Warrantee Claim Refused - 3 Year/100 000km

Attention Mr Mokhethi Monareng (Barloworld Ford Tygervalley – dealer Principal)

Regarding : Reason for the warranty claim rejection - Fuel contamination

Copy: Sue-Anne (Barloworld Ford Tygervalley – Serve Manager),

Dear Mr Mokhethi,

I see your efforts over the last 6 months, as well as that of Barloworld Ford and Ford motor company, to try and proof “contaminated fuel” as the cause of the failure of Ford Ranger engine, as an attempt to shift your responsibility to make good under your warranty. Something that I cannot accept after I have done everything reasonably acceptable as a consumer of a Ford Ranger Bakkie ( 2,2 Diesel Double Cab - 87000kms, 30 months old) under FORD Warrantee.

I have now at my own costs both; • engaged with the fuel station you are trying to implicate, Engene 1Stop Mosselbay, where I had last fuelled the Ford Ranger with Diesel, • and had your own Fuel test examined for an independent opinion by a lab of PETRO SA;

They found the following;

1. As for Engene 1Stop Mosselbay, where I filled up the day the Ford Ranger had an engine failure - it was extremely busy day as they sold more than 20,000 litres of 50ppm Diesel on same day and had no other customer complained re same 50ppm Diesel. Safe to say that your claim that my Ford Ranger was the only vehicle filled up out of hundreds of vehicles that day, that contracted “contaminated fuel” is highly unlikely and misleading.

2. The independent Lab took a look at the 1 pager report from Wear Check Laboratory (26-01-2020) appointed by yourself and found it conflicting in 2 areas: • Visual Test – they noted, “Light concentration of visible debris”..? • Total Contamination Test (IP 440) reflects a value of 9.1 mg/kg, this is well below the SANS 342 specification for Diesel of up to 24mg/kg and therefore passed your test..?

They failed to see how you can claim to see visual debris but pass the Total Contamination Test..? How did this visual debris pass through fuel filter you supp**** the Ford Ranger with in any event..? The same fuel filter that you claim was replaced in a service less that 6000kms ago…?

By Regulatory standard, the “referee test” on a fuel sample for contamination is “the Total Contamination” (IP 440 Test Method), which clearly passed.

In short, by your own test it is clear that the diesel suppled was good and the filter residue on filter paper (Photo), next to the distillation graph (right hand side) is from the Total Contamination Test, up to 24mg/kg fuel is allowed so regulation has no problem there. In our opinion, Barloworld Ford and Ford Motor Company is playing for time ( now 6 months later). Therefore I will challenge any further delay in the repair of the damage under warrantee by Barloworld Ford and Ford Warrantee in the legal system.

Please escalate the matter on your side urgently to the highest authority.

In the meantime, as discussed last Thursday, I will follow legal advice in parallel to consulting consumer protection agencies and the media for direction until such time that I have better cooperation from your dealership in substantiating this claim.