Stone chip under PPF Query

[M1AGM]

I bought my current Aston last October from a main dealer. I paid £3k to have PPF applied to the impact areas. Very recently a service technician from another main dealer pointed out that I have a stone chip on my bonnet under the PPF. I asked the supplying dealership about this and got this reply:

Hi xxx,

I hope that you are well.

As the PPF that has been applied is a preventative measure to ensure the car no longer picks up any chips there is only a positive that we would take as a dealership. Especially purchasing a used car that has the protective measures in place.

As the car is a used car, it is expected that chips may be present especially if not PPF’d from day 1.

I personally see the car as an exceptional example for the age mileage and the protection that has been applied.

Best Regards, 
xxx.

---

Effectively a FRO.

Is it unreasonable to have expected a stone chip to be repaired prior to buying a Timeless Approved Used Aston Martin?

I do not remember if I did notice the stone chip prior to purchase and pointed it out (probably because there was a large deep scratch down the bonnet that the dealer was going to have repaired prior to purchase), but I havent been around the car externals much in the intervening period to notice it until it was pointed out to me. Rectification is going to be expensive as the front PPF would need to be removed and replaced. I'm not overly precious about my cars as I use them reguarly but this will have an effect on px value when the time comes.

Pics to follow.

Is the dealer reasonable in their position that its expected a Timeless car to have stone chips when sold to a customer, and that applying PPF over one is standard practice?

[M1AGM]

[LTP]

M1AGM said:

Is it unreasonable to have expected a stone chip to be repaired prior to buying a Timeless Approved Used Aston Martin?

snip

Is the dealer reasonable in their position that its expected a Timeless car to have stone chips when sold to a customer, and that applying PPF over one is standard practice?

IMHO? Yes. Unless you requested it fixed at the time of sale and they didn't fulfil this request (which was then effectively part of the contract, albeit verbal).
I believe there is a "Timeless" paint standard which has a limit on the number of acceptable chips per panel. The limit is not zero. Cars get stone chips.

I also believe that the only recommended paint fix is to respray all or parts of the panel - I don't think a main dealer can use touch-up pencils (willing to be corrected). Touching in a chip, unless it's sanded flush then polished, can leave a little local "hill" in the paint surface - this can cause the PPF to "tent" over it, which looks worse.

I have a similar chip under the PPF I had applied to my Onyx car. I should have coloured the visible grey undercoat with a black Sharpie before I had the film applied. It reminds me every time I wash it.

[M1AGM]

LTP said:

IMHO? Yes. Unless you requested it fixed at the time of sale and they didn't fulfil this request (which was then effectively part of the contract, albeit verbal).
I believe there is a "Timeless" paint standard which has a limit on the number of acceptable chips per panel. The limit is not zero. Cars get stone chips.

I also believe that the only recommended paint fix is to respray all or parts of the panel - I don't think a main dealer can use touch-up pencils (willing to be corrected). Touching in a chip, unless it's sanded flush then polished, can leave a little local "hill" in the paint surface - this can cause the PPF to "tent" over it, which looks worse.

I have a similar chip under the PPF I had applied to my Onyx car. I should have coloured the visible grey undercoat with a black Sharpie before I had the film applied. It reminds me every time I wash it.

Thanks thats interesting info, appreciated. At time of purchase, the dealer said they would need to respray the bonnet to deal with the large scratch on it, but subsequently found they could deal with the scratch without a respray so didn’t bother.