[agurms]

Hello,

Back on the big snow of Dec. my rear door lock was stuck due to the snow and couldn't be open. I went to a private garage to fix it and also asked him to look on the rear wiper as it was not working. I asked him only to check if it was a fuse or a disconnected wire and not to do anything beyond. he said we need to replace a rely and presented it as a very small problem that should take one hour working, after 6 hours ! he fix the rear wiper but when I left the garage Irealised the central locking was not working, he tried to fix this (there was no problem with this when the car was left at the garage) and with the attempts he destroyed the entire electricity of the car so it doesnt start any more. I understand now that he destroyed the ECU of the car.
we asked him to fix the car and after no responses to our letter we sent additional letter from a solicitor which he ignored (refused to take registered mail). we have submitted a small claim of course. I'm now preparing materials to the hearing.
it turned out that after he realised that he destroyed the ECU he tried replace it with used one (with out our permission) but failed.
I undertand that replacing ECU requiers a decoder etc, and also that used ECU might change some data on the car computer such as mileage, service intervals etc.
I'm looking for professional and reliable infromation about that implication of putting used Ecu in renault, I need official information booklet of renault or from any other reliable source.

I want to ask the court not to accept repairing of the car as a solution a) because of the potential implications of installing used (and faulty) ecu and b) because the car has already been undriveable for more than 4 months damage alrady might caused to battery , other parts etc. also the garage pushes the car on a daily basis from in the garage outside as it is not driveable .

so to sum up this post, any supporting infrmation would be much appreciated.

thank you

ps
on the day when the car went to the garage it was in a very good condition: full service history in official renault dealers, including water pump and timing less than 3000 miles before low mileage, etc. the only problem was rear door lock which was mechanical problem and non working rear wiper - this aparently only a small fuse problem.

 

[madnoel10]

As you are loking for evidence to present to the court such evidence will need to be independent and reliable. The test for such in a court of law can be onerous so I suggest you seek legal advice before going to court. In my experience a solicitor would advise you get a written report from an independent qualified engineer who would be prepared to appear in court and back up his findings if necessary. Such a report may not be cheap but if the court finds in your favour then those costs should be recoverable.
A court is very unlikely to accept either hearsay or second hand evidence acceptable.

 

[agurms]

Re: thanks for your reply but

we are beyond that point.
the judge ordered to appoint automotive engineer but he limited it for £200, and the lowest price we have found was £450+ VAT so this option was dropped... the market value of the car was on Januray around £2000 so there was no point to appoint engineer, also there is no dispute now that the car is NOW uneconomic to repair and actually destroyed.
there is also no dispute that we drove the car to the garage but can not start at the moment.
what I argue now is that the garage dealt with things that he should not as he has been ordered by us no to do anything beyond fuse or wire and also he doesnt have the skills to do that, he didnt know what he was doing.
we serviced our car only with official renault dealer and if there was a big problem with the car we would have taken it to a professional garage. he only been asked to check fuse as I couldnt have found the fuse.... he also installed used ECU in the car without permission (we didnt know he destroyed it but he admitted doing that only later).
so I need a general information about the implications of installing used ecu.
I have found the following two links:
http://www.matrasport.dk/Cars/Espace/vault/JE/IMMOBILISER/RENAULT_IMMO_KEY_MEMENTO.pdf

http://www.cardecode.rs/download/Renault decoder.pdf

but they are both not official and therefore I would like to know if I can find information from renault about that.
I'm particularly interested in the information in the gray box in the 2nd page of the first link.
whether this is correct or not.
thanks

 

[madnoel10]

What evidence was produced to say the car was unrepairable or beyond economic repair?

It may be still repairable and the judge needs independent verification to know if that is the case.

Have you contacted your insurers for their opinion or advice?

 

[danthevan]

the ecu doctor is the only ones i'd recommend, and they say they can repair your existing one without losing any data, and without the need for any additional coding once they send it back to you.
If you want an expert, then google for them

 

[agurms]

More details

when the garage realised he brought a working car to a condition that it can not even start he tried to fix it himself, then he admitted he was not able to do that and told me he caused damge to the ECU ( he sacked the technitian that was working on the car and caused this ) . we agreed that he would take the car on his expanse to renault dealer, he found out that this would cost him £1500 approx, the car was then worth about £2000.
so he decided to make more attempts to repair the car by himself and installed by himself with no equipment a used ecu that aparently caused more damage.he never got my permission to try this any more.
I then offered him to take the car to renault, but he ignored my requests and a request from a solicitor. the only thing we were expecting then was to get back the car in the same condition it went into the garage.
in his defence to the court the garage claims that the he can not fix the car and that to take this to official dealer is uneconomic. while back in the winter I accepted a repair by renault (or any other garage that knows what to do) as a solution, I'm asking the court not to accept this as a resolution any more since in the meantime the garage made more attempts to fix the car, and I think they all caused additional damage.
this is the point im looking for this information that is what additional damage could potentially caused by installing used ecu by someone who doesnt know what he was doing.
the car by the way is from Dec. with the garage, can not start.

 

[agurms]

more details. sorry post it in the wrong thread !

details above. sorry posted it twice by mistake.

 

[danthevan]

Re: more details. sorry post it in the wrong thread !

Seeing as the ecu is probably the most fragile part of the car, i doubt much else would be damaged.
Send the original ecu to the ecu doctor and get them to do a report on it. Will cost you £30 for a report, or £120 for a rebuild

 

[madnoel10]

In all honesty Agurms - diagnosing what damage may have been caused cannot be defined by paperwork or a workshop manual.

