A warning showed up on the dash of Scott Hardy's Corolla an hour after he drove it off the lot at 2 cheap cars. Photo / Supplied
A warning showed up on the dash of Scott Hardy's Corolla an hour after he drove it off the lot at 2 cheap cars. Photo / Supplied
Within an hour of driving his car off the lot, a warning light came on in Scott Hardy’s new Toyota Corolla telling him there was a problem with its hybrid battery.
What followed was an eight-month saga where 2 Cheap Cars claimed to have either replaced cells in the battery or replaced it entirely, something a third-party specialist said wasn’t the case.
When the battery warning light came on after buying the car in December last year Hardy called 2 Cheap Cars immediately and requested a refund but the company insisted on fixing the car. Two weeks later they returned it to him claiming they’d replaced several of the cells in the faulty battery.
The car was still behaving erratically so Hardy took it to a battery specialist, who found that no cells had been replaced and mechanics at the dealership had merely swapped them around and then cleared the error code.
Within a month the battery failed again so Hardy took the car back to the dealer who again fixed the car and told him they had replaced the entire battery with a refurbished one from the supplier.
Except they hadn’t.
Once again, Hardy took the car back to a battery specialist who found that mechanics at 2 Cheap Cars had replaced only a single cell of the existing battery rather than the entire unit.
Hardy then took the dealer to the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal earlier this year seeking a full refund of $12,000, after becoming fed up with the constant errors with the vehicle as well as the company’s handling of the situation.
“I bought it thinking this is the most reliable car you can buy, only for it to go to the dogs within half an hour,” Hardy told NZME.
“If you buy something and it fails within 30 minutes I think a business should go above and beyond to help rectify the situation.”
A warning showed up on the dash of Scott Hardy's Corolla an hour after he drove it off the lot. Photo / Supplied.
After the battery first failed 2 Cheap Claimed they had replaced several of its cells and wrote a job sheet to confirm it. Instead, they moved inner cells to the outside and cleared the error code in the vehicle. Photo / Supplied.
According to the tribunal ruling Hardy was not initially supplied with a job sheet after the first claimed replacement of the battery’s cells, instead, he was only given a diagnostic report stating the error codes had been cleared.
With his car still driving poorly Hardy took it to The Battery Clinic who confirmed that 2 Cheap Cars had simply rearranged the cells, with the inner-most ones having been moved to the outer edge.
This method is often used to clear the error codes and is a temporary fix if the battery is faulty, with cells at the centre of the battery most prone to failure where it gets the hottest.
A month later a message showed up on the dash stating “Problem with the hybrid system - Stop.”
Hardy again called 2 Cheap Cars where they finally confirmed they had just rearranged the battery cells rather than replace them as they’d told him.
Hardy then tried again to get a refund but was refused and in March of this year collected the car to undertake further repairs. Following this Hardy was sent a mechanic’s report stating that the car’s hybrid battery had been replaced with a refurbished battery from a supplier.
Two weeks later the battery failed again, and once again The Battery Clinic analysed it and found that 2 Cheap Cars had replaced a single cell, rather than the whole battery.
A second job sheet claimed 2 Cheap Cars mechanics had replaced the battery with a refurbished one. In reality, they'd replaced one cell marked in the picture with a blue dot. Photo / Supplied
Despite 2 Cheap Cars twice claiming they’d done repairs when they had not, a Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal adjudicator has stopped short of accusing them of outright lying to Hardy.
“There is... an inconsistency between what it is telling Mr Hardy and what repair is being carried out”, tribunal adjudicator Shaurya Malaviya said in his ruling.
“It is not clear to me whether 2CCL have deliberately set out to mislead Mr Hardy or whether this comes down to poor communication between the repair workshop and customer services team at 2CCL.”
Malaviya said that the dealer had not completed the repairs it had claimed to have done and it had an obligation under the Consumer Guarantees Act to provide a vehicle of acceptable quality.
He ordered that the company refund Hardy the full purchase price of the vehicle of $12,359.
2 Cheap Cars director Michael Stiassny told NZME that in this case the company fell short of its usual standards and apologised to Hardy.
“While the company acted in accordance with the Consumer Guarantees Act by undertaking to repair the vehicle within a reasonable timeframe, the repair was not carried out as described to Mr Hardy,” he said.
“An internal investigation has revealed discrepancies in our systems that enabled the repair to be logged inaccurately, resulting in the work being completed differently than expected. This is unacceptable.”
Stiassny said the company thought the error was an isolated incident but changes were being made to ensure that repairs were completed as promised.
“We accept that in this case we fell short of the standards we expect - and our customers should expect - and apologise unreservedly to Mr Hardy.”
Hardy told NZME he’s back driving an old Volvo and is reluctant to buy another car after his experience.
Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.
