购新车3周后陆续故障和抛锚　华男将透过法律途径争取权益

（马六甲7日讯）购买新车3周后频繁故障和抛锚，送厂维修仍3度出现问题，导致乐龄女司机心有余悸，透过儿子联系客服投诉，却没有合理的解决方案，马六甲国内贸易及生活成本局建议带入消费人仲裁庭解决。

车主的儿子王国涌（46岁）今日召开新闻发布会，叙述他们的经历时强调，希望有关公司重视汽车安全与售后服务。

他指出，他在今年1月17日透过甲州一间授权经销商，为母亲购买一辆价值16万令吉的日本品牌进口轿车，他原本希望70岁的母亲能安心出行，没想到却接连带来精神上的折磨。

他披露，该辆车子在3个月内，分别于2月18日、3月26日及4月16日，3次于道路上行驶时引擎自动熄灭，警示灯亮起，送给原厂维修。而他在这期间亲自试驾该辆车，在花园住宅区时也出现激烈抖动，引擎突然自动熄灭的问题。

“首次送修，维修员表示与汽油品质有关，所以换了电池，把汽油抽出来；第二次则换了各种零件包括感测器。原以不会再有问题，没料到母亲前往麻坡途中，车子第三次故障，且引擎无法重启，刹车系统故障，需要拖车。”

他说，当时车上有5名高龄的妇女，包括97岁的外婆和84岁的姑婆，在酷热天气下等待救援，大家都感到焦虑不安。

基于多次出现上述问题，即便该辆车已送回家里，其母亲仍不敢开出门。为此，他在4月18日电邮给相关汽车制造商的客服，提出退款，或更换另一辆新车的要求。

“我母亲之前所开的旧车，也是属于这家品牌，不曾出现问题，所以才决定购买他们所生产的新款车。无论如何，我所得到的回复是会送一份礼物，制造商无意作出赔偿或更换，对方也没有派代表与我们面对面商讨合理的解决方案，令我们感到失望。”

针对此事，王国涌联系州议员拿督魏喜森，而甲州内贸局官员也联系他，建议把所有相关资料带入消费人仲裁庭，透过法律途径解决问题。

Summary of the Incident:

Timeline of Events:

January 17
Car Purchase: Wang Guoyong (王国涌) bought a new car worth 160,000 MYR for his 70-year-old mother through an authorized dealership in Melaka. The car is a Japanese brand. He hoped it would provide safe and reliable transportation for his mother.

February 18
First Breakdown: The car experienced its first breakdown on the road, with the engine automatically shutting down and warning lights appearing. The car was sent for repairs at the original manufacturer’s service center. The mechanic suggested the issue might be related to fuel quality and replaced the battery and drained the fuel.

March 26
Second Breakdown: The car broke down again, and this time, the service center replaced various parts, including the sensor. Wang was told the issue was resolved, but the problem persisted.

April 16
Third Breakdown: During a trip to Muar, the car broke down again, and the engine wouldn’t restart. Additionally, the brake system malfunctioned, requiring the car to be towed. The car was carrying five elderly women, including Wang’s 97-year-old grandmother and 84-year-old aunt. They had to wait in the hot weather for assistance, which caused distress.

April 18
Customer Complaint: Wang emailed the car manufacturer’s customer service, demanding either a refund or a replacement with a new car.

Response from Manufacturer:
The manufacturer replied with an offer of a "gift" but did not agree to a refund or replacement of the car. They also did not send a representative for face-to-face discussions, which left Wang feeling disappointed.

April 18 (continued)
Legal Advice: Wang reached out to the local assemblyman, Datuk Wei Xishen, who advised them to take the matter to the Consumer Arbitration Tribunal to resolve the issue through legal means.

Conclusion:
Wang Guoyong is seeking a legal resolution after the new car repeatedly malfunctioned within a short period. He is dissatisfied with the manufacturer’s lack of a reasonable solution and is now pursuing the issue through the Consumer Arbitration Tribunal.