Exige V6 Rear Upright Failures - Time for a recall?
Discussion
Making this thread to make people aware of the dangerous issues that early Exige V6’s are experiencing and Lotus denial of any safety issue or responsibility towards fixing or recalling parts that could pose a huge risk to life.
Unfortunately, during my yearly service and inspection by a Lotus Specialist, that works closely with the Silverstone dealership, I was told I have a cracked rear upright on my 2013 Exige V6s having only done 10,000 miles and the car never being tracked and garaged daily Researching into this it seems that this is a recurring issue and has impacted many other Lotus owners and that the uprights have since been revised to incorporate more material around the weak area so Lotus must be aware of the issue.
I was advised my Lotus specialist that this has not been caused by anything that I have done or the way that the car has been treated within the last year for it to fail.
I was instructed by Head office to take the car to Silverstone who were brilliant. Got it checked out and then agreed the upright was split and they would put a claim in but expected it to be rejected. I sent over the service history, it is checked over yearly regardless of mileage by an independent who is now merging and taking over the garage side of Lotus Silverstone.
Lotus sent the following emails
“Unfortunately, on this occasion Lotus Warranty is choosing to reject this request.
The cars has now been out of warranty since 12/06/2016, this is a long way past our goodwill timings.
The car has not been to an approved Lotus dealership for the last three services, stipulated in the Warranty policy and procedure manual.
The car has been over revved at least five times and had at least one standing start. So has been driven hard, this may not have been this owner but it is there in the performance data.
The FSE has stated ‘The photos just show the bush has worn so that’s why it’s moving.’
Unfortunately, on a car this age rubber components will deteriorate under conditions the vehicle has been driven in on the performance data.”
I’m sorry the response is not as you had hoped.
Following this I responded
“No I can confirm that this wasn't me over revving or starting starts, although from what I understand is Lotus included a 'launch mode' in the car for standing starts themselves so to judge a cars condition on this seems very odd.
The suspension arm has a split in the metal along the casting line causing the bush to move as has been confirmed by yourselves and by an independent, if it was just the rubber bushing that needed replacing I would not be asking for any help in the matter and would class this as wear and tear.
Could you please inform me how you are linking any stress given to the engine to the failure of a suspension part that Lotus are well aware of across multiple owners and have revised because of this. I fail to see how any servicing done at Lotus vs an independent (that is now being employed by Lotus) would have stopped this structural failure.
I have been a loyal Lotus customer and owner for the past 8 years and have to say this is very disappointing from a company that is trying to relaunch themselves and build up a new reputation.
I have attached pictures of the same issues that others have had including one that caused catastrophic failure and as I have mentioned before poses an immediate risk to life.
I would like you to escalate this and review your decision to reject this claim. I am not usually a vocal person regarding any issues I have ever had but if Lotus are unwilling to help on this issue I will feel I have a duty to others safety to make owners and potential customer publicly aware of this common issue and Lotus' disregard towards human life and safety when using their cars.”
They then replied with
Thank you for your email.
I have escalated your concern back to Garry (Field Service Engineer) and to Neil (Field Operation Manager).
The views lead to a formal rejection of goodwill authority from Lotus yesterday in more detail as follows.
The vehicle in question is now 6 and a half years out of the warranty period and nearly 10 years old in total. The vehicle was purchased from a private seller out of the Lotus network, routine servicing and repairs have been made outside of the network and at an independent garage,
I am not trying to undermine or state that the garage you used is unable to fully inspect the car to the correct Lotus standard, however, using an approved dealership this issue may have been picked up sooner.
