Be warned, just because you pay main dealer prices it doeasn't mean they are selling you a genuine Subaru part.

My P1 had a problem, after checking for air leaks a new MAF sensor was purchased from Subaru in Crawley, it cost me £100 more then I could have got one on Ebay but wanted genuine.

After buying it and opening the genuine looking box with subaru bar code I noticed it did not have the number in white on the sensor as I thought it should.

I questioned this with the dealers parts manager and he put me onto Gary Langford who is parts general manager for Subaru UK. I sent photos and explained my concerns, however he checked with stock he had and confirmed what I had WAS a genuine Subaru part supplied by them.

After a lot of expence and grieve over about 6 months it was confirmed on a rolling road by Simon at JGM the MAF was faulty.....

I fitted a genuine MAF with white markings and car run fine, the original supplied was sent back to Gary Langford at Subaru UK and he confirmed it was NOT genuine after all.

Compensation? Well now Mr Langford and Subaru UK are saying they didn't supply the MAF to the main dealer after all, so don't want to know.

Remember that prior to fitting the part I contacted him and he confirmed it was genuine and supplied by them and same as others they had on shelf.

Mr Langford had also admitted they had a lot of faulty MAFs last year... funny that?

So now I am taking Mr Langford and Subaru UK to court, so don't think you can trust by paying dealer prices you will get genuine parts and be looked after if they get it wrong.

P1 Number 0052 (sold)

 

Good on you, but I doubt you'll get very far in court.
They will tie you and your solicitor/lawer up in knots long before it ever gets anywhere near court.
Hope you've got deep pockets, or a no win/no fee outfit.

 

unless you have it in writing then forget court and just move on

 

Sorry to hear this, but sounds very odd.

So you had a genuine box with non genuine part inside from a dealer?

May be someone bought a genuine MAF from this dealer, swapped a new non genuine MAF in to the box and returned it hoping that they would not properly check, then this was put back on the shelf and sold to you...

They could check if they have a record of any returns on this item

 

This is what they are now saying to avoid paying compensation.

Their only problem is they checked supply and confirmed IN WRITING that both box and part without numbers on were the same as stock held at that time and was genuine, so to suggest now it must have been changed will not get them out of this in court.

Ref other comments about getting no where and costs, guess you guys do not understand how easy and effective it is to take someone through a small claims court process where you do not need to use solicitors and costs are minimal

My day in court will be at my local court as it's a private summons and Subaru UK will have to travel to it as they are a business.

 

Good on you, some people are so quick to roll over and give in.

I've done the whole small claims court thing and wish I'd done it ages before I actually did. Spent months trying to get money out of an insurance company, went through the court summons and it was dealt with as soon as they found out. Cost me about £90 IIRC, which I got back.

 

Yes, your costs are added to your claim so if you have a good case and win you do not pay a penny.

I questioned if the part was genuine as I was concerned at the time and sent photos of both box and sensor, this was response from Subaru UK...

Subject: RE: MAF Sensor Query
From: GLangford@imgroup.co.uk
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 11:16:14 +0000

Hi again Mr Egleton... please see the findings of our parts technical team.

The part does match what we have in stock.. which is genuine Subaru. I can also
confirm that Gatwick do purchase these from time to time, the last being in June this year.

I hope this puts your mind at rest. have a good Christmas and a happy new Year, Regards - Gary langford





Hi Gary This part is exactly the same to what we have in the bin locations


Dave

 

How does Gatwick subaru actually stand as a dealer?
They used to be a subaru dealer, but now only sell Mitsubishi and Kia, but still are subaru parts dealer. Maybe they are not given the same treatment as a full on dealer.

P.s my car was Gatwick subaru ex demonstrator.

 

Hi
I wish you well on your quest
However my concern is regarding the paint markings .
Motor manufacturers be it car , bike etc paint markings on connectors & looms , be it blue , purple, green , white , yellow etc etc
This is production line fitting , test pass & fitted working .
Parts for warehouse stock albeit are tested ( not always ) with the same method , & giving the freq of parts to be replaced . The more parts produced you may not be presented with colour codes ...

