Poll for Those with Paint Blistering / Bubbling Defect

[John_Matrix]

I was amazed they ever agreed to replace coatings or films from the outset. Nice thing to offer but they wouldn’t be liable for it unless they or their dealer supplied the car with it new and you are the original owner. Given the horrific costs involved with all of this and their current financial position,
I surprised it took them this long to retreat from the previously generous arrangement.
Lots of folk presumbably had sound deadening installed on the inner door skins which again would be lost following door replacement. Can’t see them wanting to replace that either.

I know there was talk here that the early cars had 5 year warranty for paint rather than 3.
Some here were strongly of the opinion that if you got the paint issue say next year on a 22 MY car, it would be covered. I wouldnt want to be putting that to the test.

 

[SimonT]

I was amazed they ever agreed to replace coatings or films from the outset. Nice thing to offer but they wouldn’t be liable for it unless they or their dealer supplied the car with it new and you are the original owner. Given the horrific costs involved with all of this and their current financial position,
I surprised it took them this long to retreat from the previously generous arrangement.
Lots of folk presumbably had sound deadening installed on the inner door skins which again would be lost following door replacement. Can’t see them wanting to replace that either.

I know there was talk here that the early cars had 5 year warranty for paint rather than 3.
Some here were strongly of the opinion that if you got the paint issue say next year on a 22 MY car, it would be covered. I wouldnt want to be putting that to the test.

If I hadn't had everything replaced already I certainly would have gone to court over it. They sold cars with a 5yr paint warranty, they stated this was an error only after they realised there was a manufacturing fault. They admitted liability by replacing the doors, one of the obstacles in litigation is proving the fault existed from manufacture.

I was also surprised that they replaced PPF as part of warranty claims. They have just refused to replace my brake pads due to them not functioning correctly, again. Covered 400 miles since they were replaced under warranty and now stating 'wear and tear' so not covered.

 

[geoffbland]

Nice thing to offer but they wouldn’t be liable for it unless they or their dealer supplied the car with it new and you are the original owner. Given the horrific costs involved with all of this and their current financial position,

I don't believe this is legally correct for the UK. They are indeed liable for consequential damage caused by their faulty part.

Say you had a house built but the foundations (covered by an NHBC warranty by law) were faulty and caused your house to fall down. Then imagine the builders saying well we'll replace your foundations - but you can build the rest of the house and replace all the contents yourself. (OK maybe a bit of hyperbole here)

Whether owners can be bothered to go the legal route is another question.

 

[freefall_junkie]

I know there was talk here that the early cars had 5 year warranty for paint rather than 3.
Some here were strongly of the opinion that if you got the paint issue say next year on a 22 MY car, it would be covered. I wouldnt want to be putting that to the test.

Lotus's official position is that all cars are covered for 3 years, regardless of build date. That is highly unlikely to change without a legal challenge, especially given their precarious financial position. According to the dealer I spoke to, the cost of replacing the doors is around £5.5k. If both rear 1/4 panels and tailgate also needed doing too the total cost it is easily double that. And those are trade prices which don't include VAT. If you had to stump up out of your own pocket you could be looking at a bill well into 5 figures, especially if you add on new PPF. So, out of warranty, it's kinda like this

 

[geoffbland]

They sold cars with a 5yr paint warranty, they stated this was an error only after they realised there was a manufacturing fault. They admitted liability by replacing the doors, one of the obstacles in litigation is proving the fault existed from manufacture.

Lotus's official position is that all cars are covered for 3 years, regardless of build date. That is highly unlikely to change without a legal challenge, especially given their precarious financial position. According to the dealer I spoke to, the cost of replacing the doors is around £5.5k.

I expect we'll find out fairly soon one or or another with early cars now approaching 3 years old. As already discussed on this forum there may be a Collection Action (UK) or Class Action (US) if Lotus don't resolve this somehow and that would cost them more in the long run. One of main issues with this would be getting owners buy-in but as we have a Lotus Community and this and other forums organising this would not be so much of a problem. In my opinion Lotus don't have much of a defence and the action could be taken out against Geely rather than Lotus UK. Hopefully it won't come to this.

Again, I'm not a lawyer just looking up stuff on the internet so may be talking rubbish. Anyone with knowledge of the law here to opine on the matter (probably not as all solicitors drive 7-series BMWs ).

 

[GregD]

I’m not a happy bunny at the moment!

My 73 plate Emira had both doors replaced this time last year due to pain bubbling. At the time they were also sent to Topaz for re-application of PPF and Ceramic coating.

All good for 11 months, now the Driver side door is bubbling up again!

It’s going into Ryland Bristol in 2 weeks time for its annual service and they are “talking a look” at the door!

It’s going to be an interesting few weeks!!!