In your email below you also questioned why over-revving and standing starts will affect the rear suspension, a standing start is logged in the ECM and is logged on the performance data when you hold the revs over 6000 RPM dump the clutch and do not go below 6000 RPM until you hit 60mph. This is very aggressive and affects the rear suspension as well as the engine and the gearbox. With the full load of the powertrain being pushed to the limit in this way of driving this will of cause, have consequences resulting in an increased load on all the components of the powertrain, including suspension, brakes, wheels, and tyres only advancing the wear and tear of these parts. Lunch control is different from a standing start in the way it is a controlled standing start from the ECM. After 20 active launches are made the system has to be reset by an approved service center or dealership. In addition to this the Lotus warranty and procedures once the vehicle has completed one controlled launch it voids the warranty on the gearbox and engine.
Rules set out in the Lotus warranty and procedures manual Lotus warranty is given on the vehicle in question and not the current owner, all periods of time the vehicle has been in operation.
The issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue. I can see in your email you have also referenced to a vehicle with a complete suspension failure last year in Europe and this was not just the upright that had failed on this vehicle. All goodwill applications are judged and policed at the time of application and the conditions of the vehicle present to the Warranty Team and any settlement offered to the customer is personal to that owner and not a common practice.
I hope the information outlined above helps you understand why Lotus has given a formal rejection on this matter and will uphold that in this case.
I have never used the car on track and averages less than 1000 miles a year over the 5 years I have owned it. Yes a waste I know….
I then replied and I could not find a statement of what constitutes a recall in the UK so I referenced the US authority.
I understand that it is out the warranty period completely but I would hope you understand that a failure of this part above any speed other than crawling could very easily lead to death and theoretically should therefore be a safety recall. the NHTSA state
A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards. Most decisions to conduct a recall and remedy a safety defect are made voluntarily by manufacturers prior to any involvement by NHTSA.
You have stated that "the issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue" which is a statement i find very concerning as I would have hoped Lotus understood the value of human life? I do wonder if the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration would feel the same way if they were to investigate?
Thank you for clarifying about the launch mode and how it is able to add stress to wear and tear items. I don't think a structural suspension part constitutes this as it is not mentioned anywhere in your literature about being replaced in the service intervals.
I'm not sure if you are aware the independent specialist I have been using works closely with Lotus Silverstone as is currently merging with them so if you are in any doubt of his ability to work at the correct Lotus standard, please feel free to confirm this with them.
I feel like I am not asking for anything unreasonable here, Lotus have made no comment to owners on this issue and have not issues any safety notices or recalls. Do you not think Lotus should really be showing some compassion to human life replacing broken parts or issuing public notices to inform owners of this common issue?
I look forward to hearing back from you
Lotus replied to me nearly instantly with
“Thank you, but we can only reiterate our previous response.
Kind regards,”
Speaking to other owners this seemed to be a lot more common than I realised with Lotus still refusing to accept any responsibility in even informing owners that they should check these parts?!
I have put in a report to the DVSA who called me back today enquiring more about this issue and looking into whether this should be a product recall or safety notice issued to owners.
I will include pictures on this thread of the failures and comments other owners have experienced.
I have had a call back from the DVSA enquiring more about this. Apparently I am the first person to raise this as an issue with them as they have no reported faults on these before.
They are going to continue to investigate the issues and seemed concerned but said it would be extremely helpful to hear from anybody else that has personally had this issue by filing a issue on the link below.
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-recalls-and-faults/repo...
Unfortunately, during my yearly service and inspection by a Lotus Specialist, that works closely with the Silverstone dealership, I was told I have a cracked rear upright on my 2013 Exige V6s having only done 10,000 miles and the car never being tracked and garaged daily Researching into this it seems that this is a recurring issue and has impacted many other Lotus owners and that the uprights have since been revised to incorporate more material around the weak area so Lotus must be aware of the issue.
I was advised my Lotus specialist that this has not been caused by anything that I have done or the way that the car has been treated within the last year for it to fail.
I was instructed by Head office to take the car to Silverstone who were brilliant. Got it checked out and then agreed the upright was split and they would put a claim in but expected it to be rejected. I sent over the service history, it is checked over yearly regardless of mileage by an independent who is now merging and taking over the garage side of Lotus Silverstone.