It could be there is very little or a helluva lot and it would appear that neither you, the court or the garage owner know exactly has ocurred - hence the need for a report.

If the car was taken to a Renault dealer for diagnosis and a written estimate stating what needs replaced and the cost it may be the court would accept such evidence - after all it would be diagnosed by a company who specialises in repairing Renaults.

 

[agurms]

reply to madnoel

1st of all thanks for replying to my posts.
2. I agree with you, if the car was taken, that is what we have agreed with the garage owner but he didnt do that.
3. the garage owner actually admitted in his defence that there is a huge damage to the car at the moment and that is unrepairable . as I'm not interested in repair as a solution at that satage any more , why would I try to show there is only a little damage? if he admits the damage is huge....I would only like to show more potential damage.

 

[madnoel10]

What were you seeking in the original claim when you went to court and what was the judges findings and/or comments.

If the garage concerned were either incapable or unskilled how can they be judged to be competent to say if the car is seriously damaged or not. In fact what technical reasons have been given to substaniate this opinion.

When you go to court seeking damages for repair you can't then change your claim to one for total loss.

If you took the claim it is up to you to establish what is technically wrong - not - the garage owner. In other words you have to prove your case. If the garge owner admitted in court he was totally responsible why did the judge mot make an award.

 

[agurms]

my claim

this is the chronological list of events:
when this happened on Dec. I asked the garage to repair the car , he agreed but didnt do he also lied about contacting renault dealer etc.
after two weeks of chasing him I sent him a letter to which he didnot respond.
then a letter from a solicitor asking him either to repair or to pay the market value of the car. he refused to accept the letter that had been sent by registered mail.
I launched a claim asking compensation= value of the car + compensation, expanses etc.
in his defence the garage wrote:
the car came with problems (didnt say what problems)
he said he tried to repair but failed. he says he tried to install used ecu but failed with that too.
and that the car is beyond repair and uneconomic to repair. He didnt give more details but said he will defence the case on this basis.
the judge ordered to appoint engineer up to £200.
this is unrealistic so we applied the judge who cancelled this order.
now there will be a hearing. we drove the car to the garage so it was working then but no longer so this happened in the garage. I have other evidence that can give a picture of the car's condition back on Dec.
I guess the court will try to find a compromise and offer that the car will be repair . I'm not interested in this any more, beacuse of many reasons . I'm asking if I can claim that installing used ecu while you are not qualified for that, might potentially cause more damage such as to mileage , computer etc. I just want to support my request to not consider a repair as an option any more. I hope this clarify my question?

 

[madnoel10]

The court will not decide on an award for the total value of the car if a repair is still viable - that's why he asked for an engineers report.

In such cases where the damage is not easily recognisable to the human eye a judge will only accept independent evidence.

The garage owner may argue that the costs of repair are not reasonable so you need to argue your case on the true technical reasons and the likely cost of repairs. Obviously a judge would expect to see such evidence in writing or have an opportunity to question the engineer in person - if he/she felt it was warranted.

To make anaolgy. If for instance the garage crashed your car and caused severe bodywork damage. Any claim would have to depend on a written inspection report by a surveyor and a written estimate cost for repairs.

 

[mord]

i'd agree with above, get the (original) UCH and ECU removed and sent off for inspection and quotes for repair.
(this should be under £200 for a detailed inspection and written report)

this should be a lot cheaper than new replacement by a renault dealership.
the UCH(for a 2001-2005 model) is 210+vat+fitting with 10-14day delivery from the factory in france. (such parts are not interchangable due to security features.)

im not sure about ecu replacement costs, usually a lot more than the uch.

a lot of modules on these cars are chassis encoded and cannot be swapped out on the fly. if any of these modules has an incorrect chassis number it wont allow the car to start or function correctly.

(bloody ford mechanics:loser: )


mixing high tech computers and cars together is not a good mix, then letting a neanderthal mechanic loose on that lot is asking for trouble.:devil:

 

[agurms]

thanks for your replies

sorry for not replying earlier due to the Easter.
your advices do make sense BUT, again, since the garage has said the the car us beyond repair and I'm not interested in the car any more then an inspection is no longer necessary.the dispute at the moment is along my claim that the garage owner has lied to me and to the court and I want to show that he touched things that he shouldnt have as he doesnt have the skill , knowledge and tools ?(such as decoder etc.).
but thanks
have a nice short week.

 

[madnoel10]

Was the judge made aware the car was beyond repair. If so why did he ask for an engineers report?

 

[agurms]

good question. I dare to say hasn't read all the details properly....

 

[madnoel10]

When awarding for damages a judge is bound by rules - one being that nether party shoud be unfairly treated or be in a better position than when they started so in order to be fair they usually insist on independent evidence.

If for instance the car could be repaired for £200 he isn't likley to award £2000. He may make a concessionary award for inconvenince and oher losses but that is a separate issue.

Say for instance the garage owner stated the car was beyond economical repair and made full payment to you for the value of the car - for all the judge knows the garage may be working a flanker and may be able to repair the car for very little money or even sell it on for a profit. It's doubtful that would occur in this case but a judge has to be satisfied with the evidence presented before him - no more - no less. If it can be demonstrated that the judge failed to do so then you may have grounds for an appeal.