I feel foolish that I didnt spot this prior to agreeing the purchase and collection of my Jaguar XF and I also put it down to my very trusting nature especially when dealing with a garage that has been trading for such a long time and specialises in Jaguars but after having taken my beloved XF to a Main dealership for one of their free health checks they have advised me that the brake discs are 100% worn all round and will of course need new discs and pads plus sensors.
Not a cheap job of course.
They have advised a few other items such as play in N/S/R Track arm for the steering & Suspension, this they have ticked as category Red meaning it should be sorted but they also said it was not an MOT failure (confuses me somewhat)

front tyres are 2% tread on the inner with 4 and 5 on the middle and outer, again, category red but not an MOT failure.

Now I of course expect the Main dealership to 'try' and find some jobs whereby they could get some money from me, I am not daft but I am a little confused as to why none of these issues were flagged up as advisories on the MOT test and am very concerned and annoyed that the brake disc situation wasnt addressed in the service.

I am waiting a call back from the garage after speaking with them on Friday to ask why but have not heard yet.
I want to do my research and see where I stand before I take my next action.

Am I right in saying that the garage are duty bound to supply a vehicle that is roadworthy and if the brake discs are below the thickness that Jaguar stipulate as safe, surely this is classed as unroadworthy?

Also, should the independent MOT testing station have pointed these issues out?

On another note, they have ticked the B box in the service book so I am curious to see if they have done a level B service or just slung it through on the cheap.

I look forward to your response fellow Jaguar lovers.

Regards,

Jason

 

Jason,

I can understand you feel aggrieved but you should consider very carefully where you want to go with this. Subject any three year old vehicle to close examination and worn items will be found.

To summarise:

1. the car has a current MoT (presumably recent?)
2. the main dealer has reported a number of "worn items"
3. the main dealer has added that none of these items would fail an MoT

The vehicle can therefore be considered "roadworthy".

You have the option to challenge the issue of the current MoT Certificate with VOSA. On the condition described, it would appear to have been issued within the regulations and, whatever the time elapsed since the test, is still in a condition to pass again now.

An MoT is a fairly superficial test of items affecting vehicle safety. It is far from an in-depth examination of vehicle mechanical condition.

If you are convinced the braking system renders it not roadworthy, you can have the vehicle examined by an independent engineer for a detailed condition report.

Before doing this, I would most certainly give the supplying garage the opportunity to examine the vehicle and see if a mutually acceptable course of action can be agreed.

Graham

 

Hi Graham,

I totally agree and that is why I am asking the questions to you guys in order to make my decision choice a little better informed.
Truth is I like the garage and would rather not enter into dispute with them however I do feel they have been a little underhand on the brake disc issue, especially considering there is not mention on any service records that they are low and would need replacing very soon.
I accept they are running a business and need to protect their bottom line.
Profit is often considered a dirty word but without a profit no business would be here.

My main question is, and I will put this to Jaguar, do they have a set thickness limit in place whereby anything less than this would be considered 'unroadworthy' if that is the case then I feel the garage are duty bound to address this issue. (provided the discs are below this limit of course)

I do accept and understand that the MoT testing stations would not necessarily pick up on the thickness provided the brakes achieved the efficiency test.

I received a £250 reduction on the screen price so am going to chat with them about me paying the £250 back to them on the condition they would replace the discs and pads as necessary.
I personally feel this is a fair gesture but we will wait and see.

On a different note, are there are any non genuine makes worth considering in the braking world, I seem to recall that Bosch tend to make most pads for vehicles anyway. The reason I ask is in case I am pushed into having a make that is really inferior quality to what the car requires.

Thanks again Graham.

 

The full answer is yes and no.

I'm sure that helps.

All OEMs inscribe a 'minimum thickness' dimension on the rotors. If removed from the car and found to below this thickness, they cannot be re-installed.

The key is 'if they are removed'. There is no requirement to remove them except for surface cleaning/machining or replacement which is not routine, scheduled maintenance.

Since they pass MOT and are installed on the vehicle they are 'legal'. I would not consider rotors in this condition to be unsafe or non-roadworthy. Excessively thin rotors tend to occasionally warp and contribute to a vibration in the brake pedal and/or steering wheel but are not something that would contribute to loss of braking action.

You are not obliged to have the brakes done at a main dealer- some/many members here do their own brake work or find a trustworthy independent. A quick search of parts vendors indicates that rotors for the XF model are plentiful in supply in a variety of price ranges.

