Jaguar Land Rover says it cannot be held responsible for repairs to a R1.633 million Jaguar Defender which has apparently been returned at least thirteen times over a three-year period due to recurring mechanical failures.

The consumer’s attorney, Trudie Broekmann said what should have been a dream purchase of a 4×4 utility vehicle designed for travel on bumpy, wet, muddy and uneven roads and advertised as being able to “tackle up to 900 MM of water”, quickly turned into a nightmare for her client.

“During May 2025, our client drove through a puddle of mud on the road, while in Koster in the North-West Province. Shortly thereafter, the vehicle’s exhaust system started releasing excessive smoke, the vehicle went into limp mode and an ‘exhaust filter full’ warning light started flashing.

“As a result, the vehicle had to be towed and taken to the dealership for repairs, where it was discovered that there was a build-up of soot in the vehicle’s Diesel Particulate Filter (“DPF”) and that the vehicle’s turbo as well as other components were damaged. However, Jaguar Land Rover South Africa rejected a warranty claim and our client received a quotation for the necessary repairs in the amount of a shocking R523 054.32, which is almost half of the vehicle’s purchase price,” an open letter addressed to Jaguar read.

She said it was alarming that a 4×4 utility vehicle, designed to “tackle up to 900MM of water”, advertised as being “unstoppable”, “tough. Inside and out” and able to “go from road, to mud, to snow, to anywhere” would suffer a failure of the air filter and DPF systems after driving through a shallow mud puddle.

The incident was not isolated; the driver allegedly experienced several other issues with the vehicle, including “unusual scratching noises from the vehicle’s front speakers, brake warning lights flashing unexpectedly, malfunctioning front sensors”, among others.

“Despite repeated requests, our client’s demand for a replacement vehicle was rejected.

“It is completely unacceptable that our client has had to return a brand new vehicle on no fewer than thirteen separate occasions within a three year period since taking delivery, all the while being deprived of the use of the vehicle for a combined total of 206 days and counting, having to pay monthly instalments and insurance premiums on a vehicle which cannot be utilised and which remains unusable due to yet another defect, one which our client is expected to repair at his own cost,” said Broekmann.

Jaguar Land Rover however maintained they were not liable to replace the vehicle, saying that their investigation of the problem found it was not a manufacturing defect.

“We investigate all vehicle-related claims rigorously and remain fully committed to resolving issues fairly and transparently. In this instance, our investigation confirmed that the issue raised by Ramoremi Trading CC was caused by the vehicle being submerged in water, and/or mud, exceeding the prescribed operating parameters of the vehicle, clearly defined in the warranty terms. This was not a manufacturing defect. These findings were communicated directly to Ramoremi Trading CC and its legal representatives, in line with standard procedure. We stand firmly by our assessment and our obligation to uphold the terms of the warranty agreement,” said Jaguar.

Cape Times

Source link