Having water pumped into your car’s fuel tank along with petrol or diesel isn’t going to do your car’s engine any good.
Nor your wallet, if the service station or fuel supplier denies that their fuel caused the problem, because repairing the damage caused is expensive.
Last March, two men, unknown to each other, filled up with diesel from the same bowser at a Sandton service station, 20 minutes apart. Both vehicles spluttered to a halt shortly afterwards, and both their (unrelated) motor dealerships later diagnosed large amounts of water in the fuel tank as the cause.
Both were subsequently sent separate, identical letters on the same day by an attorney representing the fuel brand saying that independent tests conducted on that service station’s diesel tank, pump and nozzle had revealed that there was no water present.
A company spokesman told me last May when I investigated the cases: “We firmly stand by these findings.
“Other customers purchased fuel before and after the two complainants on the same day.
“No adverse reports have been received from them.
“We stand by the integrity of the test results.”
And that was that.
Naturally those cases came to mind when I received a complaint recently from Zaid Omarjee of Durban, about his water-in-fuel incident of January 3.
He filled the tank of his 2013 Jetta with petrol at the BP in Sparks Road and, 30 minutes later, his engine seized.
The car was towed to his VW dealership for assessment, which found that “water contaminated fuel” had caused the problem, so he was held liable for the hefty R33 000 repair bill.
Responding to Omarjee’s complaint, BP South Africa investigated and later sent him a report claiming the fuel at the service station in question was “within specification” and “BP will therefore not accept liability for this issue”.
But Omarjee’s VW dealership told him that the fuel drained from his tank on the day had “failed” a fuel analysis because of its water concentration.
Still, BP SA would not budge. So, after seven car-less weeks, Omarjee took a loan and paid the dealership for the repair.
Earlier this month, on speaking to fuel attendants and the manager at the BP service station in Sparks Road, Omarjee discovered some important information.
Two other motorists who filled their cars with petrol there on the same day, from the same bowser, had later complained of a similar catastrophic effect on their vehicles.
That’s when Omarjee asked In Your Corner to take up his case.
Service station manager Suveen Singh confirmed the two other cases to me, and said they, along with Omarjee’s, had been forwarded to BPSA.
On the day in question, he said, the pump from which all three had petrol pumped into their vehicles had had a problematic bowser and motor.
In taking up the case with the fuel company, I asked: “Is BP SA of the view that this is an amazing coincidence, and that the fuel test which the VW dealership conducted (on Omarjee’s car) was flawed?”
Nine days later, company spokesman Karen Byamugisha called me to say that new tests had confirmed that the original test, on which their response to Omarjee was based, had come to a mistaken conclusion.
In a written response, at my request, she said that BP had re-tested Omarjee’s sample.
“Based on our new findings we have been in contact with him to work on the next step to resolve his complaint and claim.”
No doubt had Omarjee not sought media intervention that mistake would never have come to light, and he would have been left to pay R33000 to fix a problem not of his making.
In fairness, from time to time motorists commend service stations, and/ or the fuel companies – of various brands – for swiftly taking responsibility for damage caused to car engines by diesel/ petrol mix-ups or water contamination.
But clearly, in contested cases, having evidence that you weren’t the only one affected is key to corporate admission of the problem – in most cases.