Warning About Used Approved Rx400H From The Reading, Berks. Dealershi

[simon_caversham]

After an absolute nightmare of back and forth between the Lexus dealer in Reading, Berkshire and an autoglass repair company to find the cause of a heavily leaking windscreen on our used approved RX400h, we've now ascertained the cause of the issue and wanted to warn others thinking about buying a used approved Lexus, or who currently own one.

After the glass was removed by the autoglass company, we were able to see no primer was used on on the front windscreen and there were large patches were no adhesive was therefore able to cling to. Further, it was all Flexitrim that was used, not factory trim.

In summary we and the glass fitter were horrified. 30% of the structural integrity had essentially been removed from the vehicle and we have been warned, should the airbags have been deployed the glass would have flown out. Needless to say, this was also the cause of the leak.

Could an emergency stop have killed a pedestrian? Why doesn't Lexus fully check the windscreens that they sell as approved?

We are awaiting a response from the dealership.

[ChrisIS200SportTTE]

To be fair don't you think this is an isolated incident? I'm a member of 3 Lexus forums and this is the 1st I've heard of windscreens not being put in correctly. There are many topics about leaky windscreens with all Lexus models that have had a windscreen change but none I can find where the windscreen was dangerously fitted. I may be wrong, RX owners please correct me if this is a common problem on your model.

I'm not condoning it but it sounds like a genuine mistake. Yes it should have been checked more thoroughly but It's not as if Lexus removed the windscreen then didn't put it back right... Is it?? Please correct me if this is what happened. Need more details. Did Lexus change the windscreen or was it a previous owner that did a bodge job or was it like this from new?

[simon_caversham]

To be fair don't you think this is an isolated incident...

Regardless Chris, it's one of the most important safety features for any vehicle.

It's been a nightmare for us dealing with Lexus and it speaks volumes about, "Used Approved" as a service.

The dealer had the car and tested the windscreen twice, sending us away for the second time assuring us it was a seal replacement that was needed and we were outside the warranty period, (We've had the vehicle over 12 months).

We paid a considerable sum for a luxury brand with the misguided belief that we would have a used vehicle that was SAFE, ("Used Approved" appears to be nothing more than marketing blurb). I have a three year old daughter.... safety is paramount.

We were potentially putting our lives in danger and the lives of others as Lexus failed to check the windscreen. It's one of the most critical parts of vehicle integrity and essential to safety during a crash or rollover... so why aren't Lexus testing this as part of the, "Used Approved" assurance? What are you paying for with, "Used Approved"?

[ChrisIS200SportTTE]

I understand your anger and frustration. I would be exactly the same.

It seems that lexus Reading are not living up to the famous Lexus customer service. From what you've said I would expect the dealership to fix everything (properly) for free this time. I've used 5 Lexus Dealerships in the UK and the standard of service does vary between them. I found Bristol to be the best, they can't do enough for you, yet just up the road at Swindon it's a completely different matter! If the dealership are still being awkward I would get on the phone to Lexus UK and tell them everything in its entirety and send them evidence such as correspondence between you and the dealership and the report from the auto windscreen people. You might be surprised with the response by going over the dealers head.

Hope you sort everything but I guess you are turned against Lexus as I was turned against Mercedes Benz after some shocking customer service.

[matt-c]

As a windscreen fitter of 8 years, and having done loads of work for dealerships, I can tell you it is an isolated incident. There is no way a dealership can quality control what another company does - if they could they would do the windscreen fitting themselves. The problem here, which I've seen before, is down to the individual fitter that did the job, not the dealership. The problem arises though that the customer thinks the problem lies with the dealership, when in fact it lies with the windscreen fitting company, and the next problem is that the customer doesn't have a "contract" with the windscreen company - the dealership does (the dealership will have a warranty supplied to them by the fitter, unless they've foolishly "done it on the cheap" and paid for a cash job with no comebacks - unlikely, but wouldn't be the first time I've seen it)

So, what needs to be done is a reputable windscreen company diagnoses and qualifies the problem, with proof, then the dealership takes it up with the company they had do the work.

