Should I worry about Honda recalls?

[serendipity]

Hi there

I put a non-refundable deposit for a Honda Vezel at Ubi Automart from Cars & Coffee. 

I read on the LTA One Motoring site that there is a recall for HR-V in effect on June 4, 2020, which says:

Due to incorrect manufacturing of the rear seat belt assembly, the component attached was bent. The vehicle sensor and webbing sensor could be inoperative.

I know Vezel has had issues in the past for the 2016 models and there were recalls of 8% of all of them.

Do you think there is anything to worry about with the new 2019 model that I bought? I will be transporting my baby around and don’t want to take risks.

Thanks

Edited June 21, 2020 by serendipity

[Shoebox]

Vehicle recalls are almost always issues that are of high importance that may affect safety, or reliability.

When you emergency brake, the seat belt should lock up, stopping you and your passengers from leaning forward and hitting the seat in front, or your steering wheel, etc.

The recall says that this lock up safety feature may be faulty on the HRV and Odyssey, and needs to be repaired/replaced.

Actual recall wording from OneMotoring is below as reference.

Spoiler

Due to incorrect manufacturing of the rear seat belt assembly, the component attached to the rear seat belt retractor locking mechanism was bent and interfered with other component parts. The vehicle sensor, which engages during vehicle deceleration, and the webbing sensor, which engages during rapid seat belt extension could become inoperative."

Should you be worried that your seat belt may not work when you need it the most?

If I'm not wrong, Cars & Coffee has their own in-house workshop with warranty, right? They should be able to fix the recall for you if it affects your car.

[1fast1]

I was under the impression that for recalls, the AD is obligated to fix it free even it's a PI car. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

[QQDreamer]

is PI is obligated to fix it. However some PIs they charge for replacement.

[serendipity]

1 hour ago, Shoebox said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Due to incorrect manufacturing of the rear seat belt assembly, the component attached to the rear seat belt retractor locking mechanism was bent and interfered with other component parts. The vehicle sensor, which engages during vehicle deceleration, and the webbing sensor, which engages during rapid seat belt extension could become inoperative."

Should you be worried that your seat belt may not work when you need it the most?

If I'm not wrong, Cars & Coffee has their own in-house workshop with warranty, right? They should be able to fix the recall for you if it affects your car.

Yes they do at Bukit Merah. Looks pretty legitimate. 

[serendipity]

1 hour ago, StreamRSZ said:

is PI is obligated to fix it. However some PIs they charge for replacement.

Thanks for clarifying. But the LTA website just states that the HR-V has a recall. I assume this affects the Vezel too because its made in the same factory?

I just dont know how much to worry. What are ways to mitigate against this risk, now that I put a deposit already?

[Shoebox]

You can check with Honda Japan as the PI Vezel should be made in Japan.

You'll need the chassis number.

http://recallsearch4.honda.co.jp/sqs/r001/R00101.do?fn=link.disp

Bookmark and save this link, create a reminder to check every year, because PIs may not inform you when there's a recall. Then they might charge you to fix it, like what StreamRSZ pointed out.

[Ct3833]

3 hours ago, serendipity said:

Hi there

I put a non-refundable deposit for a Honda Vezel at Ubi Automart from Cars & Coffee. 

I read on the LTA One Motoring site that there is a recall for HR-V in effect on June 4, 2020, which says:

Due to incorrect manufacturing of the rear seat belt assembly, the component attached was bent. The vehicle sensor and webbing sensor could be inoperative.

I know Vezel has had issues in the past for the 2016 models and there were recalls of 8% of all of them.

Do you think there is anything to worry about with the new 2019 model that I bought? I will be transporting my baby around and don’t want to take risks.

Thanks

Vezel has one of the biggest  forum group here , you may want to post there to ask the experience owners, I am sure they will have private group , facebook whatever social media as well. Those will be the best place to ask your question. 

[Zxcvb]

https://paultan.org/2020/06/18/honda-malaysia-recalls-55354-units-over-fuel-pump/

https://www.nst.com.my/business/2020/06/601607/honda-malaysia-recalls-more-55000-vehicles-change-fuel-pump

I'm sadden Honda Malaysia is more pro-active than Honda Singapore in such global recall. No SG mainstream media nor SG automotive journalist reporting this is shocking for a first world country.

