[asr245]

Originally Posted by akshay1234

I'd really love to hear what the 9l repair bill was for. This seems to be the 3.6 fsi Superb, and contrary to what a few are saying, a have a few friends with the 3.6 and it runs just fine on normal fuel.

Before some facts are out lets not jump to conclusions and start saying "oooh Skoda horror stories" blah blah. Ask most of the present owners on the forum and 95% of them will be happy.

I am scared of being in the other 5%, dead scared. So I wouldn't touch it with a pole. And anyway, 95% is poor. Industry standard is 99.99% or more (any industry).

[Enigmatic]

Guys lets give the heated argument a rest ..

The case file clearly states that the incident happened within 3 months of ownership , where as in this case the pamphlets clearly states an ownership time span of 2 years .

Moreover the case file mentions a repair bill of 11 Lakh where as the owner in this incident has mentioned a repair bill of 9 Lakh .

There could be similarities between the two however if you come to think of it , if a person is going to the extent of posting stickers all over his car and handing out pamphlets, why would he reduce the cost of repairs and increase the time it took for these issues to crop up .

So lets wait till we have more credential information from the horse's mouth .

[Akshay1234]

Originally Posted by Raghu Srinivasa

Akshay,
The real measure of a company is how it deals with 5% who do end up with bad products. Going by the consistency in "buyer pain" over the last few years, have to agree that Skoda treats their customers very badly.

Raghu Srinivasa

Very true, but lets take tbhp as an example. There are people unhappy with their Marutis, BMWs, Hyundais, and many other brands. And here we are not talking about the car itself, but the service.

Originally Posted by Passiautonate

You might be right and question the driver's judgement but did he had a choice? . Gurgaon is a peculiar city having one of the highest density of cars with pathetic roads (Understatement). Water logging starts even before the rain and you need to drive through small ponds. Ironically you cannot stop after seeing a pond as it will create a traffice Jam. Believe me even in R8 you have no choice but to move on. Add to that- Superb is a street car not a track car, that means it is made for roads (or Indian roads- I assume as it is selling in India)

Buying a car is not like buying an insurance policy for which you need to go through terms and conditions. Owner was travelling on a city road and was not involved in off roading. Other cars were passing through but Superb could not get through. So I would say vehicle is not suited for Indian conditions. Ultimately Skoda is solely responsible for selling a product unfit for Indian conditions and should take full responsibility of the mishap.

regards,
Maddy

Well I guess he did have a choice, and that was whether to stop before the water or go on. And seeing the so called cheaper cars going through the water he chose to go through. If the water was high enough to get into the tail pipes I'm sure only a few cars were going through at a time.

Do you not do research before buying a car? It seems to be the owner just bought the so called 'top end' without actually knowing what it is. It is his bad luck, we all feel bad for him. But Skoda is not to be blamed. Tomorrow if you take your car to Ladakh and hit the underbody and bust the oil sump, are you going to sue the manufacturer saying it was not made for Indian conditions?

Originally Posted by Vijayraj1890

Sorry for asking a really elementary question here, but regarding the RPM thing, is it the same story if you drive an A/T in 'Manual Mode'?, in which (i asssume since i dont drive an Automatic) you can keep the RPM high?.

e.g if its a PRND123 config, then you shift to the 1,2 or 3; and if its a PRNDS like a BMW 3 Series Corporate Edition, you shift into 'S' and keep it on 1.

Well its not the same as a manual, but the best thing to do would be to keep it in 1 gear manually and just hope you can keep moving. I suspect the gearbox might have shifted into 2nd while going through the water or possibly the water was just too high.

Originally Posted by asr245

I am scared of being in the other 5%, dead scared. So I wouldn't touch it with a pole. And anyway, 95% is poor. Industry standard is 99.99% or more (any industry).

That was just a figure I concocted, don't go by it. It might be different. But the times have surely changed from Skoda 'horror stories'.