 

I want to focus on the MOT.....When was this done?

Was it sold with the remaining 4 months MOT or similar OR was it 12 months MOT that they had done??

I'd be with Graham on this......IF it was a 12 months sticker that they had put on it, I'd be calling them and suggesting that they were at it!

I've had independent checks done and this, that & the other is needed. I wanted to give you the opportunity to comment before I contact Vosa with my complaint.

If they are an MOT testing station they will be registered by Vosa and the very mention of their name will make them think twice, as if any wrong doing is found they can have their licence revoked and or severe penalties imposed.

I had this issue with a Renault Clio I had bought for my son and subsequently found what turned out to be serios steering issues. The car had been MOT'd only a week before so I contacted the garage and went down the route as above.

They asked me to bring the car in so they could investigate, which I did. They found the issues as discussed and resolved to make good the reapir at a cost ( to them ) of around £300+

They gave me a loan car in the interim and I collected the car a few days later.

Hope it helps

Good luck

 

IMHO.....

For a *professional auto business* to sell a car with worn out brakes is bad mojo no matter how you slice it. Damage to reputation is virtually assured and the liability exposure is high.

In preparing a used car for resale there are a hundred places to cut corners. Brakes should never be one of them.

Cheers
DD

 

We all are humans, they might have just missed it. It could have been a car that is not a normal service customer, came in with decent tires and clean overall so they just put it up for sale since it had already passed inspection. Give them a call, it sounds like you know them well and I am sure they will work with you on it.

 

I've searched for the thickness specification and most sources are quoting 32mm for a new disc with 2mm as the maximum recommended wear but I must stress I don't have a copy of the XF Workshop Manual to be able to verify this.

As Mikey pointed out, the minimum thickness will be inscribed on the hub section of an OE disc.

Graham

 

MoT tester looks at brake pad thickness but not really at disc (rotor) thickness because they'd need a gauge and probably have to remove the wheels. They do look for any obvious cracks etc in the discs. They check braking efficiency but worn discs would probably pass until well under the min thickness.

I suppose discs would eventually wear so thin they might shatter or the pistons would leak or not brake or whatever, but not at just below min thickness.

So, I see nothing wrong as far as MoT is concerned (you could argue MoT should be a tougher test that involves checking disc min thickness but it would have to cost more!). Oh, and MoT is NOT repeat NOT a certificate of roadworthiness. (Though generally you'd fail MoT if a car is clearly not roadworthy.) One reason it's not would be worn discs but there are many more such as rust that isn't findable during an MoT.

However, the selling garage ought not to sell a car with worn discs - if we're believing the dealer that is. Fairly cheap to get a measuring tool and see for yourself.

 

I dont know about mot in england, but in the state must stop in 30' or less from 25mph and not be metal to metal. Ie no grinding. Now we dont sell a preowned jag even if the pads, tires, look like they may need to be replaced by next oil change. Last thing we want is a customer coming in at a oil change and being told things like , you need brakes, tires, alignment etc. After just purchasing the car from us 5000 miles ago. But many car sellers will not put any money in a car other than cleanup. Another way to look at it is this. If we put tires, brakes alignment into a car your still paying for it in the purchase as its just figured into the costs of the car. So either way youre paying for brakes wether before or after the sale. The only saving grace in this case is did they pass a car that should not have passed at the time performed and in that casethey may want to take care of it or risk a hefty fine

 

Braking efficiency is not affected by rotor thickness. A disk is a disk

These cars came into a shop with only a complaint of 'unusual noise'. I'm not suggesting that anyone keep similar rotors in service.

 

I love it mikey, ive seen that before including one lady i used to work with who said her wheel just felt like it fell off when she parked against the parking barrier. I went out and looked and the rotors was cut off the hub. I dont see how the pistons didnt pop out of the calipers before this

 

Disc brakes are not worn out until the metal touches the metal. I've never seen one set of pads wear out a set of discs. However, if someone tried to go cheap and put a second set of pads in then the discs could wear too thin before the second set of pads is worn out. However, unless you are getting brake fade or the discs actually warp from being too thin (quite rare in reality) the brakes are not worn out.

The specified minimum pad remaining is 2 mm which is almost gone. In fact 1 mm is enough. The pad generates heat which the disc dissipates. If you have no brake fade in normal driving your brakes are not worn out.

Repair shops just love to do brake jobs early. They get to earn extra money for doing nothing. They can defend themselves by taking the position, correctly in most cases, that the owner does not know how long his worn brakes will last so, to be on the safe side, replace them now. That is a no lose position for the shop to take.