In regard to trims, it's something I hear time and time again. Very VERY few cars ever receive a dealer part trim when having a windscreen replacement. They are nearly always pattern part trims, and most of the time indistinguishable from a dealer part trim. Of course, this is different to a "flexitrim" - flextrim is just universal trim off the roll. Sometimes it's entirely necessary to use this type of trim (for example, an Austin Maestro has one of the worst fitting trims ever, but spend a bit of time with universal trim and mitre the corners you get a perfect fit that looks ten times better than the standard trim. Likewise, the Ford Galaxy / Seat Alhambra / VW Sharan has a top trim that usually looks rubbish - flexitrim looks much much better, and fits on the glass nicer) and it's also needed on older cars that trims aren't available on anymore.

I personally wouldn't, and haven't needed to, use universal or flexitrim on an Lexus or Toyota in the past, so unless the fitter didn't have a trim available at time of fitting for whatever reason, it should have had one.

On the topic of safety, I've fitted screens to cars before that haven't had any primer at all applied to any point of the car or screen, and a couple of those I've been able to literally lift the screen out of them without needing to cut them out. THOSE screens are scary. But those are extreme, and rare cases, where there's been no primer used at all, and the surface hasn't been cleaned properly - a number of factors that all contribute to a severely dangerously "fitted" screen. But they are few and far between. The glue we use in the trade is always evolving, and it's pretty good stuff, even without primer. Again, personally, I wouldn't fit a screen without primering it first, but provided the surface has been cleaned well enough, and the aperture in the car is clean, there will usually be enough adhesion to be "safe enough". Granted, this isn't much consolation to the OP, and I'd be as furious as he is; it is true the screen counts as much as up to 30% in some cars (it's not an automatic 30% for all cars, bear in mind), but I have seen screens fitted that have been in cars for years without primer and they've still been fine.

As for Lexus, or any other manufacturer/dealership "testing" the quality of windscreen fitting into used cars they sell, it's nigh on impossible for them to do so - as said, if they had the means to, then they would be doing the replacements themselves. They have to rely on the integrity and professionalism of the company they have do the work for them. The only thing they can test is if it leaks or not. If it doesn't, there is no visual clues they can see to suggest it has or hasn't been fitted correctly. If it does then they should indeed have a different company undertake removing it, finding out why, and replacing it correctly.

It's the same as if you have a gas engineer come and work on your boiler. You know nothing about boilers, so you cannot possibly comment on whether the work has been done properly. Maybe if you take the front panel off and find the wires have all been cut and joined with sellotape and sticky gum, then maybe you can see something is up, but you don't have the experience to give a qualified diagnosis. Even as a windscreen fitter, there can be a number of things that can be "wrong" with a windscreen that are impossible to see/discover without actually removing the screen completely - and even then it can be hard to spot the actual culprit.

Back to resolving the issue, if the screen was replaced before Lexus took "ownership" of the vehicle, there is really nothing they can do about it. Autoglass give the longest warranties for their fitting; they give a lifetime warranty on all fitted glass (and on stone chip repairs too). However, the warranty only applies to the person who owns it at the time - as soon as the car is sold the warranty ceases. If Lexus had the work done, the warranty would cease when the OP bought the car. I've seen it time and time before - one poor woman ended up having to pay me, when I worked at Autoglass, £422 for a new screen in her 307 she bought used from a Peugeot dealership after it leaked. I did my absolute best to save the screen she had in it, in the hope I could reuse it, but it cracked coming out. Because the screen was fitted prior to the dealer taking the car in, they don't have a warranty on it, the original owner was long gone (and even if he was contactable, the warranty ceased when he handed the vehicle over to Peugeot anyway) and because the lady had informed her insurance company the reason she was having it changed was because of leaking, and not damage, the insurance refused to pay for it also. I managed to get the price dropped by about £80, but she still had a hefty bill.

While you might think, and I might too, that the dealership has a moral obligation to sort this out, and pay for it, they really don't, and the problem is, no one wants to pay out when they don't have to, or can get away with not paying out. Which is why it's so hard to get money from dealerships and insurance companies; who are both professionals at not paying for things! If there isn't a legal obligation, then it can be almost impossible to get an insurance company or a dealership to pay for something they can otherwise get out of paying for...