[urajkumar]

I have been a victim of skoda poor after sales service and I tend to think its an issue caused by the dealed and not so much by the company (of course the company is accountable for it still). We have 5 diff car brands at home(joint family) and constantly keep changing cars every year but skoda is the only brand we have had to send a legal notice for their service. Period. That says it all. I disagree on some of the comments stating we cannot drive in water areas or worser "how could he restart". Come on guys, we leave to office and then it rains, am I expected to take a taxi home? If the tata or honda can take me home in that condition, a skoda should be able to as well. Its not fair to compare a Audi R8 which is not a daily use car. If what the customer says is right then its just not fair. We have a superb at home and it runs very well. The skoda is really awesome as long as nothing goes wrong. One breakdown (which is common and more frequent than other brands) and your nightmare starts.for the 95% of owners where nothing goes wrong, you are lucky but for 5% (which is huge - will you be okay with 5% flights crashing or breakdown) trust me it is very stressful.

[Warwithwheels]

Going by the facts posted in links outside TBHP, SKODA has very little to do in this case. At best all they can do is offer a partial waiver on the replacement cost as a goodwill gesture.

If the water logging case were to be true, and the driver had negligently tried to restart the water logged engine, the manufacturer is absolved from his warranty obligations on the issue.

I see a lot of posts on SNS abusing SKODA on this issue quoting this thread. Social Media is a very powerful tool. If such a tool is being grossly misused, it would soon loose its credibility and sanctity.

Am sure the news about TBHP discussing this issue would have reached the Mr. Sachdev by now. If he has got a genuine case he must contact the forum ASAP and share his views across.

Without getting the facts right, it would not be right on our part to engage in a hypothetical discussion that would go on to further tarnish the reputation of a already battered Brand - SKODA.

[zenren]

11 lakhs is an estimate given to the owner, not the actual bill which could be slightly lower. Still, if both cases are the same, unless we know the actual cost incurred for the water logging related repair, we might not be able to comment. It is probable that the actual bill might have been much lesser, around 5-6 lakhs or so. Otherwise the maintenance expense that the owner incurred for the remaining period has to be very minimal.

If the remaining repair costs were minimal, I doubt if the owner would take the pains to distribute the pamphlets for a car that is reasonably low on repairs after a one-off incident.

I'm sure none of us can comment on who is right in this case without knowing the one-off cost.

Originally Posted by Enigmatic

Guys lets give the heated argument a rest ..

The case file clearly states that the incident happened within 3 months of ownership , where as in this case the pamphlets clearly states an ownership time span of 2 years .

Moreover the case file mentions a repair bill of 11 Lakh where as the owner in this incident has mentioned a repair bill of 9 Lakh .

There could be similarities between the two however if you come to think of it , if a person is going to the extent of posting stickers all over his car and handing out pamphlets, why would he reduce the cost of repairs and increase the time it took for these issues to crop up .

So lets wait till we have more credential information from the horse's mouth .

[Raosaheb Desai]

OTE][/quote]While I feel the pain, it is just his bad luck. The Superb 3.6 has much lower ground clearance than the normal car, some 135mm odd, not only due to the 4x4 system but the car itself is lowered. Now obviously this means the tail pipes are also lower. You can imagine how low they would be.

Driving any automatic through waterlogging is silly since you cannot keep the rpms high, like you can in a manual by slipping the clutch. Water must have entered through the exhaust pipe and stalled the vehicle. Possibly the driver tried to restart the vehicle.

Either way, its a case of water going into the engine. Not really Skodas fault is it? I mean the lower ground clearance and everything is given in the spec sheet.[/quote]

If this is the case then Skoda is not a culprit. Its not justified to blame the company for your wrongdoings.

[dkaile]

Anyways, there is no denying the fact that the already battered SKODA brand is going to be further dented by this gentleman's exercise, whether it was his fault or not. And if the hypothetical figure of 5% disgruntled users of Skoda has any semblance of truth in it, it is definitely a quite high number. I as a 'satisfied' Skoda owner would like the company's image to not take a beating on such regular intervals.

But as far as I am seeing recently, their ASC's are no better or worse than the best I have encountered and that includes the benchmark Toyota for me. The general public perception is still negative for Skoda in India and there is no denying this fact. It may be a case of sour grapes for many bashers who are not Skoda owners but for the actual minority of Skoda owners who are left stranded, it is and will remain a cause of worry, and I genuinely sympathise with them.