From a purely safety perspective that position is correct. If you can't judge when your brakes are worn out then you have to rely on your mechanic and he in turn MUST use conservative recommendations when vehicle safety is at issue. You can't fault the shop for covering their own butts.

My mechanic actually typed "rear brakes are metal on metal, this car must not be driven" when he and I both knew I intended to drive the brakes to minimum remaining pad thickness to see how far I could make them last. Danged litigation lawyers make liars out of all of us. I know, I is one and my mechanic knows it, hence the warning on the invoice!

Nowadays, pads wear out the rotors so you should always fit new pads and rotors to both wheels on an axle if anything is worn out, that's just good safe practice. It is unusual for all four wheels to need new brakes but there sometimes is a small cost saving to doing all four at once, every second rear brake job in the case of the XF.

Finally, always flush the brake fluid completely, all four wheels at least every two years, three years if your climate is dry. Usually this should be done every time brakes are replaced.

 

[QUOTE=jagular;858678
Nowadays, pads wear out the rotors so you should always fit new pads and rotors to both wheels on an axle if anything is worn out, that's just good safe practice.[/QUOTE]

Can't agree with that Jagular.


I'm not sure if its an over the pond conception or not, but over here in the UK generally, you can go through 2 or perhaps even 3 sets of pads to one set of discs, with no issues.

I myself have had 2 sets of pads on my A6 before electing, ( not necessarily needing ) to replace ALL pads & discs all round.

To be fair in all probability I could have used another set of pads on the discs and perhaps worn them halfway or more, but it made sense for me to do it at that time.

Clearly it makes sense to visually inspect these items on a regular basis, along with actually "listening" to the car when driving once in a while and not the radio.

Using this along with driver "feel" and the usual inspections should be more than enough to err on the side of caution without unneccessary expense

 

Not everyone on this side of the pond replaces rotors with every set of pads. I think most do it on an as-required basis.

 

I certainly don't, maybe it's a Scottish thing?

 

On a side note, I just fitted my snow tire set and inspected the brakes while they were off.

I have owned my car for 20,000 miles now and the pads are still 50% or better all around. And I don't know if the pads we're replaced when I bought it as a CPO vehicle but I do know the rotors were not new as they had a fair bit of a lip on the outer edges when I took delivery.

I was under the impression you get 20-25k on each set.

Is my situation rare to get that sort of wear?

BTW - I do drive agressively, the summer rear tires, that were new when I bought the car, are now past the wear indicators and will be replaced before they get fitted after the snows have to come off next spring.

 

I replace discs (rotors) when at or below the specified min thickness and I'm replacing the pads. It's really easy to measure a disc thickness and compare against the spec.

I've had 50K+ miles on pads (more on discs) sometimes, but I do a lot of motorway miles so little braking.

I too get 2 or 3 pad changes before finding the discs are at/below min spec.

 

I replace discs when more than half worn at pad change. The logic is that leaving them on will mean the discs will wear too thin (below spec) before the second set of pads is worn out. I do a lot of driving on mountain roads and effective fade free brakes are pretty much essential. One steep downgrade is around 50 km at 6% or steeper (another is nearly as long and up to 13% at one point) just for example. Worn discs are very prone to fade and wear out pads more quickly as they always run hotter than designed for.

It has been quite some time since I got two sets of pads from a set of discs on any of my cars. My 1991 Alfa Romeo will do this but the brakes on that are not terrific. My 1986 SAAB 9000 turbo would do this but not my 97 SAAB 9000 Aero, essentially a more powerful version of the same car. My 2001 Audi S4, again a very quick car, needed new rear discs when the pads wore out. The days of soft pads are over.

My '09 wore out the rear brakes entirely at 32,000 km (19,000 miles). The discs weren't scored but the pads were below 2 mm. The discs were within a few mm of below minimum thickness. Discs worn too thin can actually warp and will generally do so when used hard from high speeds in the wet or winter conditions. Then you have to pay for new discs and the same labour to fit them as a full brake job. False economy to try and reuse a set of old discs these days.

Discs are really cheap and brakes are really important. Each to his own.

 

You're right. Not routinely replaced. Nor arbitrarily resurfaced...a practice which is much less routine than it used to be.

But, since rotors for most ordinary cars are so inexpensive these days, "as required" might in some cases simply be "Aw, what the heck. I've gone 100k miles. It's probably due for new rotors. I'll order a set".


Cheers
DD