[simon_caversham]

I understand your anger and frustration. I would be exactly the same.

Thanks Chris, yes, totally turned off Lexus now.

As a windscreen fitter of 8 years, and having done loads of work for dealerships, I can tell you it is an isolated incident....

Matt, really appreciate the in-depth and informed post. "literally lift the screen out of them without needing to cut them out. THOSE screens are scary" - Yes, that was what happened and the fitter was visibly unnerved, (He called all his colleagues in to look at it as well and we took video evidence, (Not pursuing action against Lexus yet, but reserving that right if the dealer maintains the silence they've currently got)).

Given the safety risk Matt, do you not think it worthy for me to campaign to get Lexus to at least check the windscreen against the same force of an airbag deployment, (Surely this could be checked)? Just to confirm the glass is properly in place? Do you not feel that even if this is an isolated and rare instance we should campaign to preserve the safety of even a single life before the financial betterment of a dealership? If it had been your daughter/son/family member riding around in a car with that level of danger?

Consumers trust, "Used Approved" means that all reasonable safety checks have been made, they haven't.

[matt-c]

Problem is, pressure testing a screen, even to airbag level, is like crack testing a bicycle helmet - once you've done it, you're gonna want to change the screen anyway! There's a massively high chance the screen will crack anyway, but even if it doesn't, you're going to be driving around thinking that all the components (glue etc) have been subjected to forces they don't usually get subjected to, even though they are designed to withstand, and will then be thinking that you should now get it changed so nothing is stressed - in the event of an accident and your airbags go off and the screen is ripped out, you'll be thinking "would that have happened if it hadn't been tested, and thus subjected to higher than normal stresses, before I bought it. The legal ramifications of that could be crippling, so no company will do it.

But as said, being able to lift a screen out, that should have been bonded in, is a very isolated situation. I've come across it twice in 8 years (and god knows how many thousands of screens I've changed) - one was a Renault Clio, and was the one that lifted out, and the other was an Escort that wasn't quite as bad, as the glue was holding it in three corners. But the top, both sides and bottom were not bonded securely. One other was an old Merc (190E) that was boned in all the way round, except the bond on the bottom hadn't adhered properly. I had to cut the top and sides, but the bottom lifted out. Partial non-adhesion isn't THAT uncommon, but still vastly outweighed by complete adhesion, with complete no adhesion being a very very tiny % of screens fitted.

[simon_caversham]

Problem is, pressure testing a screen...

Agreed, I did a bit more research and there is an off-the-shelf inexpensive tool, an ultrasonic tester which finds air, dust and water leaks around windscreens, door seals and boot lids. All that's needed from Lexus is the desire to protect consumers by using it!

[matt-c]

Trust me, if they were the be all and end all, we'd have been using them long ago. As I said, they only way to tell for sure, is to physically remove the screen, or compromise it in such a way it would need replacing anyway. I've worked for the biggest names in automotive glazing; companies that have VERY deep pockets, and very good R&D departments. And time and time again, gizmo's have been proven unreliable, or plain useless. We had some very expensive kit for detecting and pin-pointing water ingress around windscreens. Only trouble was the cars it found it on, most of the time, weren't leakers and didn't need the screens replacing, and cars that did, it reported as clean. Useful!

[simon_caversham]

We had some very expensive kit for detecting and pin-pointing water ingress around windscreens.

I wish Lexus in Reading did, useless or not. We had soaking wet carpets, I think that shows how they currently, "Test" windscreens to find the ingress.

Knowing as you do Matt the impact on safety of, "THOSE" scary screens, I have to pursue an answer. It's simply not good enough to be ignored by Lexus. If nothing else, then the Lexus promise, as it appears in their warranty to me as a consumer of Window glass being in good condition, needs to be dismissed as a falsehood, if as you say Matt, aspects of that condition, it's very integrity can't be checked. Consumers deserve the full picture on safety when buying, "Used Approved" where the guarantee is, " We carefully inspect the car's overall condition - outside, inside and underneath".