[StarScream]

Damage from water logging happened to a colleague's Wagon-R - the car stalled in a severely water-logged area and the driver tried to restart it. My colleague had to eventually buy a half-engine from Maruti for close to 50k to get the car running again. And incidentally that car was also a few months old.

My point is, this kind of damage can happen to any of us in any car. However, Skodas seems to be particularly sensitive to Indian road conditions. This isn't the first Superb that I've heard of giving trouble.

Originally Posted by Vijayraj1890

Sorry for asking a really elementary question here, but regarding the RPM thing, is it the same story if you drive an A/T in 'Manual Mode'?, in which (i asssume since i dont drive an Automatic) you can keep the RPM high?.

e.g if its a PRND123 config, then you shift to the 1,2 or 3; and if its a PRNDS like a BMW 3 Series Corporate Edition, you shift into 'S' and keep it on 1.

You're right, in an automatic one can move to a lower ratio but you still can't do the high-revving, half-clutch thing that you can with manuals. In heavy flooding a manual has a much better chance of going through as long as the revs are high and the exhaust gasses are strong enough to keep water out. In an automatic as you press the accelerator (even in 1) the car will move forward. In a manual you can keep the revs up even if you're stationary, there is no way to do that in an auto.

[Sankar]

I think that guys knows better than TBHP members on why he is on the street fighting against Skoda and whether if its his fault or Skoda's fault.

He himself being a businessman and the MD of another well known company wouldn't go to such extreme steps to defame another company without valid reason. There might be more than just what meets the eye.

But if its indeed because of his/driver's fault the vehicle failed and he expected Skoda it fix it up for free which didn't happen and thats why he's doing this then its cheap. But i'd like to give him the benefit of doubt and believe that's not the case.

Just my thoughts.

[hrman]

Lets pause and think about the circumstances under which this happened. What is evident so far is that the car was driven in a waterlogged road (shouldn't be a small puddle as he claimed as logically this should not cause much harm).
His driver was driving the car and it stalled, probably due to water entering the exhaust. I'm sure once it stalled, they would not have just called Skoda for help, but would have re-started the engine, which caused it to seize.

Now, most car manufacturers will not cover any damage due to water logging, unless it is a mass and natural phenomenon like 26 July 2005 water logging in Mumbai. So IMHO, Skoda is within their rights to refuse warranty claim for the engine.

But we need to get more details before concluding that this is another Skoda Horror story. My gut feel and what I can see and deduce so far is that it was the owner's fault and Skoda is not to blame.

I personally own a Skoda and am quite happy with their service so far.

[Passiautonate]

Originally Posted by pganapathy

There is such a thing as common sense you know. Porsche for example sell the 911 in India. They have even lower GC than the skoda. So would you say that in the same event, Porsche should repair their cars free of cost.

Given your logic, we should all be driving around in monster trucks as they have a few feet of GC and you can then pass through any stagnant water Indian cities are likely to throw at you.

I agree with you, but assume Maruti or Hyundai coming up with a Porsche @ 20 Lacs- There would be huge queue of disgruntled customer standing outside there showroom with their repair bills. But we know that this will never happen as they value their customer base. All I wanted to point out is the diffrence between a responsible car manufacturer and an irresponsible one. Maruti sells atleast 20 times more vehilces than Skoda but rest assured total count of dissatisfied customers would be far lesser than Skoda. I have seen them going out of way to help there customers which Skoda can't.

To add further- There is a huge difference in buying a sports car and a normal luxury car. I believe every car company when ventures into India modify there vehicle as per the host country standards. Not sure about others but I was not aware of GC when I bought my car. Tell me how many give due consideration to GC (Not talking about members on TBHP).

Imagine you buying a new car not designed to cater to extreme Indian climate and one day stranded on a highway with repair bills. Whom will you blame???

Superb is not that a common car so much so that people can rely on experience but not so distinct also that people would consider it as an experiment. I know 135mm GC with long wheelbase is a practical joke in our condition, so don't you think that-
Skoda should ethically (overstatement) advise its customers accordingly before making a deal

Afterall I do not see common sense as common, as common.

