Chandigarh District Commission Directs Skoda Dealer To Pay Rs. 60,000 To Former Colonel, Citing A Deficiency In Service

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh – I consisting of Pawanjit Singh (President) and Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member) partly allowed the complaint against Krishna Auto Sales (dealer) which was filed against Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Pvt. Ltd. (Skoda Auto) and the dealer. The Commission held the dealer liable for deficiency in service and directed it to pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation for causing mental distress and inconvenience, pay Rs. 10,000 as litigation expense. Brief facts of the case: The Complainant bought a Skoda Kodiaq vehicle from Skoda Auto and their dealer through the Canteen Stores Department of the Indian Army. The initial servicing of the vehicle was completed in January 2019, at 15,000 kilometers. However, less than 18 months after the purchase, the vehicle began experiencing a humming noise originating from its wheels, even though regular servicing was performed by the dealer. The person made multiple attempts to address this issue with the dealer and Skoda Auto but without any response. Subsequently, it was revealed that the problem stemmed from improper wheel alignment and the lack of wheel rotation. During the third servicing, the complainant was informed that the issue resulted from uneven tire wear due to incorrect wheel alignment. Skoda Auto and the dealer conveyed that all four tires needed replacement, with the complainant bearing the cost, as the tires were not covered under warranty. Despite numerous attempts to have the problem resolved, the complainant's efforts were not responded to. The Complainant filed a consumer complaint against Skoda Auto and the dealer alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. Contentions of the Opposite Parties: Skoda Auto Skoda Auto stated that the complainant reported a humming noise coming from the vehicle's wheels during the 3rd service in June 2020, by which time the car had covered a distance of approximately 45,000 to 47,000 kilometers. Upon a thorough inspection, it pointed out that the noise resulted from normal wear and tear and was not indicative of a manufacturing defect in the vehicle. Notably, the issue had not been reported during the first and second services, conducted at 15,000 and 30,000 kilometers, respectively. Skoda Auto clarified that the vehicle's manufacturing warranty does not encompass the tires, as they are covered under warranties provided by tire manufacturers themselves. It contended he should approach Handkook, the tire manufacturer, and stated that there was no deficiency on its part. Dealer The dealer contended that the complainant first reported the humming sound in June 2020, and after diagnosis, it communicated to him that the uneven tire wear was responsible for the issue. The dealer refuted the assertion that the uneven tire wear resulted from incorrect or non-aligned wheel rotation. It mentioned that the first service was a complimentary service and therefore didn't have specific details in the tax invoice. The tax invoice from September 30, 2019, included alignment and wheel balancing work. The dealer argued that there was no deficiency in service. It claimed that the complainant was aware that wheel alignment should be done every 10,000 kilometers and criticized the complainant for not visiting the dealer for alignment at the 10,000-kilometer mark. The dealer also highlighted the complainant's failure to prove alignment work performed by another authorized agency. Observations of the Commission: The Chandigarh District Commission partly allowed the complaint against the dealer and dismissed the complaint against Skoda Auto. It pointed out that the main issue of the complainant was that the vehicle's tires experienced uneven wear due to the negligent behavior of Skoda Auto and its dealer, who failed to conduct proper tire rotation and wheel alignment during servicing. The Commission observed that the service invoice detailed costs for original equipment manufacturer parts, oil, lubricants, and labor charges. However, the first Periodic Maintenance Service report did not include any mention of tire rotation, wheel balancing, or wheel alignment, despite an odometer reading of 15,115 km. Further, the owner’s manual stated that for consistent tire wear, wheel changes should occur every 10,000 km as per the recommended schedule. The Commission held that the dealer was at fault for disregarding its own manual's recommendation for uniform tire wear during vehicle servicing. The second service report at 30,000 km also lacked any indication of tire rotation. The Commission highlighted the uneven tire wear as the dealer's negligence in adhering to the guidelines outlined in the owner's manual. The Commission concluded that the dealer is liable for deficiency in service and directed it to pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation for causing mental distress and inconvenience, pay...

Chandigarh District Commission Directs Skoda Dealer To Pay Rs. 60,000 To Former Colonel, Citing A Deficiency In Service

Sachika Vij

Tags