Lotus sent the following emails
“Unfortunately, on this occasion Lotus Warranty is choosing to reject this request.
The cars has now been out of warranty since 12/06/2016, this is a long way past our goodwill timings.
The car has not been to an approved Lotus dealership for the last three services, stipulated in the Warranty policy and procedure manual.
The car has been over revved at least five times and had at least one standing start. So has been driven hard, this may not have been this owner but it is there in the performance data.
The FSE has stated ‘The photos just show the bush has worn so that’s why it’s moving.’
Unfortunately, on a car this age rubber components will deteriorate under conditions the vehicle has been driven in on the performance data.”
I’m sorry the response is not as you had hoped.
Following this I responded
“No I can confirm that this wasn't me over revving or starting starts, although from what I understand is Lotus included a 'launch mode' in the car for standing starts themselves so to judge a cars condition on this seems very odd.
The suspension arm has a split in the metal along the casting line causing the bush to move as has been confirmed by yourselves and by an independent, if it was just the rubber bushing that needed replacing I would not be asking for any help in the matter and would class this as wear and tear.
Could you please inform me how you are linking any stress given to the engine to the failure of a suspension part that Lotus are well aware of across multiple owners and have revised because of this. I fail to see how any servicing done at Lotus vs an independent (that is now being employed by Lotus) would have stopped this structural failure.
I have been a loyal Lotus customer and owner for the past 8 years and have to say this is very disappointing from a company that is trying to relaunch themselves and build up a new reputation.
I have attached pictures of the same issues that others have had including one that caused catastrophic failure and as I have mentioned before poses an immediate risk to life.
I would like you to escalate this and review your decision to reject this claim. I am not usually a vocal person regarding any issues I have ever had but if Lotus are unwilling to help on this issue I will feel I have a duty to others safety to make owners and potential customer publicly aware of this common issue and Lotus' disregard towards human life and safety when using their cars.”
They then replied with
Thank you for your email.
I have escalated your concern back to Garry (Field Service Engineer) and to Neil (Field Operation Manager).
The views lead to a formal rejection of goodwill authority from Lotus yesterday in more detail as follows.
The vehicle in question is now 6 and a half years out of the warranty period and nearly 10 years old in total. The vehicle was purchased from a private seller out of the Lotus network, routine servicing and repairs have been made outside of the network and at an independent garage,
I am not trying to undermine or state that the garage you used is unable to fully inspect the car to the correct Lotus standard, however, using an approved dealership this issue may have been picked up sooner.
In your email below you also questioned why over-revving and standing starts will affect the rear suspension, a standing start is logged in the ECM and is logged on the performance data when you hold the revs over 6000 RPM dump the clutch and do not go below 6000 RPM until you hit 60mph. This is very aggressive and affects the rear suspension as well as the engine and the gearbox. With the full load of the powertrain being pushed to the limit in this way of driving this will of cause, have consequences resulting in an increased load on all the components of the powertrain, including suspension, brakes, wheels, and tyres only advancing the wear and tear of these parts. Lunch control is different from a standing start in the way it is a controlled standing start from the ECM. After 20 active launches are made the system has to be reset by an approved service center or dealership. In addition to this the Lotus warranty and procedures once the vehicle has completed one controlled launch it voids the warranty on the gearbox and engine.
Rules set out in the Lotus warranty and procedures manual Lotus warranty is given on the vehicle in question and not the current owner, all periods of time the vehicle has been in operation.
The issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue. I can see in your email you have also referenced to a vehicle with a complete suspension failure last year in Europe and this was not just the upright that had failed on this vehicle. All goodwill applications are judged and policed at the time of application and the conditions of the vehicle present to the Warranty Team and any settlement offered to the customer is personal to that owner and not a common practice.
I hope the information outlined above helps you understand why Lotus has given a formal rejection on this matter and will uphold that in this case.
I have never used the car on track and averages less than 1000 miles a year over the 5 years I have owned it. Yes a waste I know….
