Dear colleagues drivers, please pay attentions to my trouble and draw appropriate conclusions.
On January 16, 2008, I have bought a car Mitsubishi Outlander from the company "Zolotoy Vek"Ltd. ("The Golden Century"), Simferopol, Republic Crimea, Ukraine - the official dealer of the company MITSUBISHI Motors. As I am a resident of Donetsk region, the newly bought car was registered in Khartsyzsk, Donetsk region (the state registered No. AH5005CP).
The first technical maintenance was performed on February 14, 2008, at Service Station "NIKO Donetsk" Ltd. (subsidiary enterprise of the company "NIKO Ukraine") after the run distance 1000 km.
I heard a rumble under the motor hood at the run distance up to 7000 km on the highway Kiev-Donetsk, however, none of service transducers or appliances indicated disrepairs in the car. Only after the rumble raised considerably I had to stop the car. After stopping down the car I saw drops of oil on the asphalt. I cut off the engine and checked the oil level in the car. The level of oil was sufficient. When checking the level of oil in the car transmission case I found that oil in the transmission case is absent due to the leakage. Specialists of service station "NIKO Donetsk" on the phone recommended to call for the recovery vehicle and to evacuate my car to Donetsk to the service station "NIKO Donetsk", so I followed their advice.
The technical specialists at NIKO service station together with the representative on the warranty service checked and found a leakage of oil in the car transmission case in the section of duralumin faucet to the radiator. The examination was accompanied with photographing. The car was taken to the warranty repairing for the change of faucets.
Due to the absence of spare parts required for the repair the idle time-out of the car at the station was about 30 days. The car was given back to me after that period.
From the moment of reaching the run distance of 30000 km the troubles occurred in the car transmission during the engine running. I indicated the stated malfunctions in the car transmission during the service maintenance on October 14, 2008 and it was suggested to perform the diagnostics of the car and car transmission especially.
After making the test operation I was told that the performed diagnostics proved the absolute perfect condition of the car.
Also the vice-director on technical service Mickail Vladimirovich (unfortunately I don't know his surname) informed that the head-office of MITSUBISHI in Kiev was notified about the troubles with my car and the head-office permitted the further running of my car.
The problems became obvious during the service maintenance at the run distance of 50000 lcm. My claims for the malfunctions of car transmission were taking for consideration. With this regard and according to the recommendation of the head-office of your company, the specialists of service station made appropriate investigations during the car moving. The results of the investigation were sent to the head-office in Kiev. Notwithstanding the presence of the confirmed malfunction, the head-office allowed the further running of my car.
At reaching the run distance of 59600 km, it became impossible to drive a car that involved the creation of crash-dangerous situation on the road.
With this regard on January 15, 2009, I took my car to the service station "NIKO Donetsk" for malfunction warranty repairing.
In the result of the performed diagnostics of the car the malfunction of the car gearbox was ascertained due to the reasons not depending upon me. That was confirmed by the vice-director on technical service Mickail Vladimirovich. At the same time he explained that the new unassembled transmission case was delivered for my car from the exhibition booth in Kiev.
On February 02, 2009, Mickail Vladimirovich notified me, that NIKO technical specialists made the "assembled" transmission case combining the transmission gearbox of my car and the transmission gearbox received from Kiev, i.e. they made temporary troubleshooting just for one month. Along with they ensured me that the order was taken for my car by head-office for the installation of the new transmission case, which should be received within 4-5 weeks from Holland.
On February 04, 2008, I was appointed to take my car from the service station. On my coming to service station Mickail Vladimirovich explained to me that the authentic (initial, native-mode) transmission gearbox of my car was assembled and installed into my car. Along with he stated that a service transducer unknown to me was taken from the entirely new car and that transducer was installed into my car instead of the faulty one. According to the words of Mickail Vladimirovich, the malfunction of that service transducer was a reason of breakdown of my car.
I refused to accept my car in such state (i.e.with old faulty gearbox) and currently my car is located at the service station of "NIKO Donetsk" Ltd..
05.02.2009 I sent a legal appeal to the Director of NIKO Ukraine for the possible replacement of my car for the new one of the same model and mark in the order prescribed by the legislation of Ukraine.
Till now I didn't receive any answer.
On February 17, 2009, I've got a letter from "NIKO Donetsk" Ltd. where it was stated that during the performance of a car's diagnostics the oxidation of contact points was found on the housing of a service transducer of the transmission drive shaft. That was a reason of malfunction of my car. As indicated in the letter, presently my car is technically viable and ready for further running, and the transmission defects declared by me were not confirmed.
Also by its letter dated February 05, 2009, "NIKO Donetsk" Ltd. obliges me to take the car from its territory with the utmost promptness. Otherwise I would be charged 25,00 hrv per day for the car storage. However, the company does not indicated in the said letter, that my car was on the warranty service repair within 20 days for a transducer replacement.
Moreover, the Statement on the car's diagnostics test researches is not attached to the said letter, that places in a question the performed repair and the further running of the car.
"NIKO Donetsk" Ltd. indicates in its letter referring to the Art. 1 of the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of the Consumers' Rights" that the revealed and eliminated malfunctions were not essential. However, in accordance with Point "b" Part 12, Art.l of the above-said Law "the malfunction is considered as essential when the period for its elimination lasts for more than 14 days".
My car was in repair for 20 days, that is confirmed by schedule-order dated January 15, 2009. From all above-mentioned the finding can be made out that the malfunction under discussion is essential and very seriousA
Anatoly P.Meshkovsky

 

You have big problems, I wish you the best of luck!

 

Good luck with your problems. You talked about Ukraine law that protects the consumer. I hope you can get some resolution to your problem with this law. Here in the United States we have "lemon laws" that serve a similiar function in protecting the rights of consumers who purchase a vehicle that has many problems.