My contact at CRC called to update. Apparently the Head of Business at Williams is due to call me today having been called by CRC.
It was alleged (by CRC) that the waranty is a third party warranty with a company called Car Care Plan – and accoringly the terms and conditions may be different than ‘manufacturer’s warranty’. This is absolutely the first I have heard of this, and it is in no way acceptable that the terms vary. It is further unacceptable as all the issues were notified well within the original manufacturer’s warranty period. JLR need to honour the statements made under the ‘Approved Used Scheme’.
The printed documentation I have clearly states that the warranty is provided by Jaguar Landrover Limited, and further that it is not an insurance backed warranty.
Car Care Plan certainly appear to be an insurance backed warranty provider.
My CRC contact told me that Williams had said I had been offered an alternative vehicle – which it is accepted did not meet the specification required – and that I had been offered a refund. For clarity, I was actually offered to ‘reverse the deal’ and have a refund on the vehicle and the return of my part exchanged SV8. However, the SV8 had left the dealership and gone in to the trade. I had no way of knowing what state that may have been in and what use it may have had in those four weeks. It was decided that in the first instance, a repair should be attempted on the XF-S. As it happens, I have been in touch with the new owner of the SV8 and he is very happy with it, as it has no issues.
CRC want to close this case whilst waiting for the latest attempt at a fix. I fear this is a political request, and the case flags up as open for an extended time. I request that this case remains open, under its original reference starting around twelve months ago. (A previous attempt was made to close it, but I had it reopened when it was clear the vehicle still had issues).
It is 17:32 and I have had no further calls (i.e. from Williams).