Photo: Google Street View
A Vernon attorney has lost his fight for compensation for more than $5,000 in work done on his BMW that he says arose when an oil change was done improperly.
Andrew Powell brought his 2009 BMW X5 to WBC Holdings Ltd. (WBC), doing business as Great Canadian Oil Change, for an oil change, BC Civil Settlement Tribunal member Micah Carmody said in a May 9 small claims decision.
Powell alleged that during the January 22, 2022, WBC oil change was removed and was unable to replace an oil filter cap insert that directs oil through the filter.
This, Powell said, resulted in damage to several parts. He claimed $5,000 in damages for repairs and engine cleaning.
The WBC, however, responded that the repair costs were related to the BMW’s pre-existing problems and not the WBC’s oil change. He denied losing any oil filter cap components.
Powell said his check engine light came on on February 8, 2022.
He took the BMW to his regular mechanic, Affordable Auto Repair, and paid a $2,508 bill, which contained extensive notes. He said that amount was attributable to the WBC oil change.
Powell says his check engine light came back on a few months later, prompting him to take the vehicle back to AAR. Powell said $2,589 of AAR’s $3,865 bill on May 30, 2022 was attributed to the WBC oil change.
The February 9, 2022 AAR invoice includes detailed notes made by a Red Seal automotive technician, who noted that based on engine error codes and information provided by Powell, he recently an oil change.
The technician started by checking the oil filter cap.
“It is undisputed that Mr. Powell’s BMW model has an oil filter cap that typically has a central cartridge or insert that directs the flow of oil,” Carmody said. “Without this, the oil bypasses the filter, resulting in unfiltered motor oil being supplied to the engine.”
As suspected, the technician found the cartridge missing. The technician noted that it can stick to the filter when the old one is removed and can be inadvertently discarded along with the filter.
WBC disputed that it had been removed and could not replace the insert, saying it should have gone earlier.
“It’s based on the note on his January 22nd oil change invoice that he observed ‘heavy oil leaks under the oil filter upon arrival,'” Carmody said.
Powell said AAR staff told him that every bill they see from the WBC says there was a pre-existing oil leak.
The court asked for this hearsay evidence and refused to accept it.
An AAR technician testified that he has seen the same problem that affected Powell’s BMW in the past with other vehicles from different dealerships, especially those that specialize in quick oil changes.
Carmody said Powell did not say when his previous oil change had occurred, did not say how many miles the BMW was driven between its last service and the WBC oil change, or the 17 days between the WBC oil change and first AAR invoice.
Although an AAR technician said the problems did not predate the oil change in question, it is unclear whether he was based on AAR’s service records, which were not in evidence, or simply what Powell told him.
“Under these circumstances, given that there was documented heavy oil leakage under the filter prior to the WBC oil change, I cannot conclude on a balance of probabilities that the insert was removed during the change of ‘oil of WBC and not at another time,’ the court ruled.
Carmody added that AAR’s repairs were equally consistent with a previous leak as with a leak that developed after the WBC oil change.
“I believe that Mr. Powell has not demonstrated a breach of the standard of care,” the panel member said in dismissing the claim.