I then replied and I could not find a statement of what constitutes a recall in the UK so I referenced the US authority.
I understand that it is out the warranty period completely but I would hope you understand that a failure of this part above any speed other than crawling could very easily lead to death and theoretically should therefore be a safety recall. the NHTSA state
A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards. Most decisions to conduct a recall and remedy a safety defect are made voluntarily by manufacturers prior to any involvement by NHTSA.
You have stated that "the issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue" which is a statement i find very concerning as I would have hoped Lotus understood the value of human life? I do wonder if the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration would feel the same way if they were to investigate?
Thank you for clarifying about the launch mode and how it is able to add stress to wear and tear items. I don't think a structural suspension part constitutes this as it is not mentioned anywhere in your literature about being replaced in the service intervals.
I'm not sure if you are aware the independent specialist I have been using works closely with Lotus Silverstone as is currently merging with them so if you are in any doubt of his ability to work at the correct Lotus standard, please feel free to confirm this with them.
I feel like I am not asking for anything unreasonable here, Lotus have made no comment to owners on this issue and have not issues any safety notices or recalls. Do you not think Lotus should really be showing some compassion to human life replacing broken parts or issuing public notices to inform owners of this common issue?
I look forward to hearing back from you
Lotus replied to me nearly instantly with
“Thank you, but we can only reiterate our previous response.
Kind regards,”
Speaking to other owners this seemed to be a lot more common than I realised with Lotus still refusing to accept any responsibility in even informing owners that they should check these parts?!
I have put in a report to the DVSA who called me back today enquiring more about this issue and looking into whether this should be a product recall or safety notice issued to owners.
I will include pictures on this thread of the failures and comments other owners have experienced.
I have had a call back from the DVSA enquiring more about this. Apparently I am the first person to raise this as an issue with them as they have no reported faults on these before.
They are going to continue to investigate the issues and seemed concerned but said it would be extremely helpful to hear from anybody else that has personally had this issue by filing a issue on the link below.
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-recalls-and-faults/repo...
Edited by Mwn11 on Thursday 2nd February 18:31
Edited by Mwn11 on Thursday 2nd February 18:32
I ran a 2014 car for 3 years and about 50k miles. In that time I mostly commuted but with a few full on EU road trips and a trackday or two. I`m pleased to say I had no issues but this does not sound great. From a selfish point of view does anyone know when the component was strengthened?
Maybe if all else fails a few of you could get together and take proper legal action, I cannot for the life of me understand why Lotus wouldn't even meet you half way. They do have a point regarding the cars age and they have no idea or control over what the car has been used for in it`s life (off roading???) but at the same time if this is a multiple car failure then there clearly is an issue. If they`d made 20k V6 Exiges then maybe it would be a bigger concern but they can only be talking about 50 cars or so that might be affected...
Maybe if all else fails a few of you could get together and take proper legal action, I cannot for the life of me understand why Lotus wouldn't even meet you half way. They do have a point regarding the cars age and they have no idea or control over what the car has been used for in it`s life (off roading???) but at the same time if this is a multiple car failure then there clearly is an issue. If they`d made 20k V6 Exiges then maybe it would be a bigger concern but they can only be talking about 50 cars or so that might be affected...
There have been a lot more than 10 this has been an issue over a number of years and as the OP pointed out lotus redesigned the part relatively early in the life of the V6.
I'm not sure what the threshold for forcing a recall is there is talk of something similar in the McLaren world at the moment with door hinges cracking actually in a similar way to these uprights. There is a form on the DVSA website for reporting dangerous defects.
Certainly not worth getting stressed over just fit the updated parts. There's no way Lotus would replace them and at 10 years old it is reasonable wear and tear. This was happening when the cars were just a few years old so there are people that for a much rawer deal on this but taking into consideration the age of the car as of today I don't think expecting a free replacement is reasonable.