 

Subaru UK state they only supply genuine parts to dealers, this includes Gatwick

 

I have never known or found a genuine Subaru MAF sensor without the numbers in white on it.

The MAF supplied was returned to Subaru UK technical dept who fully tested it and confirmed it was not genuine.

The genuine replacement that worked fine had the white numbers on, as do all other MAF sensors now held in stock with Subaru UK

 

Direct from Subaru UK.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Air-Flow-M...item2c8f45ae17

 

Yes that is a genuine looking MAF with proper markings and box.

The one supplied to me was in the right box and sealed in packet inside, just as you would expect from main dealer.

But the MAF had nothing on it to identify what it was, no numbers.

I was suspicious and the main dealer put me in touch with their UK supplier, (Subaru UK) who confirmed in writing A) it was genuine. B) It was same as others held in stock (no markings)

So to now turn round and say it isn't genuine and they didn't supply it is a joke, but I hope I will be the one laughing when we have had our day in court.

 

I see what you guys are saying , yeah I was giving ref to paint circles or lines on electric plugs & looms etc , maybe I shudnt have stuck my nose in
If you say all maf's are marked up in white ( then I'm inclined to believe you
Good luck with your case

 

The link I posted is from International Motors who own/run Subaru UK. I am sure if these parts where not genuine and went tit's up there would be real sh*te.

Admittedly the site sells without warranties but are sold as genuine.

 

Update.. legally advised I need to change my court action to make the dealer the defendent as it was obviously with the dealer whome I had the contract.
Even although the dealer only sold me a part supplied from Subaru UK I am claiming against them now and expect then will need to claim from Subaru UK after my case has been heard.

Subaru have been absolute s**t over this and dropped a dealer in it instead of sorting it out directly with me, this after seeming to accept my compensation claim.

I knew that legally my contract was with the dealer (Gatwick Group, Crawley) but also know being supplied a non genuine and faulty MAF was 100% the fault of Subaru UK.

I miss the P1 and thought about buying a newer faster Scooby, but due the way Subaru Uk are behaving decided to get something different, so have a 600bhp GT-R instead, 0-60 under 3 secs and over 200mph

 

Personally it sounds like a lot of hassle for a £100 part. If you have that much money to buy a GTR, why do you even care?

I would put it down to experience. Did they not offer you a replacement part?

 

I think its great you are standing to your principals , no matter how much money is involved. Too many times the consumer gets f****ed over

 

As I recall the MAF (Non Genuine) lead to engine failure.

 

I was advised the faulty MAF could well have been the reason for the engine failier, this engine failier cost me about £3000, but think that hard to prove in court, however the £2000+ it has cost me due being supplied a faulty non genuine part can be proved.

So no it isn't about just £100, and even if it was it would be a matter of principle.

Remember Subaru UK confirmed the MAF supplied by a main dealer was genuine and supplied by them to the dealer, also stating it was exactly the same as rest of stock held at that time, now they say they didn't supply it to the dealer? This after the dealer has confirmed in writing that the part was supplied direct by Subaru UK and never left the shelf until I bought it from them.

Subaru UK are taking the **** and have dropped a dealer in the s**t rather then deal with the matter directly and I think they are a disgrace.

 

This is great, well done mate. One day they will get one up the Khyber Pass over the 2.5 engines.

 

It sounds like an innocent mistake probably at the central parts warehouse in Japan.

The part would have in all probability have been manufactured and then being a genuine Subau part would have had the part number applied to it by either it being printed on to the part or a sticker applied.

It is not unknown that the OE manufacturer would have sent a batch of these sensors to Subaru and the 'non' genuine sensor got mixed into the order by accident. Subaru cannot be expected to quality check every last item they receive into their parts stock.

At various points during the supply process - OE manufacturer to Subaru Japan, Subaru Japan to Subaru Europe, Subaru Europe to Subaru UK, Subaru UK to the dealer and then finally to the customer, some of the parts would have been subject to a QC inspection - they will pick at random so many part numbers and then a quantity of each to inspect.

