Suspension 'fault' and VW reply
Page 28
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
WE ARE a small firm operating a VW LT35D diesel van. We had to opt for a small van because we prefer a diesel engine. After 5,000 miles we wish we had opted for another make as we have found this van to be completely unsatisfactory. The front suspension is faulty and the front payload is reduced by the heavy-duty diesel engine fitted. An evenly distributed load over both axles is not possible as to comply with the law 75 per cent of the payload must be carried on the rear axle.
We have been stopped by the police twice to check if we were overloaded as the van sloped sharply on the front suspension touching the rubber buffers. On the last occasion the police checked the van and after finding the van was not overloaded strongly advised us to take the van back to the VW dealer as in their opinion the van had a suspension fault.
The van was taken to the dealer who stated the front springs were indeed faulty and would be changed free of charge under warranty. When the van was alleged to be repaired, seven days later, as the springs were not availdble ex-stock, it was refused as the fault was not rectified (ie sloping worse than the original).
The van was then inspected by a VW field service manager who recommended the fitting of heavy-duty springs combined with the fitting of an anti-roll bar. New alleged heavy-duty springs were fitted but not the anti-roll bar because it was stated by the dealer that no provisions were made on this van for their fitting despite that fact they are listed as an optional extra. The van was again refused by us as the suspension bottomed even when empty.
The dealer said that the wrong springs were sent from VW although the springs had the right colour code. A further set of springs were fitted, combined this time with new heavy-duty shock absorbers but not the antiroll bar as this is non standard to this vehicle and as stated no provisions are made for their fitting. We again complained that the vehicle was not correct. The van was inspected by another field service manager who compared the van visually with another VW van and stated that he could find no fault.
The fitting of heavy-duty springs, etc, had an adverse effect on the stability, braking and steering. They did not solve the original problem but only added to it. I personally got in touch with VW-MAN who arranged with me for the service manager to return and re-examine the van. The van was weighed and driven by him. The result of his test was the offer once again of the fitting of an anti-roll bar to remedy the additional faults created.
We have since submitted the van to the Ministry of Transport on August 9 last for examination. The tester found the van, he stated, to have weak front suspension, and he was considering a GV9 with a 10-day delay on this vehicle. The van was examined loaded and unloaded. The. tester then informed me after speaking to his superiors on the phone that he was instructed not to issue a prohibition order but to refer the matter to the Accident and Defects Branch, Department of Transport, Bristol HQ.
The Ministry despite numerous phone calls has taken two and a half months to answer my complaint. Up to this time I was not informed that the van was completely .safe. The Ministry have arrived at their decision without re-examining the van and have accepted VW's word
that this van is completely roadworthy. We find it very alarming that manufacturers can state that a vehicle is safe and to standard and their statements are accepted as gospel by the Ministries.
It would appear from the letter received from the Ministry that the information supplied by VW is not complete. The Ministry asked for copies of our letters and promptly dispatched them to VW without our authorisation. We have now to hand a letter from the Department of Transport enclosing a copy of a Code of Practice prepared by the Department of Fair Trading and pointing out that VW have offered to fit an anti-roll bar and pointed out that VW-MAN had stated that the front suspension should come into contact with the conical rubber spring assisters.
In the manual issued by VW this is clearly referred to as a buffer.
Can you help us by investigating our complaint, as we feel that we are a small independent operator not having the protection of a large organisation. The VW field service manager told me that I would never win any action against VW as they are too big.
This van is available for inspection . It was noted that this vehicle was not on show for inspection, or in fact any diesel LT van, at the Motor Show 1980.
KIERAN DURCAN Director Tyre and Auto Fitments Ltd Felt ham, Middx CM contacted MAN-VW and their reply is as follows: "Prom details submitted by Mr Durcan to ourselves, we find that the kerb weight on his vehicle is ten per cent up on our standard specification and that the front axle in particular is 11 per cent up.
"The vehicle has been equipped by Mr Durcan with various racking, in line with requirements for the pursuit his business. The increas weight is directly attributed this equipment, and as can seen, has affected to a consid able amount the kerb weii distribution, which obviou will have a detrimental effect the distribution of the payloat "We consider our actic have been both fair and sy pathetic in as much as we h recognised Mr Durcan's parti lar operating conditions, am an attempt to enhance IN specification of the product suit, we have fitted, at no cha to Mr Durcan, optional eqt ment of heavy-duty frc springs. Consequently, it xi reported to us by Mr Dur, that the fitment of this eqt ment had a detrimental efi upon the handling characte tics of the vehicle, which, al having test driven the vehi we refute.
"However, in an attempt appease Mr Durcan and fina the situation we have offerec fit (again at no charge) an a roll bar, which is a producti line option. However, to d the offer has not been taken u "The main context of problem is Mr Durcan's r cence to accept that the rub component described within • repair manual as a buffer, is fact a component part of • suspension, and assists acco ing to the load on the springs.
"Contact by the rubber bui is constructively determin, and at certain loads within permissible axle weight st contact is regarded as quite n mal. Overloading of the vehi or springing should not be duced from this contac Editor.