The truth we are arriving at together so far is that your no better off with, "Used Approved" Lexus than "Del Boys Trading" when it comes to essentials for safety and specifically structural integrity in the event of a crash or roll.

[matt-c]

I understand your frustration - id probably e as frustrated as you. However asking a company to do something try actually can't, and then declaring them con artists because of it is a bit much.

What if you bought the car and a tyre blew out? Is it Lexus' fault, even tho the tyres are made by Dunlop? Lexus can only visually check the tyres (just as try can only visually check the windscreen), but if there is no visible damage to the tyre, and nothing to suggest it will fail, would you still hold them liable for it failing a year after purchasing it?

[simon_caversham]

I understand your frustration - id probably e as frustrated as you.

Do you Matt? Did Lexus put your life and those that you love at risk, (Albeit unknowingly)? Did Lexus waterlog your car when testing for a, "leak"? Have you been pushed from pillar to post by a dealership who have now gone completely silent?

However asking a company to do something try actually can't, and then declaring them con artists because of it is a bit much.

No where do I declare that they are, "con artists". I ask that fluffy and flowery marketing blurb be corrected to reflect reality, taking into account your expert opinion as given in this forum. However, I still dont wholly believe that absolutely nothing can be done to check the vehicle windscreen wasn't replaced from factory and that the replacement shouldn't and couldn't be investigated further, (Flexitrim usage being an obvious sign of the need to investigate further) . Given the safety danger. Something can and should be done, or consumers need to be explicitly aware when purchasing used approved that this no guarantee or warranty can be given on the integrity of the windscreen glass. Is that not fair? Would you seek to challenge that?

Consumers need to know that the trust they place for safety in, "Used Approved" is a myth.

What if you bought the car and a tyre blew out? Is it Lexus' fault, even tho the tyres are made by Dunlop? Lexus can only visually check the tyres (just as try can only visually check the windscreen), but if there is no visible damage to the tyre, and nothing to suggest it will fail, would you still hold them liable for it failing a year after purchasing it?

Matt.... please... that's such a weak comparison even Lexus don't cover it under, "Used Approved" they make no promise of tyres being in good condition. I had no trust or faith in the integrity of the tyres. I was prepared for that.

[matt-c]

I can see that because you aren't getting the answers you want, you aren't prepared to have a sensible and intelligent discussion. But one last time I'll play along and address your points.

1. No, but I have seen it several times, as previously stated, so yes I do understand.

2. Several times you have said the "used approved" is worth nothing, and in your 2nd to last post made a reference to "Del Boy's Trading". If you insisting the "used approved" is a con, you need to word it better - anyone would read what you've written as likening Lexus, in this case, to conning you. You even just wrote "used approved" is a myth - meaning its a con.

3. Correct. Lexus do not cover tyre blow outs, and that is because they cannot physically check them, or predict what they will do with 100% certainty. Now, as I've explained many times, Lexus also cannot physically inspect the firmest of a windscreen either, so how could they say with any certainty that is is or is not safe? You already know this - firstly I've told you several times, and secondly Autoglass had to undertake the work. Not because Lexus didn't want to, but because it's a specialist field, and not something Lexus can do.

You go on to say you had no fair or integrity in the tyres - did you change them then? I wouldn't drive my family around if I had no faith or integrity in the tyres. Or did you mean you had no reason to doubt the integrity of the tyres? Because you also had no reason to doubt the integrity of the windscreen former either - at least not until AFTER you had a problem with it. Likewise, Lexus would have had no reason to doubt the windscreen had been fitted incorrectly either - their trust was placed into the fitter that fitted it. Just as my customers put faith into me doing a good job everyday.

Also the use of flexitrim is not a clear indication the screen has been fitted badly. The trim is just a trim, and what trim is used does not correlate directly to whether the screen has been put in with or without primer. You could put a screen in with no trim at all, but that doesn't mean you wouldn't have cleaned prepped and primed the screen and aperture correctly. Likewise you can out a dealer supplied screen in, with a dealer supplied trim, but that's not clear proof that the screen had been cleaned prepped and primes correctly.

