dashboard to come on.

In my garage, every customer is asked on arrival if they have any worries with their car, any rattles, strange noises, performance issues, or device problems. Where these are raised, they are recorded and sent onto the mechanic and in most cases are small problems that are closed off during the service of the vehicle. If the problem is something more complicated, it is sent back to reception for costing and customer approval. In your case if you came into my garage, you'd be asked if you have any concerns or problems with your vehicle and you'd have to tell a receptionist that you think you might have a fuel consumption problem, from there the problem would be worked through.

I wouldn't be looking for compensation here, also, if the temperature sensor was faulty and returning a voltage value consistent with the engine being cold, your engine should have been idling high whenever you stopped and this should have told you that there was an engine problem, if the idle RPM was over 1000 RPM at idle when the engine was warm and obviously not where it should be, (700-750 RPM). I know people who think they have a problem with their car and just put off going to a garage because they think they are going to be screwed. This is a burying your head in the sand philosophy in the hope that the probably will go away and I've yet to see one occasion where it does...

Capt'n Midnight

Did you pay for petrol with Credit Card ?
if so then it will be on the bills, as well as the garage and times.

Also paying by credit card deprives garages of a slice of their profits, if you think they charge too much.

Larry David

declans wrote:

Thanks for the reply but I am not a mechanic , I bought a spanking new car and was told to come back at 20K , How the hell I am supposed to diagnose a fault without any indication , I install/maintain Computer Networks for a living I dont have time to monitor my car , I paid for a new car and expected it to arrive in perfect working order , It did not so who is to blame ?

I actually agree with you 100%. You bought a product, and it was faulty and cost you money out of your own pocket, through no fault of your own. I suggest you contact your solicitor - and let him/her contact Ford or the garage.

Seth Brundle

Larry David wrote:

I actually agree with you 100%. You bought a product, and it was faulty and cost you money out of your own pocket, through no fault of your own. I suggest you contact your solicitor - and let him/her contact Ford or the garage.

The OP claims that the 'product' was faulty when he bought it. He has no evidence that it was faulty and made no attempt at getting it sorted until now. pleading ignorance is not enough. if the OP thougt there was something wrong then they should have done something about it, not continue driving for thousands of miles wondering about it!
@OP what does your owners manual state about the following:-
* fuel consumption
* mechanical & electrical problems?
* servicing intervals?
Have you read your owners documentation thoroughly?

Larry David

kbannon wrote:

The OP claims that the 'product' was faulty when he bought it. He has no evidence that it was faulty and made no attempt at getting it sorted until now. pleading ignorance is not enough. if the OP thougt there was something wrong then they should have done something about it, not continue driving for thousands of miles wondering about it!

Like he said - he's not a mechanic, and he had no reason to believe it was anything other than a sh*t car.

@OP what does your owners manual state about the following:-
* fuel consumption
* mechanical & electrical problems?
* servicing intervals?
Have you read your owners documentation thoroughly?

He's not obliged by law to read the manual to compare the expected MPG to the actual. Only a car enthusiast or a nerd does this - I've certainly never done it (but I've also never had my car guzzling petrol, and I most likely would have noticed, even if it was new!)

BUUUUUUUTTTT: Don't get me wrong - in REALITY, he's an idiot for not noticing - but the law always caters for the lowest common denominator - that's all I'm pointing out.

maidhc

Larry David wrote:

BUUUUUUUTTTT: Don't get me wrong - in REALITY, he's an idiot for not noticing - but the law always caters for the lowest common denominator.

No, it certainly doesn't. It caters for ordinary reasonable people. Stupid and idiotic people (I am not suggesting the OP is this for a second) rarely succeed in frivolous actions.

Larry David

Maidhc Dainin Ó S&#233 wrote:

No, it certainly doesn't. It caters for ordinary reasonable people. Stupid and idiotic people (I am not suggesting the OP is this for a second) rarely succeed in frivolous actions.

You sure about that? Maybe you can explain the ridiculous warnings and disclaimers on most household products then? e.g "Do not drink this Bleach".
If an ordinary reasonable person wouldn't drink it, then why put a warning on there? "This lighter fluid is highly flammable", etc....The list of examples is endless.....
Hell - people are so stupid they actually had to change the word inflammable to flammable - to cater for the lowest common denominator! In fact, a lot of idiots still get the 2 mixed up, when they both actually mean the same thing....

crosstownk

The OP should have made a reasonable effort to outline to the manufacturers agent (the dealer) that he felt soemthing was not right. As far as I can see this didn't happen. The OP found out about the fault and then, in hindsight, came to the conclusion that it had consumed excissive fuel and cost more money as a result. As others have pointed out, having fuel receipts with mileage would have helped strengthen the case but no such evicence is available to the OP.

Maybe the OP has a valid point, but, its going to be virtually impossible to prove - and thats the real problem.

maidhc

Larry David wrote:

You sure about that? Maybe you can explain the ridiculous warnings and disclaimers on most household products then? e.g "Do not drink this Bleach".

Bheul,

The issuing of labeling is very seperate from this case. The slight paranoia about labelling was brought about by a number of cases involving children getting burned/injured/killed from manufacturers products. Having a warning label is a means of a manufacturer avoiding liability if, say, a child gets burned by going to close to a fire when wearing one of the manufacturers garments.

If however a person contributes to their own misfortune, either by ignoring problems with a car, not wearing a seatbelt, or going for a siesta in the middle of a motorway they will only be able to recover a percentage of the damages due to them, or in some circumstances may be entitled to nothing.

E.g. in England a manufacturer delivered an unstable boat. It was clear to be unstable, and the captain knew this. However he still took 50 children for a spin in it. It capsized and children died. The manufacturer escaped liability due to the stupididy of the captain.

Larry David

maidhc wrote:

E.g. in England a manufacturer delivered an unstable boat. It was clear to be unstable, and the captain knew this. However he still took 50 children for a spin in it. It capsized and children died. The manufacturer escaped liability due to the stupididy of the captain.

Haigh Maidhc,

I don't believe that story.