i have listened to this argument for a while now and just thought people might
like to no this isnt isolated. peugeot suffer this, citroens too. pug 405's were well known for it altho this was because the bonnet pull didnt return properly. citroens suffer it too as the psa group use common parts. it is to some degree
poor maintenance, especially as alot of people dont get there cars serviced at dealers, partly because dealers scrimp on servicing too. its a 6 of one , half dozen of another i think
I do concur that this is an industry wide phenonoman and thus, not soley down to Renault as a manufacture not the Clio Mark-2 as a model / make affected.
However, you will find that other manufactures have taken a different tone when a common occurrence of these bonnet catch failures has occurred. Some opted to Recall the vehicles (Alfa Romeo) and others quickly included this in the maintenance programme of the servicing of the vehicles affected or across the board.
Renault decided to opt for the head-in-the-sand approach, and felt that if they try to fob the "1 or 2" cases as they materialised (they used the words "unique" when I reported it to their head office!), they would be able to get away from an expensive recall or notification exercise. I think it is easy to say that they got caught out by this - and the media attention to their attitude and inaction to deal with root-cause!
But the problem is that they were sooooo down the line, they couldn't do anything because either way they would get caught out...if they admitted the fault, the liability shift back to the manufacturer would be huge, the repair costs, the insurance companies would be at their door, and their customers would be suing them left, right and centre. So they tried the hard line of still pretenting it is nothing to do with them. After all, it's not them that actually designed and build the car is it? Also, decide who actually benefits from their hard-line - do we, as "customers"??? Is "Safety" their top priority...Hmmm....
It's an interesting stance, because most companies are trying to protect their brand, their committment to safety and their appreciation for the customer's business. THREE values which Renault decided against protecting. Several people I know off were long-time (family) customers of Renault - in fact we have had Renaults for over 12 years - about 6-7 vehicles in the family. It is very easy to reduce this long-term custom to nothing. It means nothing, and Renault don't seem to care!
Right so what is the issue I hear you ask?
Well actually yes it is to do with maintenance, but this is only one small cause. It is hard to stick the line of maintenance without really understanding the background. What Renault are trying to do with their marketing campaign is to stay on the line of maintenance as hard as they can - and this is what the responses message to the media that Renault have sent out! What they forgot to state is that the parts in questions were designed and manufactured to be "maintenance-free". So I think this statement alone draws the line in the sand - indicating that it is a design and manufacturing defect - if the parts now being questioned is not fit for purpose or designed for to its original expectations! THis is why there was no mention of maintaining these catches anywhere in the handbook, servicing programme etc. - and it is NOTHING to do with WHERE you get your car serviced. It is still down to the manufacture to design and ensure the parts withstand normal road usage. We have had quotes from Renault about "it's where you live", the "catches weren't designed to withstand speeds exceeding 40mph" - yep hard to believe that the customer service teams used these...
In short, the very FACT that they have been COERCED to send notification TWICE to all Renault Clio Mark-2 owners meaning that the industry does not accept that Renault's attitude was right nor fair to their customers. It is our lives that they are playing with!
The issues aren't going away, the incidents started prior to April 2006 (when it first got coverage in the media) - mine happened a few weeks before BBC Watchdog's airing in April, and the incidents continue to happen up to this day (last few incidents occurred in March 2009!). So whatever Renault are doing still is no solving the root-cause. It is simply sticking a bandaid over a wound - and the wound is not getting healed.
The only bodies that have the power to ensure redress formally and efficiently is VOSA and the SMMT - but neither feel it is their responsibility and brushed the matter back to the manufacture - if I were the manufacture, that is simply as saying "there is no problem guv'". Guess what Renault opted to, yep the one and the same attitude and VOSA and SMMT let them get away with it. They have blood on their hands, all of them!
Sorry, but as you can see, I am still far from happy about the injustice of this all...and that's coming from someone who managed to get Renault UK to cough-up - that's £2700 of repairs that they paid. Multiple this across hundreds of not thousands of cases - and GLOBALLY - and that's a bit of liability sum that Renault should have been responsible for covering.