Peugeot Partner 1.5 BlueHDi could the damage have happened

[Doghouse17]

Hi all,

I’m looking for some technical advice from anyone familiar with the 1.5 BlueHDi/DV5 engine.

I bought my 2021 Peugeot Partner in December 2025. It was a one-owner fleet vehicle and had been running normally since I bought it.

On 1 July 2026, I had the timing belt and water pump replaced as Precaution remeasure

The mechanic who did the work is someone I’ve used for around 30 years and is very experienced.

On 4 September I drove the van into Peugeot for the MXL camshaft-chain recall. It was running properly when I took it in.

At around 1:30pm, Peugeot called me and said they had found a problem and needed to order some parts. I agreed to the parts being replaced.

What I’m trying to understand is what happened next. The parts hadn’t arrived, but they continued working on the van for the rest of that day. What would they have been doing?

The parts were subsequently fitted and the engine reassembled, after which I was told the van was running lumpy.

Peugeot now say they found two damaged camshaft rocker arms, a missing hydraulic cam follower and subsequently a valve that isn’t seating correctly. Their theory is that this was caused by a timing-belt failure or tooth jump at some point in the van’s previous life.

So my main questions are:

Could this damage have happened during the timing-belt/water-pump replacement on 1 July, and could I then realistically have driven the van normally for the following two months without noticing anything?

Or:

Could the damage have occurred during Peugeot’s recall work, particularly given that the van was running normally when I drove it in and was running lumpy after they had worked on it?

And finally, what would Peugeot actually have been doing on the van for several hours after telling me they had found the problem and were waiting for replacement parts?

I’m now over two weeks without the van, which I desperately need for my dog-walking business, and I’m obviously concerned about potentially being presented with a large bill.

[Andy86GT]

I don't know the this car / engine specifically, but there is absolutely no way it would have been running normally when you took it in with " a missing hydraulic cam follower"!!
This all sounds very iffy, like they are trying to cover up something?
You might want to engage a vehicle engineer to investigate, or at least in the first instance, get them to explain how on earth it was running fine with the cam follower "missing".

[Doghouse17]

This was one of their emails
The heavy wear on the valve rocker arm and the missing hydraulic lifter must be considered as a contributing factor regarding the current running issue. We are taking steps to confirm that the issue has arisen due to the exhaust valve itself not opening. There are two valves per cylinder so even with just one exhaust valve opening on that particular cylinder the van will run normally but may be less fuel efficient!

An exhaust valve that does not open, will, in simple terms get caked up with carbon and other deposits. These deposits can solidify and form a crust over the valve.

Once the new rocker arm and hydraulic lifter have been fitted and the engine is then running, that crusted up valve will be forced open breaking away this crust. The solidified deposits can then drop into the cylinder itself and cause a running issue.

[richhead]

Car was running fine when you took it in, it was not after, its something they have done.

[E-bmw]

Doghouse17 said:

This was one of their emails
The heavy wear on the valve rocker arm and the missing hydraulic lifter must be considered as a contributing factor regarding the current running issue. We are taking steps to confirm that the issue has arisen due to the exhaust valve itself not opening. There are two valves per cylinder so even with just one exhaust valve opening on that particular cylinder the van will run normally but may be less fuel efficient!

An exhaust valve that does not open, will, in simple terms get caked up with carbon and other deposits. These deposits can solidify and form a crust over the valve.

Once the new rocker arm and hydraulic lifter have been fitted and the engine is then running, that crusted up valve will be forced open breaking away this crust. The solidified deposits can then drop into the cylinder itself and cause a running issue.

The first question you need the answer to is did this happen?

Whilst what they are initially saying about the engine still running with 1 of 2 exhaust valves opening (I am assuming they meant "there are 2 EXHAUST valves per cylinder" rather than what they said "2 valves per cylinder") may well be true, I would have thought it would have been noticeable.

If the answer to the above question is NO, then 100% it is an issue they have caused.

On top of that, why on earth would a garage continue to work on a car when they have found an issue on it before starting?

That alone would make me suspicious of a guilty conscience on their part.

Edited by E-bmw on Monday 21st September 07:43

[Doghouse17]

Thank you, my thoughts exactly. Unfortunately not the garage

[Heaveho]

If this is the same engine as in the Connect, they're weird in that the cam lobes are pressed on to the shaft, rather than the cams being one piece. In the event that the belt snaps it's necessary to replace the cams, as the lobes spin on the shaft, and therefore can't be re-used.

I'm another who thinks that the guy who fitted the belt seems to have done nothing wrong, given it ran fine afterwards. Also given that it wasn't running fine after the 2nd garage worked on it, it follows that they're in the frame.

The last fact shouldn't need pointing out, but it obviously needs to made clear to them that this is the position, and the onus is not unreasonably on them to provide a solution at no cost to you, unless they can categorically prove that damage was apparent prior to the start of them commencing work.

It also needs to made clear to you why they felt the need to fit parts with no explanation to you as to why they were required, and whether the fitment of these parts required the timing belt to again be removed. If so, further ammunition to suggest they've caused the problem.

Edited to add, what was it like on fuel when you first got it, and in the interim period between belt replacement and recall?

Also, to address one of your questions, if they've ascertained early on in the inspection that, let's say for example, the chain has stretched so far as to be out of spec, or the tensioner has not been within spec for whatever reason, they'll have ordered the parts and gone ahead and stripped it while waiting for them to arrive. I don't know if that's what happened, or if so, how long that would take though, so their claim of several hours may or may not be correct.

Lots of variables here, but I'd be all over them about this if it was mine.

Edited by Heaveho on Thursday 1st October 21:33