Power Report: 'Tested' car left unwary buyer with bitter taste

Michelle Hoffmann drove around Cape Town for a month in a potential death trap. She was none the wiser; the 2003 A4 Audi had passed a roadworthy test just a few weeks earlier. And not just any test.

On the advice of the Automobile Association, Hoffmann had asked the private seller to use the AA's recommended test partner, the globally recognised German vehicle-monitoring organisation, Dekra Automotive.

The AA's website assures consumers their collaboration ensures "world-class" car safety in South Africa.

But in Hoffmann's case, Dekra appears to have given the green light to an unroadworthy car.

In September, just a month after Dekra had given Hoffmann's Audi 1.9 TDI the all-clear, an Audi specialist discovered a badly worn front suspension.

Hoffmann complained to Dekra, which apologised and covered the costs of making the R48 000 car roadworthy again.

story_article_left1

But when she asked Dekra to cover an additional R17000 worth of mechanical problems revealed at the same Audi inspection, it refused. A subsequent request to pay just 50% was also rejected.

When Hoffmann came to me, she was understandably angry.

"Dekra should be held responsible for these [mechanical] repairs as it was because of its false roadworthy certificate that I purchased the vehicle," said the 49-year-old fashion designer from Gordon's Bay.

"If the examiner at the Strand branch had done his job properly and picked up the faults with the vehicle, it would have shown me that the seller was dishonest in his claim that he maintained the vehicle well, and I would not have purchased it."

The bigger picture for other consumers, said Hoffmann, was road safety and possible corruption. "My life and the lives of other road users were placed at risk," she said. "And although unproven in this particular case, bribery in this industry is rife."

In initial e-mail correspondence with Hoffmann, Dekra said it viewed the case in a serious light, that an investigation and disciplinary hearing had taken place and that the examiner would "undergo further training", with his progress "closely monitored by management".

But when I approached Dekra, it sang a different tune, suggesting the car's problem may have arisen between the first and second inspections.

"At the time of the first inspection the examiner deemed the vehicle to be in a roadworthy condition," said Dekra compliance officer Marius Schutte. "The vehicle had already travelled some 1400km before we could re-inspect it ... "

block_quotes_start Anything could have transpired on this vehicle during the 1400km she travelled and, as an act of good faith, we agreed to pay [for] the repairs. block_quotes_end

He said that after the second inspection revealed "a certain amount of play on the parts in question", Dekra covered the R7700 repair bill.

Schutte claims the branch manager warned Hoffmann after the first test that the car had not been well maintained. Hoffmann denies this.

Dekra examiners operated under strict compliance and were regularly audited, Schutte said. The examiner in question had been with the company since 2008.

"We have a zero-tolerance approach when it comes to any form of fraud and corruption ... the allegation of bribery is strongly refuted as the buyer of the car brought it in for inspection and not the seller."

Schutte later conceded that the seller had indeed been present for the test, but that Dekra had "no dealings with him".

What about the earlier reference to action having been taken against the examiner, I asked Schutte.

"It is standard procedure to investigate the complaint and, when necessary, conduct additional quality checks on the individual to ensure that we are comfortable with the standards at Dekra," said Schutte.

"After inspecting the vehicle when it was returned, it was decided to give the client the benefit of the doubt and only agree to those specific repairs.

"Anything could have transpired on this vehicle during the 1400km she travelled and, as an act of good faith, we agreed to pay [for] the repairs."

He said at no stage had Hoffman's life been in any danger.

Kobus van der Heever, owner of Quattro Technic, a workshop specialising in Audi and Volkswagen cars in Brackenfell - and whom Dekra paid to rectify the problem - wasn't so sure, and said the worn suspension could have been dangerous at high speed.

The mechanic, with 20 years' experience, said he had no idea how Hoffmann's car had passed the roadworthy test, as Dekra was usually "too strict".

story_article_right2

"I'm shocked," said Van der Heever. "There is no doubt the car wasn't roadworthy ... I don't know how any examiner could have missed the obvious problem on that car. We spotted it straight away."

He dismissed the possibility of the defect having arisen after the Dekra test, instead attributing it to wear and tear over a long period: at least 20000km.

"Ideally, I'd like to see Dekra take action to find out how the examiner passed the car in the first place," said Van der Heever. "How many other cars in similar condition have been passed by that examiner?"

Van der Heever said Hoffmann had unfortunately bought a lemon and that she should have opted for a full technical inspection, or taken the car to an authorised dealer for checking, before buying it.

"A roadworthy test is a minimum legal requirement to put a car on the road and should not be used as a measure of a good car to buy," he said.

Schutte dismissed Van Der Heever's comments on Hoffmann's test, saying he was not a qualified vehicle examiner, nor did he inspect vehicles daily.

Philip Purnell, head of public affairs at AA, said because it had only just become aware of Hoffmann's complaint, it was unable to comment on the details. "Our experience with Dekra is that customers are generally happy with the service they receive and that this specific complaint is a rare occurrence."

Hoffmann, who paid R435 for a test she trusted, said she felt cheated. "Simply put, Dekra did not deliver the service it was paid for," she said. "Although it partly rectified the problem, I don't believe it's enough. Not only were lives put at risk, but I have suffered a considerable financial loss as a direct result of its incompetence and negligence. It's a sad day when a large international corporation gets away with placing the small man on the street in such a position."

sub_head_start Contact Megan Power sub_head_end

E-mail: consumer@sundaytimes.co.za

Follow Megan on Twitter: @Power_Report

Tune in to PowerFM 98.7's 'Power Breakfast' (DStv audio channel 889) at 8.50am on Monday to hear more from Megan

Please note: Other than in exceptional circumstances, readers sending me complaints must be willing to be identified and photographed.