Audi Beaurocracy Help, Please......

[quk@sievers.com (Phil Payne)]

In message <961018023239_129229147@emout19.mail.aol.com> Chukolives@aol.com writes:

> proprietary parts.  The car was simply a lemon.  The original service manual
> indicated that the timing belt should be replaced at 90k miles.....

I find that part hard to believe.  The 60k maximum idea has been around for a 
_long_ time over here in Europe.  Some engineers (like mine) even consider 60k 
a dangerous distance to go with one belt - I'm now changing at 45k.  81k is 
_really_ pushing the envelope - failure at that point does not make the car a 
lemon, any more than a blowout after running tyres for 100k would be.  IAC - 
your dispute is really with the dealership, as long as Audi correctly delivered 
the service manual change to them.

> to make matters worst, the dealer has
> taken the engine apart and discovered that the rack (rack and pinion) needs
> to be replaced...

That really is _your_ problem.  

> .another $1700 for a total of $9900 on a car that has a
> street value of maybe $15,000 fixed even though it's in otherwise premium
> condition.  Is it unreasonable to expect more of a fine luxury German car??

The second-hand price is low partly _because_ the parts and repairs are so 
expensive.  I shudder to think what a ten year old ur-quattro would cost if it 
had a twenty-year parts and service warranty.  Probably more than a Ferrari - 
it's a better car.

>  Don't you think that Audi could do more to take care of a loyal customer??

You should, really, have Audi on your side against the dealership.  _That_ is 
where their service provision has broken down, and it is also where their image 
could be further damaged in the future unless it is addressed.  This dealer is 
damaging Audi's reputation - they should be concerned about that.

--
 Phil Payne
 phil@sievers.com
 Committee Member, UK Audi [ur-]quattro Owners Club