Dear Sir,
Sub: Customer Grievance: TOYOTA FORTUNER bearing registration No HR26BJ 9276, Chasis No MBJ11JV5105018737 and Engine No 1KD6739518 purchased from MGF TOYOTA
I had purchased TOYOTA FORTUNER bearing registration No HR26BJ 9276, Chasis No MBJ11JV5105018737 and Engine No 1KD6739518 from MGF TOYOTA (Capital Vehicles Sales Limited), Gurgaon on 5th May vide invoice no A20110000231.
In the very first month of my purchase I noticed a PULSATING / WOBBLING EFFECT while applying the brakes at high speed. This problem was brought to the notice of dealer MGF TOYOTA (Capital Vehicles Sales Limited) and vehicle was given in the work-shop for attending to this complaint. Post-servicing there was some improvement but the problem again re-surfaced recently.
This week (on 22.11.12) the vehicle again taken to the work-shop of the dealer MGF TOYOTA (Capital Vehicles Sales Limited) and to my surprise I was told that the front brake discs need to be turned/ skimmed.
This has come to me as a surprise as my vehicle is single owner driven, immaculately maintained and has done little over 16000 Km only. During such a short period of running necessity for turning/skimming of brake discs should not have happened. In any case, if this is necessary then definitely this is a MANUFACTURING DEFECT, which must have been noticed in the first instance itself when the vehicle was taken to the workshop with the same complaint in the first month of the purchase, but the fact was suppressed. I’ll not be surprised if after turning/skimming, I’ll be told that now the brake shoe needs replacement.
I did not endorse the “trial and error” approach for remedy of this problem and definitely not at the cost of turning/skimming of original brake discs. Instead, I would like this problem to be properly investigated by technically competent person and proper remedy provided under WARRANTY.
On 3.12.12, MGF Toyota, Gurgaon temporarily attended to the problem in brakes by skimming of the brake discs. My concern still remains as to why this had to happen 'twice' within 17000 Km of running. Moreover this problem was first reported within one month of vehicle purchase and was temporarily resolved to resurface again after one year. This therefore doesnot give me full comfort and in my considered opinion this is definitely leading me to believe that it is a product 'manufacturing defect'. I'm sure pitting-falling on disc would have had its impact on the surface of the brake shoe. I'll therefore not be surprised if next time there will be issue related to brake shoe as disc-shoe work in combination.
I had therefore requested for replacement for brake disc and shoe assembly under warranty as a permanent resolution of the complaint.
However in the last three weeks I have not heard anything from the company inspite of my repeated follow-ups.
In absence of satisfactory service, I’m forced to escalate this complaint at your level and hope to get a proper remedy/solution.
Best Regards
Sanjeev Kumar
(M) 91 9818989724
E-mail: [email protected]
0 comments