I'm not sure what the threshold for forcing a recall is there is talk of something similar in the McLaren world at the moment with door hinges cracking actually in a similar way to these uprights. There is a form on the DVSA website for reporting dangerous defects.
Certainly not worth getting stressed over just fit the updated parts. There's no way Lotus would replace them and at 10 years old it is reasonable wear and tear. This was happening when the cars were just a few years old so there are people that for a much rawer deal on this but taking into consideration the age of the car as of today I don't think expecting a free replacement is reasonable.
As said im sure there has been a lot more than 10 and in comparison to their numbers I dont think thats great.
Ive already ordered both sides to replace just to be safe. Obviously I would have liked a good will gesture from Lotus as this really shouldn't be happening and hasn't happened on any previous Lotus I've had.
The thing that concerns me most now is that that that have said
The issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue.
There could be people driving with them semi split unaware a potentially life threatening crash just waiting to happen. I think at minimum notices should be sent out to owners telling them to check them and inform them this is an issue.
The DVSA got back to me yesterday and said
"Please accept this email as confirmation that the review stage of your defect report is now complete.
The manufacturer has now been contacted and has been given 28 days in which to respond."
Ive already ordered both sides to replace just to be safe. Obviously I would have liked a good will gesture from Lotus as this really shouldn't be happening and hasn't happened on any previous Lotus I've had.
The thing that concerns me most now is that that that have said
The issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue.
There could be people driving with them semi split unaware a potentially life threatening crash just waiting to happen. I think at minimum notices should be sent out to owners telling them to check them and inform them this is an issue.
The DVSA got back to me yesterday and said
"Please accept this email as confirmation that the review stage of your defect report is now complete.
The manufacturer has now been contacted and has been given 28 days in which to respond."
Mwn11 said:
The issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue.
Did they actually use that word OP?'demeaned'
- do something that is beneath one's dignity.
- cause a severe loss in the dignity of and respect for (someone or something).
If they did, no wonder you are peeved!
GaryF said:
Mwn11 said:
The issue of the uprights has been assessed by Lotus Engineering and was demeaned as a non-safety-related issue.
Did they actually use that word OP?'demeaned'
- do something that is beneath one's dignity.
- cause a severe loss in the dignity of and respect for (someone or something).
If they did, no wonder you are peeved!
There must be a pretty high bar for DVSA to get involved when you look back at the VX220s they had the upright/hub carrier bolts snapping with alarming regularity and they directly caused a couple of pretty serious accidents back in the day plus numbers track crashes and this was never a recall. For the sale of 4 high tensile bolts and an hour or two of work that was really amazing it was never a recall. They did however recall a lot of them for not having heat treated wheels and I believe that recall was off the back of one or possibly two incidents.
I do know of another Lotus recall that was off the back of one single incident of a fire as well.
I do know of another Lotus recall that was off the back of one single incident of a fire as well.
Are we looking at metal fatigue on a 10 year old car here and expecting the manufacturer to repair FOC AND recall all affected vehicles? Just because they've updated the part, doesn't mean they're suddenly liable for the old part. All they've done is recognise the part might fail and made a minimal change to try and prevent that.
10 year old car with a worn part, with proof that it's been driven hard, you've not got a cat in hells chance. Change the part, move on.
10 year old car with a worn part, with proof that it's been driven hard, you've not got a cat in hells chance. Change the part, move on.
Yeah I don't agree and think it warrants a recall or safety notice telling people to check them instead of Lotus saying its a non safety issue.
Goodwill would be nice but cant see it happening, id rather owners know of the potential risk at this point.
Ive not had this happen on any other car before whether thats a Lotus or 70's car. A few owners seem concerned and with the video like below of the white Exige's breaking on the road I am too.
Goodwill would be nice but cant see it happening, id rather owners know of the potential risk at this point.
Ive not had this happen on any other car before whether thats a Lotus or 70's car. A few owners seem concerned and with the video like below of the white Exige's breaking on the road I am too.
Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff