General query concerning VW Polo recalls

[RUM4MO]

Veteran,

Remember that it was you that first reported to have been requested by VW UK to attend your local VW dealership to get this towing hook swopped over officially, now even if this was an error by VW UK, then I'd think that because you were contacted by either VW UK directly back then, or by your supplying VW dealership, to take your Polo in to them, if you had done this back then, either VW UK would have then deleted your car from that official safety recall because they had officially swopped towing hooks, or deleted it from that recall because they had worked out that your car's towing hook was in fact okay - and that would have stopped this comment appearing on your latest MOT.

Edit:- when all said and done, I'd still consider that VW's records are more or closer to being correct than any 3rd party organisation as VW would be the original source for this recall.

[SRGTD]

Edit:- when all said and done, I'd still consider that VW's records are more or closer to being correct than any 3rd party organisation as VW would be the original source for this recall.

Agree.

I seem to remember that the rear seat belt buckle recall related to early next generation (current shape) Polos rather than the 6c Polo; quite a few posts at the time relating to this recall on the AW/BZ forum board, but I can’t recall seeing any on this (6R / 6C) forum board.

So third party information sources perhaps need to be treated with a degree of caution

[veteran]

" ...if you had done this back then, either VW UK would have then deleted your car from that official safety recall because they had officially swopped towing hooks, or deleted it from that recall because they had worked out that your car's towing hook was in fact okay".

I'm afraid you've misunderstood the history of this. The letter, which I got in about the first few months of 2018, came from Volkswagen UK. In it, they briefly described the issue and included a picture of the offending toolkit accessory, the tow-eye. The device was manufactured from two pieces of steel - a barrel with a necessarily coarse thread on one end and a welded-on 'eye' on the other. The letter started with:

"Volkswagen AG has established that on affected vehicles of a limited production period an incorrectly welded towing eye has been included in the vehicle tool kit".

At the time - remember, this was back in early 2018, about 5 months after I'd first taken delivery of the vehicle - I did precisely what the letter recommended and I took the tow-eye along to what was then my local VW dealership. Their tech person there asked me for the vehicle's VIN no. which I duly gave him. As the guy began to input the VIN no. he murmured that they'd have to have the car for a few days, and would I therefore just leave it parked outside for collection by them! I was flabbergasted by that, as this was a tool accessory issue and all that was needed was a straight hand-to-hand swap of the old one - presumed to be faulty - with a replacement one. Nothing needed to be done to the vehicle itself.

I objected to the idea of them relieving me of my car, especially as I lived miles away and they weren't offering any sort of courtesy car. I argued that them taking custody of my car was completely unnecessary. I think they may have had some other agenda on their minds. But the tech guy, sitting at his laptop, insisted that they wouldn't give me a replacement tow-eye unless they took charge of my car for a few days. My response to them was "In your dreams, mate. The car belongs to me and stays with me." The guy then halted the inputting of my VIN no. They wouldn't tell me why they needed to keep the car. They wouldn't relent over this, and so I just left the dealership and came home.

So you see, I did do the correct thing. But typical of that dealer's attitude and questionable practises, they refused to do the swap.

Do note that, in VW's letter, it was emphasised that this particular manufacturing fault "affected vehicles of a limited production period". This seems to fit with a number of recall sites on the Web where they give a common 'start' VIN no. and 'end' VIN no. for this particular VW Polo recall. That range doesn't include mine.

[RUM4MO]

I fully understand that this was not treated very sensibly by your local VW dealership - what their true reasoning was I can't say, but it sounds a lot like VW UK were instructing all their dealerships to get the possibly affected cars checked in > then check the towing eye > then if necessary order up a replacement towing eye > then swop them over > then hand the car back to the customer.

That would explain why each car needed to be booked in for a couple of days as the FOC replacement towing eyes sounded like they were being supplied only if and when required - which you could sort of understand as only a set number of extra towing eyes would be getting made available by VW AG to VW UK.

Truly a monumentally dumb way to sort out a possible issue, but as it was the subject of a safety recall, clearly defined procedures needed to be followed.