[Apple-Tree]

3 hours ago, Turboflat4 said:

I was under the impression that for recalls, the AD is obligated to fix it free even it's a PI car. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Generally not true, no business is transacted.  A car is not a iPhone lor.

The next thing is Vezel and HRV are 2 different product lor.

Lastly Car Manufacturer is clever to segment the market. Example, my previous Carens has a recall in US, and not SG.  Because, the Carens in US is called Rondo.  It is 2 different product lor.  Even the PN suffix is different lor.  My car developed the same failure for clockspring, speed sensor and OCV lor. My PN suffix is 1D000, US is 1D100

[Watwheels]

Go do a search. There are ppl who received notification letter from LTA about their affected vehicle if there happens to be a recall on that model. If you go the PI route be expected to pay for the affected part and labour charges or just labour. What you pay is what you get.

[ToyotaShuttle]

13 hours ago, Turboflat4 said:

I was under the impression that for recalls, the AD is obligated to fix it free even it's a PI car. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Wouldn't that be massively unfair? AD is just a distributor and not the manufacturer. Why should they be obligated to fix something sold by another seller?

[WWbarb]

That's why some ppl pay more to get from AD. Peace of mind is worth that money.

[1fast1]

21 minutes ago, ToyotaShuttle said:

Wouldn't that be massively unfair? AD is just a distributor and not the manufacturer. Why should they be obligated to fix something sold by another seller?

It's part of the contractual obligation the AD undertakes I guess. If someone dies as a failure to rectify a defect for which a recall was in effect, then it's possible (and proper) that the manufacturer is sued. The main company (Honda) may want to shield themselves from this liability so they make the subsidiary they control (the AD) responsibile for rectifying recalls, even for vehicles they haven't sold themselves (but are still affected Hondas).

Of course, like all warranty repairs, financial restitution should come from the parent company, just like for any other warranty repair. So I don't see how this is massively unfair if implemented properly.

The bottom line is this: if the manufacturer feels they don't want this extra headache, they should do a better job of quashing PI exports to us. Remember, new car PI exportation to Singapore is done *legally* by authorised dealers in other countries. Honda can just blacklist them and solve the problem at the source. But I think they like the extra revenue stream. Which means they must also assume the responsibility. 

Edited June 22, 2020 by Turboflat4

[Atrecord]

5 hours ago, Turboflat4 said:

It's part of the contractual obligation the AD undertakes I guess. If someone dies as a failure to rectify a defect for which a recall was in effect, then it's possible (and proper) that the manufacturer is sued. The main company (Honda) may want to shield themselves from this liability so they make the subsidiary they control (the AD) responsibile for rectifying recalls, even for vehicles they haven't sold themselves (but are still affected Hondas).

Of course, like all warranty repairs, financial restitution should come from the parent company, just like for any other warranty repair. So I don't see how this is massively unfair if implemented properly.

The bottom line is this: if the manufacturer feels they don't want this extra headache, they should do a better job of quashing PI exports to us. Remember, new car PI exportation to Singapore is done *legally* by authorised dealers in other countries. Honda can just blacklist them and solve the problem at the source. But I think they like the extra revenue stream. Which means they must also assume the responsibility. 

I owned a PI Wish for ~13 yr before we replaced it.

Never had any problem with the PI - there were few issues with the car - until around the 11/12 yr.

background: our 1st Gen FL Wish was YM06. Borneo finally woke up and brought in 2nd Gen Wish from 08 onwards.

When the global Takata airbag scandal broke, Toyota announced recalls around 2017. Wish was involved, so i did some checks. One of them was to call the PI. 

The PI - a quite reputable one - asked some details when i called. When he realised my car was >10 yr old, he said oh, they will arrange recall only for cars <10 yr old, so my car was not covered. I was speechless.

Separately i also called LTA, who checked and told me my car was not in the list to be recalled. I mentioned the PI's reply, and LTA said that's wrong. As long as car remains on the road, the original seller is responsible for the recall. Now there is one problem though: LTA said they can pressure the PIs to comply, but they cannot force the PI to foot the bill, so if PI wanna charge the customer, it's their perogative and LTA can't stop them!!!