Regards,
Maddy

[wantarangerover]

Originally Posted by pganapathy

There is such a thing as common sense you know. Porsche for example sell the 911 in India. They have even lower GC than the skoda. So would you say that in the same event, Porsche should repair their cars free of cost.

Comparing a porsche and a skoda is, well, not really sensible. No offense, but your common sense doesnt really hold right here!

No one would expect to take a porsche through pot holed roads, its a sports car; and the typical customer wont need a free repair, since he is not your average joe working to make ends meet: he would buy another car if he wrecks it, he would have that kind of money.

A Skoda superb is a roadcar, and it should hold well in all types of roads it might encounter. In india, that includes potholes, standing water and what not.

Always remember that a product is made for the market in which it sells and not the other way round. I as a customer cannot change the roads that I drive on. The manufacturer, on the other hand, can alter its product to suit the conditions.

Given your logic, we should all be driving around in monster trucks as they have a few feet of GC and you can then pass through any stagnant water Indian cities are likely to throw at you.

So as per your common sense, we should stop at standing water and tow the car on a flatbed to the next good surface. I dont understand.

[coolboy007]

No company honors warranty for water damage, be it Maruti, Hyundai or anyone else. Just read that it was a case of water damage due to owner taking his car through the waterlogged roads.

I dont own a Skoda but if this issue is ONLY because of the owner taking his car through water, it stalls and then he restarts , engine seizes, then its really not the fault of Skoda here. Its not right to bash them up here just because this particular case is with Skoda. I agree they are not saints but then every time and for every thing we cant go and blame a manufacturer.

I read people saying that if a particular car is made for India, it should be able to handle every thing, potholes, water logged roads etc. I strongly disagree with these statements. You need to see what is made for what conditons and drive accordingly. You cant take a Superb somewhere which is meant for a Fortuner.

Didnt Skoda clearly state that the GC was a low 135 mm? Isnt it the responsibility of the owner to take note of it and take notice of the low GC in particular conditions. Oh yes, the santros, scorpios were going through water so i might as well take my Superb. He took the risk and when the results werent favourable, ask the company to repair everything.

I have seen umpteen people stopping their cars by the side of roads in monsoon, not every one takes the risk and why should they. If i have a Superb and am doubtful my car wont pass through the waterlogged areas then i need to stop or take a detour, going inside water isnt the only alternative.

When people buy such sedans, they know or should understand how to treat them. I own a Vento and Linea and a Superb being a D segment sedan cant endure water or bad roads as a C seg car would, its unfair to expect that if a manufacturer sells his car here, then it should tackle everything. The manufacturer never forced you tu buy his car, you had choices.

[shashank.nk]

Originally Posted by coolboy007

Didnt Skoda clearly state that the GC was a low 135 mm? Isnt it the responsibility of the owner to take note of it and take notice of the low GC in particular conditions. Oh yes, the santros, scorpios were going through water so i might as well take my Superb. He took the risk and when the results werent favourable, ask the company to repair everything.

When people buy such sedans, they know or should understand how to treat them. I own a Vento and Linea and a Superb being a D segment sedan cant endure water or bad roads as a C seg car would, its unfair to expect that if a manufacturer sells his car here, then it should tackle everything. The manufacturer never forced you tu buy his car, you had choices.

+1 to this. Couldn't have put it better myself.
If there's any truth in what we've read so far about damage being because the owner/his driver drove through a waterlogged section, there's no way Skoda can be held responsible.

There are a lot of cars with low GC(Civic, Octavia etc.) even a few hatchbacks cannot boast of superb GC. As an owner one is expected to understand the limitations of his car and drive sensibly. If you damage your car out of sheer negligence and carelessness, the manufacturer cannot be held responsible for not providing specs to suit your driving style.

Skoda cannot be expected to sell the 3.6 with a cautionary note about the low GC and long wheelbase. Its a car, not a pack of cigarettes to be sold that way!

Besides Superb has most certainly passed all the homologation tests required, you cannot 'blame' Skoda for selling cars which are 'unsuited' for Indian conditions.

I sympathize with the owner for having to shell out 1/3rd of his car's costs for repairs, but it may be because of his own fault. We need more information on this case to draw a conclusion, no one resorts to such extreme steps if he's convinced it was more due to his fault, than the car.