I'd expect, if your had been subject to the rear seat belt linkage issue that plagued the next version of Polo, which again was a safety recall issue, then all cars with that issue would need to be booked in to get checked over, handed back, and then re-booked for swopping of fittings, so again a time wasting issue.

Either way I would also have been extremely annoyed about how this towing eye issue was being handled, but I'd only have myself to blame if I had not used the defined pathway to get it resolved as this issue will stick with your car for its entire life - or until it gets resolved in the way that VW UK said to MOT it would be.

[veteran]

Yes, dumb indeed. When you go along to your VW dealer and order in a spare part for a job you plan to do on the car, you don't have to leave the car with them for two or three days, do you? So, why would you for this? Especially as this is an accessory, not an integral part of the vehicle. No, instead when you order a spare part and it's not in stock, the dealer simply takes your payment for it and places an order with the distributor. Then, when the dealer gets delivery of the part, you get a phonecall to say it's ready to pick up. Why should this be any different? Okay, if it's because of a completely different recall issue requiring a degree of dismantling of the vehicle to put right, then clearly the vehicle would have to be left with them until the recall was fixed. But even then, surely it'd make far more sense to book a date and time for the starting of the job and to ask the vehicle owner to bring the car in 'on appointment'. Indeed, in the case of that particular dealership, parking space for customers' cars has always been very limited, and on most occasions vehicles due for jobs are crammed on to the dealer's open forecourt. Because of that, I learnt early on that, whenever visiting the dealer for a spare part, to not attempt to park on the dealer's premises anywhere but instead to park several streets away and to walk the rest of the way to their premises.

But in respect of this particular recall, the plain fact of the matter is that, irrespective of whether my own Polo turns out to be included in the affected VIN range, it's still unnecessary for the car to be left with them, especially as it would seriously inconvenience me. The whole thing defies logic, IMO.

[SRGTD]

@veteran; my previous Polo (a 2016 6c GTI) had the towing eye recall. The dealer replaced the towing eye when the car was back with them for its annual service.

I was only aware of the recall when I went back to collect the car after it’d been serviced and the service advisor told me they’d completed the recall work. I don’t know if the dealer a) had a ready stock of replacement towing eyes or b) they’d checked for recalls after I’d booked my car in for its service and ordered one in. Whichever it was (I suspect it was the latter), I didn’t need to make a second trip back to the dealership or leave my car with them for 2-3 days; the original towing eye was replaced while the car was with them for its service.

[RUM4MO]

Oh bother, my last reply has vanished in the ether!

Anyway, the point that I was making was, in response to veteran's last posting was:-
In the first case where you order up parts and pay for them, and they get supplied from the UK warehouse or VW AG in Europe, you have paid for the parts so if you don't return to collect them, it is only your loss.
In the second case, the dealership will have to arrange for the recalled part to be supplied to them FOC and then they "fit" it into the car, return the recalled part and charge VW UK for doing this - there will be a time frame attached to these recall tasks, if they don't get closed down by completion then VW UK will probably cause the dealership some financial grief which they don't need, if the recalled parts are a lot more expensive than a towing eye then the financial grief could be much higher, so no business needs to put up with that.
While you consider that a towing eye is an accessory, I'd consider it be a part of any car that needs to have it in the tool kit.

[veteran]

SRGTD,

No dealership services my Polo; I do it all myself; always have done; makes for an easier life. So, in my case, something such as an annual service has no bearing on whether this item gets exchanged.

RUM4MO,

Just to make it clear: I expressly said "this is not an integral part of the car", 'integral' meaning precisely that - it doesn't form a permanent part of the vehicle's structure; instead, it's a tool you'd store in the boot, in much the same way that the wheel-jack provided with the car is. I don't underestimate its importance, as clearly it might well be needed in the event of a recovery operation following an accident. As for the argument that it's the purchaser's fault if he doesn't bother to collect an ordered item, obviously that's true but is entirely beside the point - you're not required to leave the vehicle with the dealer while the item is on order.