[motomaverick]

I think I will side with Audi here, there has to be n number of reasons why a engine seized. First and foremost will be over revving. Of course as a customer I will say I was driving sedately but driving sedately and revving the engine may cause this effect. This we had seen with the Audi Supercar recently. May be the oil levels were low, who knows, so Audi should investigate and release the facts. Plus I do not see how the other business men will get money just by returning their cars if its in perfect working condition. Is there are refund policy? I do not think so.

[Nilesh5417]

Originally Posted by h@r$h@l

[b]

On April 28, Sunil Chaudhari, president, Ambernath Municipal Council, was returning from Nashik when his A4 stalled in the middle of the highway.

Regards,

President of Ambernath Municipal Council right? Part of me thinks he is trying to make a statement by taking on Audi and showing that he's got numbers. Standard political rubbish from a lowbrow politico who must've got his face splashed in the local newspapers!!!

There is no way Audi should give in and like suggested in the posts above, Audi should just release a report formally of its findings. The remedy suggested by Audi seems very reasonable for a car used for 20 months and any one of us who is buying a car individually will be more than happy and shower praises on Audi's customer focus.

[Maky]

Is this the same guy from twitter?.

If you buy a product from a reputed company, car or otherwise, It's understood that it will be a quality product. This person has not only bought a car from a known brand, paid handsomely for it but hasn't even had it serviced from a 3rd party.
I did ponder, Suppose he could have simply settled for an engine/faulty part replacement instead of a new car. Then I said to myself, would I have had this happened to an expensive car I had recently bought? or would I have rather preferred a fresh car instead of a patch up job so soon in it's life? Probably but I personally hope he gets what he wants.
Maybe it'll put a statement out there. Engineer cars made for Indian conditions if you wish to make of the Indians.

[asr245]

Originally Posted by julupani

If I were with Audi, I wont say or do anything.

No car, not even a Nano or a M800, will have its engine seizing before giving multiple warning signs. Despite that, Audi has agreed to replace the engine, which is a very commendable action in my view. A new car is just completely un-reasonable request.

Of course the guys car is valued 7lakh less than other cars of similar age. The car has no engine!!! How do you expect Audi to pay the same amount as other cars.

And if I was part of JLR/Merc/BMW, I would be sending out letters to dealers saying not to accept these people as customers at all. Its better to not sell a few cars, than selling car to crazy people like these.

You have got to be kidding me!!!

You really find it acceptable for a 2 year old car (assuming reasonable mileage & assuming that story is true) to have an engine failure??

If yes, then it's because you find it acceptable that we consumers are given such shoddy treatment. Believe me, if such a case were to happen in any western country including Germany, Audi would have a new car with express delivery + a whole lot more.

And that is the way it should be. I, as a consumer act, do not want to pay full price and then get a defective product.

There is nothing commendable about Audi's action. They offered the very least they could do.

Originally Posted by Nilesh5417

There is no way Audi should give in and like suggested in the posts above, Audi should just release a report formally of its findings. The remedy suggested by Audi seems very reasonable for a car used for 20 months and any one of us who is buying a car individually will be more than happy and shower praises on Audi's customer focus.

If Audi had indeed found the owner at fault, no way in hell would they have agreed to replace the engine. AND I would not be happy with an engine failure in my 20 month old car and neither would I be showering praise on manufacturer who has agreed to replace the engine free of cost. It would have caused me difficulty and if I were to decide against taking Audi to court, I would have simply sold the car to an unsuspecting buyer after the engine replacement. Because no way would the replacement job be as perfect as a new job.

It's like getting a heart transplant and expecting yourself to be as fit as you were before the trouble started.

[ajmat]

More data is required!

How many KM did the Audi do?
How old was it?
Was it serviced on the dot and by whom?

Since the rest of the car is working fine, I think replacing the engine along with some warranty terms is reasonable. The manufacturer has a duty to repair first and replace if the faults are recurring.

[Nilesh5417]

Originally Posted by Maky

Then I said to myself, would I have had this happened to an expensive car I had recently bought?

20 months is a long time. I'm not sure i would call that recent. The write up doesnt talk about the kms on the odo or what sort of warranty. But audi provides 2yrs warranty and so within the terms of warranty conditions, replacement of an engine seems like a fair deal.

If you read the Skoda A.S.S experience & Harish's fight in the courts against Skoda India, you will agree that Audi did handle the issue well. What Skoda did was something you fight for.