I also independently emailed Toyota global website set up for the recall, simultaneously, to ask.

Within one day, Borneo called me and said it was reference to my inquiry! I was impressed. The lady said they will help me to check, but will need a few days. What was not so impressive was that after that impressive initial response, i had to call them maybe after a week to follow up. Only then did they also say my car was not involved.

So it's clear that the car manufacturer will pressure the local AD to take care of critical recalls, if the PIs act blur. But again, i'm not sure if there will be charges, and i didn't ask. I suspect there is a chance that if my car was involved, BM might do it FOC, and then claim back from Toyota, just like they would for BM's own affected vehicles. If they were to charge the owners, and owners made noise to Toyota, it's also no good for them.

[1fast1]

9 minutes ago, Atrecord said:

I owned a PI Wish for ~13 yr before we replaced it.

Never had any problem with the PI - there were few issues with the car - until around the 11/12 yr.

background: our 1st Gen FL Wish was YM06. Borneo finally woke up and brought in 2nd Gen Wish from 08 onwards.

When the global Takata airbag scandal broke, Toyota announced recalls around 2017. Wish was involved, so i did some checks. One of them was to call the PI. 

The PI - a quite reputable one - asked some details when i called. When he realised my car was >10 yr old, he said oh, they will arrange recall only for cars <10 yr old, so my car was not covered. I was speechless.

Separately i also called LTA, who checked and told me my car was not in the list to be recalled. I mentioned the PI's reply, and LTA said that's wrong. As long as car remains on the road, the original seller is responsible for the recall. Now there is one problem though: LTA said they can pressure the PIs to comply, but they cannot force the PI to foot the bill, so if PI wanna charge the customer, it's their perogative and LTA can't stop them!!!

I also independently emailed Toyota global website set up for the recall, simultaneously, to ask.

Within one day, Borneo called me and said it was reference to my inquiry! I was impressed. The lady said they will help me to check, but will need a few days. What was not so impressive was that after that impressive initial response, i had to call them maybe after a week to follow up. Only then did they also say my car was not involved.

So it's clear that the car manufacturer will pressure the local AD to take care of critical recalls, if the PIs act blur. But again, i'm not sure if there will be charges, and i didn't ask. I suspect there is a chance that if my car was involved, BM might do it FOC, and then claim back from Toyota, just like they would for BM's own affected vehicles. If they were to charge the owners, and owners made noise to Toyota, it's also no good for them.

Thanks for the account. Yes, you generally cannot rely on PIs who, even when they're not fly-by-night conmen, have razor thin margins. 

The AD is generally strong armed into covering this sort of thing by the parent company. But you have to bang table virtually to the parent company first and embarrass the local AD a bit. 

Oh, and the gahmen agencies are basically good for nothing.

[Yewheng]

41 minutes ago, Turboflat4 said:

Thanks for the account. Yes, you generally cannot rely on PIs who, even when they're not fly-by-night conmen, have razor thin margins. 

The AD is generally strong armed into covering this sort of thing by the parent company. But you have to bang table virtually to the parent company first and embarrass the local AD a bit. 

Oh, and the gahmen agencies are basically good for nothing.

That is why there is AD ma.. So depends on individual. Want peace of mind go for AD lor. 

[Atrecord]

1 hour ago, Turboflat4 said:

Thanks for the account. Yes, you generally cannot rely on PIs who, even when they're not fly-by-night conmen, have razor thin margins. 

The AD is generally strong armed into covering this sort of thing by the parent company. But you have to bang table virtually to the parent company first and embarrass the local AD a bit. 

Oh, and the gahmen agencies are basically good for nothing.

right on all counts.

i don't think the PI has really thin margins. In fact, when i bought the car, i was told (not by them) that they sold many Wish that month. And they have been around for decades, was some chairman of some dunno what bodies either with AML or the PIs...

But i think all car dealers were hit badly from after we bought the car in 06, when the abundance of COE meant COEs were cheap and more importantly, there were more businesses to be spread around in the whole industry. Then in the later years when govt reduced no. of COEs, many car deals were hit hard - and obviously the PIs with less financial muscles, were worse off. That spelt the end of many a PIs, with only the fitter/fittest one surviving...