Subaru Complaint - What Subaru and Ganley Subaru especially don’t want you to know
BEDFORD, OHIO -- We write this in hopes of helping other families avoid the expense and aggravation we've experienced thanks to Ganley Subaru.
We bought a 2005 Outback 2.5 XT LTD in July of 2005 at Ellacott Shaker Subaru dealership, which later became Ganley Subaru of Bedford. At that time we also bought an extended warranty that was pitched hard by the salesman. During that visit, we were treated nicely, with eager explanations of trustworthiness, dependability, reliability, ride, and so on, and so on, and so on regarding Subary brand. Unfortunately, it was the last time we were treated with respect at Ellacott/Ganley Subaru dealership.
As we discovered much later and in the middle of a very dangerous cituation (November, freezing, and on a highway) the window washer tank was filled with water instead of washer liquid. Later, that first winter, one of thin aluminum sliders glued on top surface of the rear bumper simply fell off and ended up being stept on. It took a month, lost hours, and distinct sense of being unwelcome to replace the slider and one (!) wiper blade. Appearently, at first there were no replacement wiper blades at the dealership and, later, there were no driver side replacement wiper blades. Regarding the slider, we initially were told that it was not replaceable under warranty because it was bent. That absurd position was changed only after it was pointed out that it is impossible to bend the slider if it glued properly in place. At that point, we gave up since, highly inconveniently, working hours of the dealership service department coincide with most populace working hours.
By the way, below 25°F the window washer doesn’t work properly even with the proper liquid. To briefly mention some other deficiencies with our Suburu – expensive performance OEM tires lasted less than 35,000 miles and fared poorly on wet and snowy surfaces. Replacing those with regular passenger four season tires much improved the handling and driving in all conditions. Poor fuel economy – actual highway economy is around 21m/gal instead of 24 as advertised. Information display is primitive and there is absent “low oil level” warning light and, presumably, corresponding sensor. The later is very disturbing considering problems we have faced with the engine. After little more than 30,000 miles the power window main switch and, after 45,500 miles, the motor fan and a cam belt tensioner had to be replaced. Judging from our experience, 60,000 miles is a very inadequate drivetrain warranty for this brand.
In the process of removing wheels for the tire replacement, it became apparent that during 30,000 miles service at the dealership lug-nuts were over tightened to the point that one of them broke its bolt instead of loosening. At approximately 45,500 miles “check engine” light came on, idle became rough, and the car exhibited signs of loosing power. Because we change the oil between major services ourselves, the service department employees tried to blaime us alleging that we used diesel fuel instead of gas, did not change the engine oil on time, and so on. After the engine heads were removed, it became clear that all the accusations were groundless but there were no apologies and the repair took an astonishing five weeks. Apparently an oil control valve was faulty. In addition a motor fan and a cam belt tensioner had to be replaced under extended warranty, which could not be blaimed on us. The service department reluctantly provided a car for use during repair only after more then two weeks of inquires. Just 5000 miles later, on the Thanksgiving eve and at two thirds into a drive to Boston the “check engine” light came on again and, a few minutes later, the turbocharger stoped working. We were told at Clay Subaru in Boston that it happened because the turbocharger was not fastened properly, apparently after previous repair at Ganley Subaru. In addition to worrying instead of celebrating, we were stranded in Boston for three more working days more than we planned to stay.
The turbocharger failed again at 69,900 miles or less than 10,000 after a major scheduled service at Ganley Subaru and 1,500 miles after we changed the oil and filter. Although the car is under extended warranty with First Extended, the coverage was denied under pretense that the car was abused by us. Apparently, this happened because Ganley Subaru “forgot” to report oil changes that were performed as part of the repairs at both Ganley and Clay Subaru and because we were presumed guilty of lying about changing oil ourselves in the absence of iron-clad proof otherwise (credit card receipts for purchase of oil and filters apparently do not constitute such proof). It did not mater that, at the time of purchase, we were told that self service is OK as long as we keep the log of it, that, at least once before, this kind of accusation was proven false, and subsequent inspection has shown no signs of the abuse. Moreover, despite every invoice carrying a proud statement: “THE TEAM AT GANLEY BEDFORD IS DEDICATED TO SERVING THE NEEDS OF OUR CUSTOMERS WITH HONESTY AND INTEGRITY WITH A TOTAL BELIEF IN OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES WHILE PROVIDING THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SATISFACTION IN EVERYTHING WE DO”, for four days after the car was brought to the dealership nothing has been done. It required multiple phone conversation with a reluctant and almost contemptuous employee to find out that the dealership presented a very negative picture to the insurer. First Extended, in turn, happily used that impression and ignored facts proving recent oil change. As a result, two weeks after the car was brought to Ganley Subaru, we decided to tow it to a repair shop we can trust to do honest job.
At this time two things are certain: we’ve visited any Ganley dealership for the last time in our lives and we will never consider owning another Subaru.
P.S. To add an insult to injury, Service director of Ganley Subary Pete Spacagna instructed his technicians to put the oil pan (removed on request from First Extended) without sealing it properly as a “revenge” for my refusal to pay for it, although, when we complained about it, his boss pledged to reimburse us the cost of this work done properly at another shop.