2009 Audi A4 Suspension Issue – Bought from Dealer

[Mark Valley]

Hello,

I had the car inspected by an independent inspection company, and they found several suspension-related issues. Both suspension bushes are rubber coming off, and the top suspension bushes are broken on both sides. The dealer is claiming it's just normal wear and tear, but the inspector said these issues would cause an MOT failure. He also suspects the MOT may not have been done properly.

I have uploaded video from an independent garage. 

Who is right here, do you think? 

Mileage: 100.662

MOT passed: 26th of February 2025

Thank you in advance.

Edited April 10 by Mark Valley
more info added

[cliffcoggin]

Soft or damaged rubber bushes in the suspension joints are instant MOT failures, and the dealer's sale of the car to you was illegal for that reason. Take it back to him and demand, not ask, for either a repair or a refund.

[spartacus 68]

We’re not talking main dealer here. Jeez, they pick up on worn wiper blades!

At 100k miles you are going to have suspension related issues at some point. Check service history for what’s been done to date. Meyle HD or Lemforder, torque with weight on vehicle.

At the very least I’d expect this to show up as an advisory on previous MOT. You’re right to challenge it.

[cliffcoggin]

Do you have an update for us Mark?

[Mark Valley]

Hello,

@cliffcoggin@spartacus 68

Thank you for your previous responses, and apologies for the delay in getting back to you—I was unable to access my account until today.

Regarding the issue with the vehicle, the dealer has repeatedly claimed that the problem is due to general wear and tear, that the car is safe to drive, and therefore they are not responsible for any repairs. He also stated that each bush costs around £6–£7 and expected me to replace all the bushes myself. I informed him that this is not acceptable or legal, considering the condition of the vehicle when sold.

He provided the contact information for the MOT tester who originally inspected the vehicle, and I have since booked an appointment with them for the 30th of April. Our conversation has been recorded via WhatsApp messages for reference. The tester has agreed to inspect the vehicle and take appropriate action if necessary.

My expectations are straightforward: I expect the issue to be repaired and the car made fully MOT compliant. If the necessary repairs are not carried out, I will be seeking a partial refund. Failing that, I will be forced to escalate the matter to the DVLA.

While individual bushes may be inexpensive, the labour involved in replacing each one is considerable. Most qualified mechanics would opt to replace the entire suspension component rather than individual bushings due to the complexity and time required.

It’s worth noting that the MOT history shows only one advisory: "Underbody and suspension components undersealed." This raises further concerns regarding the accuracy and thoroughness of the inspection conducted.

 

[Magnet]

Thanks Mark,

Why return the car to the original MOT station, rather than another (independent) one? 
Was the ‘independent inspection company’ assessment of the car carried out before you bought it or after? If after - why not before - it would have been far more meaningful. 
‘Escalating to matter to DVLA’ why them, and what will be your discontent with them? 

[Mark Valley]

Thank you for your response Magnet.

1. Why return the car to the original MOT station rather than another (independent) one?
I chose to return the car to the original MOT station because it was the same garage that certified the vehicle as roadworthy. If there were underlying issues that should have been flagged during the initial MOT, it's important they are made aware and given the opportunity to re-examine their own assessment. This also provides a clear chain of accountability and supports any potential case of negligence or improper testing.

2. Was the independent inspection carried out before or after the purchase?
The inspection was carried out after the purchase. In hindsight, a pre-purchase inspection would have been ideal, and I acknowledge that. However, at the time, I relied on the MOT and the dealer’s assurance of the vehicle’s condition. 

3. Why escalate the matter to the DVLA, and what would your concern with them be?
If the MOT was improperly carried out or misleading, and the vehicle was sold as roadworthy when it was not, that raises serious safety and compliance concerns. Escalating to the DVLA would not be out of discontent with them personally, but rather to report a potentially flawed MOT process and to prompt an investigation into the garage's practices. I believe this garage is part of the dealer's garage and MOT station.

Honestly, I will try to sort out issues with them and follow their instructions. Otherwise, I will file a complaint with DVLA and Trading Standards. 

What would you do if you were in this situation?  @Magnet

[Magnet]

Thanks Mark,

If it were mine:-

(1) I would not return it to the same MOT station - they are highly likely to pass it again - perhaps with a backside- covering advisory. As said, I would chose a random local MOT station. 

(2) Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but would I have put my faith in the car’s total condition being assessed via a seller-chosen MOT and the seller’s word? No ( in caps). 
 

(3). Such MOT issues are drawn to the attention of VOSA and not DVLA.

As an aside, I go back many decades, at the time I was selling a MK2 Cortina Estate. A potential buyer ( without having seen the car) arranged for an AA inspection. They came up with about half a dozen trivial conclusions on what was a nice vehicle, and understandably, he did not buy it - but someone else did shortly after. The point I make is that paid-for inspections can be a backside covering assessment, to prevent any ( in caps) come backs. Might be worth keeping this in mind, and the affair may turn out to be a storm in a tea cup.

We can only offer advice to follow on the ‘if it were mine’ principle, and it’s obviously up to the poster to chose whether to follow it or reject it.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do Mark, but please keep us up to date on progress.

Kind regards,

Gareth. 

[spartacus 68]

In my experience, using bushes is only cost effective if you're doing the work yourself. As you mentioned, labour is the killer. For convenience, replacing the entire arm is the way to go. The suspension arm needs to be completely removed, the old bush pressed out and the new one pressed in. On lower arms, some vehicles may have hydra bushes fitted (filled with a liquid). Once it's all done, the vehicle tracking geometry should be checked.

Personally, I'd have chosen a random MOT centre and put it through. You might get some disparity between the two checks, but it should be minimal, as the garage's MOT certification is at stake, so it's in their interests to be honest and impartial.

Visual inspection is only part of it, the tester should put a pry bar on those joints to check for flex.