The chances of a part which doesn't conform if it's say 1 of 500 supplied in a batch are 0.2% of being found if it's the only non conforming part in the batch manufactured - as they say **** happens and it just so happens that it caused an issue.

Who is to say that even if the part had the correct labelling that it wouldn't have failed anyway at some point?

 

Where your theory falls down is that I thought something was wrong as soon as I opened box.

I did not fit the part but contacted the dealer who put me onto their supplier Subaru UK.

Subaru UK checked the part and CONFIRMED it was a genuine part supplied by them.

Only when it came to my car being set up on rolling road by JGM 6 months later did I find out all my running problems had been due to the faulty non genuine maf sensor.

The faulty part was inspected at the dealers and a experienced parts manager agreed he also thought it was not genuine, this was confirmed when Subaru UK technicians inspected the part.

Remember I questioned this part with Subaru PRIOR to even fitting it, but they assured me it was genuine.

Yes parts do fail, but find that of no relevance in this matter, we are talking about being sold a faulty non genuine part from a main dealer, then wrongly told by Subaru UK it was genuine when it was not.

 

Also ref the comment 'innocent mistake'.

I am not suggesting Subaru UK knowingly supplied the dealer with a non genuine part, but they did so are legally accountable for that.

They could have done the right and decent thing and dealt with me direct but decided to drop the dealer in it instead, so I have to take the dealer to court who will then need to do the same to Subaru UK if they do not get compensated.

 

^ they should've just owned up to the error immediately when you queried the part.
The fact they didn't either shows a complete disregard for customers (which I find extremely disturbing and would be inclined to post harsher criticism) or incompetence regarding inspecting the part.

Gotta be honest, I've been looking into getting a scooby for a while and this post along with my own experience with dealer lack of knowledge, and the apparent 2.5ltr issues are seriously putting me off.
Certainly buying a brand new one (it is unlikely I'll ever be able to afford a brand new car again).

 

With the greatest of respect I've worked in the parts supply business in main dealers for over 23 years and I can assure you that what I've outlined goes on all the time.

Subaru don't manufacture the sensor themselves and occasionally an OE equivalent from the same manufacturer as makes them for Subaru will slip through the QC net.

Was the make of the non genuine the same as the manufacturer that Subaru use?

 

Was the make of the non genuine the same as the manufacturer that Subaru use?

This is the point you do not appear to understand, the maf sensor had no make or part number on it whatsoever.

I questioned this being a genuine part because with all respect to you I have had over 40 years in the motor trade, run my own business and dealt with many different suppliers.

I have never had a part from a main dealer with no markings to id the part or manufacturer, however Subaru UK assured me in writing it was genuine so I trusted them and fitted the part.

 

I think Subaru customer services have shown how they deal with customers when they have made mistakes.

1st mistake, allowing non genuine parts to get into the supply chain.

2nd mistake, not dealing with my concerns properly and instead confirming part was genuine when it wasn't.

3rd mistake, not doing the right thing and accepting the consequences of supply of non genuine parts and compensating me for my losses.

4th mistake, after confirming part was supplied by them and same as rest of stock so genuine now turn round 6 months later and blame the dealer because 'they only supply genuine parts' which has pissed the dealer off.

I liked my P1, and was looking at spending a large chunk of cash on a much newer faster Scooby, but was not prepared to buy another when I get customer service like this... so bought the GT-R instead.

 

I'm not arguing a case for Subaru, I'm just trying to explain how the non genuine part could have arrived in a genuine box through the Subaru parts network.

I'll leave you to argue with anyone that tries to offer a potential explanation for the error, I'll just go back to running two very successful parts departments.

 

How the non genuine part was sold as genuine through the Subaru network is not the issue.

The issue is how Subaru UK have dealt with the mistake, a mistake which was compounded by them confirming part was genuine when it was not prior to me fitting it.

I'm sorry you appear to have missed the point, with all due respect.