That all I have to say on it now, as I'm just repeating myself. You're clearly not willing to have mature discussion, and I don't need to have anything poked at me, or have it appear that I am being attacked. I'm impartial, apart from the fact I have a far more educated and experienced insight into to it than you. But I feel my words are wasted, so that's where I'm going to leave it.

Good luck

[simon_caversham]

Hi Matt,

I appreciate that's the last word from you and the opinion you've given.

When I purchased my used approved Lexus. There was no reason for me to doubt the integrity of the windscreen - I've learned a lot in the last few days, more than I'd ever normally care to learn about how important the windscreen is to car safety.

I've learnt more than the typical consumer who's also largely unaware of the importance of the integrity of that windscreen for overall integrity in the event of a roll or crash.

I've learnt how 30% of road fatalities are caused by passengers being ejected from the vehicle or are critically injured during rollovers.

I've learnt that the The National Glass Association (NGA) in America has made it clear that a "measurable percentage of fatalities occur when an improperly replaced windshield does not remain firmly bonded to the vehicle during a crash."

As part of my warranty, the vehicle was being sold to me with a windscreen in, "good condition". That was a myth.

[simon_caversham]

Ongoing updates to this story can be found here:

http://lexusreading.tumblr.com/post/33789470701/what-does-used-approved-mean-from-lexus

[philthy]

Used approved schemes suggest a reliable second hand vehicle the manufacturer would be proud to put their name and reputation behind. I too fell foul of Lexus' used approved scheme a few years ago when I purchased a two year old IS220d.from Leicester. Firstly the salesmen conned me that I had to put down a refundable £1k deposit for them to transfer the vehicle to stock for me to view it. On inspection I picked out a few faults which they agreed to sort. On collection the salesman didn't have time to do a proper handover, there were numerous problems; chewing gum stuck on top of the ash tray, puncture hole in a door card, scratches in the paintwork and on the way home a blow out in a wheel that when inspected by the fitter he declared caused by a nail that had been in the tyre for some time. When I got the spare out, the boot well was full of once wet but now dried business cards that had stuck to the chassis. Some PDI eh Lexus Leicester. Lexus had the car back to rectify the problems and made various promises and apologies none of which were fulfilled. On checking the premises one evening I found my car left on the forecourt rather than secured away from the public.

When I got the car back I found someone's credit card in the glove box, someone I hasten to add had no connection with the company so I can only assume they let my car out as a demo or loaned it to someone without my knowledge or agreement. They then had the nerve to ask me to take the card to them clearly indicating they knew who to return it to but could give no explanation of how it got there. I took the car into work (police) and booked it in. Six months later I got rid of the car at a substantial loss having no desire to step foot in a Lexus dealership again.

Now I'm in the market for an SUV and the RX looks have always been good, but the experience with Lexus Leicester has always made me hang back. Thankfully the RX's problems with holding Battery charge when stationary for a week or more mean I won't be tempted to back to Lexus.

All used approved schemes can have problems but my experience with Volvo for example has never thrown up any such issues. I'm about to try VW's scheme so we'll see how they compare.

[LexBri]

After an absolute nightmare of back and forth between the Lexus dealer in Reading, Berkshire and an autoglass repair company to find the cause of a heavily leaking windscreen on our used approved RX400h, we've now ascertained the cause of the issue and wanted to warn others thinking about buying a used approved Lexus, or who currently own one.

...

Simon,

I was thinking of getting a Lexus from the Reading dealer, are you suggesting I should go elsewhere?

Brian

[mcleish]

Does anyone think that this level of service (or lack of) from Lexus Reading is connected to Octogan (at both Reading and Bracknell) being taken over by the motor group Jemco ? I know from years of experience from Lexus Bracknell, they were excellent. I only went to Lexus Reading a couple of times, they were not as good as Lexus Bracknell.

We all know what happens with "takeovers"......redundancies...cut backs etc etc.

I am still looking for the right 400h and I think I will give Lexus Guildford a try, albeit a lot further.

[DanD]

I have recommended Lexus Hedge End (Southampton) in the past and still do, if it's of any use to you.