And by me, a contractual agreement honored is good customer service. Why should anyone have unreasonable expectations like a replacement of car? Esp if its a not a recurring issue. Unless of course you can prove that Audi didn't read the signs during service of the impending seizure.

I ride a bullet and can tell you all about seizures. Pun intended there..

[CARDEEP]

The correct term to address these people would be GOLD-DIGGER. They have enjoyed the car for almost 2 years now & when the design, & tech have advanced from what they had purchased, they want to get the latest one for free, but forming an alliance amongst the like minded political businessmen.

At least, VAG group is helping these people by replacing the engines of he affected cars. BTW, we have details of one car's engine getting seized, what about 4 others. Let them return their cars & suffer the loss, which I am sure they will try to cover up from the Municipal Council funds, but, let's hope their scams are caught later by auditor or opponents.

[2cents]

"The Audi spokesperson said Chaudhari’s car was trouble-free for the last 20 months except “this one incident.” “Normal procedure would entail replacing the affected part (VBelt),” said the spokesperson in an email response. “However, to reinforce customer confidence, we advised him to replace the engine."....

Are they replacing it for free?!! It isn't said explicitly anywhere (well, otherwise the suggestion - “Normal procedure would entail replacing the affected part (VBelt),” said the spokesperson in an email response. “However, to reinforce customer confidence, we advised him to replace the engine" looks bizarre). If that is indeed so, then I wonder what is the issue. Let Audi replace the engine first, and then sell/replace it for a higher quote! Big deal!

[rahul4321]

"An Audi spokesperson said the company advised him to replace the engine but the customer insisted on getting a new car as a replacement. "

I may be wrong here, but where exactly does it say that Audi is giving him the new engine for free? "Advised him to replace the engine" sounds a lot like he will have to pay for the engine.

[julupani]

Originally Posted by asr245

You have got to be kidding me!!!

You really find it acceptable for a 2 year old car (assuming reasonable mileage & assuming that story is true) to have an engine failure??

No, but I dont think the engine would have failed at all without some serious misuse. And even in such cases of misuse, the car would have had quite a few issues crop up, which would most likely have been ignored.

I dont think a perfectly healthy car, with no abnormal systems, would have had a catastrophic failure leading to an engine seizing.

That is why I say, Audi's honoring of warranty, if that is what they are doing, is a very commendable act. If Audi is asking him to pay for the engine too, it doesnt seem unreasonable to me at all.

You said, "assuming reasonable mileage and story to be true". Point is I dont think the story is true at all.

[tsk1979]

I read the post. Somewhere its mentioned V-Belt failure. Its not engine Seizure. Of course if timing belt had broken, it would seize engine and damage the head.
The early 2.2 DICORS had this common occurance where within 15000-20000kms the timing belt would snap. Nobody got new engine, but a new head was fitted. Tata even did a silent recall(not advertised) and replaced the timing Kit for all early models.

A new engine after a belt failure is acceptable I guess. I would not find Audi at Fault here.

[rlvl]

They are going to return the cars to the dealer?? As in sell it back to him? That will be great business for the dealer
I don't understand why all the strong arming is required if the dealer just replaces the engine for free and gives the car.

[bullrun87]

I dont think engines just DIE wihout any sort of warning, further details of the incident are required. I think replacing the engine is all that audi should do.

[urajkumar]

I side with Audi here (more facts on ODO, service is of course required)! For now It looks like a pure arm twisting act by a local politician! I don't think anywhere in the world, the manufacturer replaces the car with a brand new car when things fail! A car is made up of million parts and in spite of best quality checks / products, things will fail once in a while and we all know that (even in the products our companies sell). As long as the manufacturer lives by his commitment & does his best to rectify the issue when its sent for service within a reasonable time, we should accept it. More to watch in this space!

[rohanjf]

Originally Posted by 2cents

...
Are they replacing it for free?!!

Originally Posted by rahul4321

I may be wrong here, but where exactly does it say that Audi is giving him the new engine for free?

Considering that the car is within warranty (less than 2 years old), shouldn't the engine change be free?

By the way, there is no mention of the fuel type. Remember when an A6 belonging to a doctor was filled with adulterated diesel, and the estimated repair costs were upwards of 11 Lakh Rupees? Seems like there is something similar (poor quality fuel) even in Mr. Chaudhari's case.