Van fire caused by ‘unidentified’ fault
The estate of Marek Powierza will receive $7,450 from a car dealer after a Ford Transit burst into flames shortly after it was purchased.
Powierza, who was previously general manager of the Enterprise Motor Group for about 20 years, took a claim to the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal after alleging the fire was caused by a fault with the van. He passed away on November 27, 2019, before a ruling could be made.
Powierza, pictured, bought the van from Robert Allen Wholesale in Auckland, trading as RAW Motors, on June 25, 2019. However, about three weeks later, it was destroyed when the blaze started behind the dashboard.
In his complaint, Powierza, who was 79, alleged the fire was caused by an electrical fault. The dealer claimed its cause hadn’t been proven, so it couldn’t be attributed to a problem with the vehicle.
But tribunal adjudicator Brett Carter ruled that, “a reasonable consumer would not expect a recently purchased vehicle to spontaneously ignite” and found in favour of Powierza, as the applicant, in-line with the Consumer Guarantees Act.
The van went up in flames in last July when it was parked at Powierza’s home. His son Stefan was nearby and extinguished the fire.
The van was then assessed by senior fire risk-management officer Robert Watson, of the New Zealand Fire Service (NZFS). He considered the issue resulted from an undetermined fault in the electrical wiring behind the dashboard.
Powierza – and later his estate – believed the fire was caused by an inherent defect with the vehicle, possibly caused by repairs to it pre-purchase.
Robert Allen Wholesale denied performing any repairs that could have interfered with the vehicle’s wiring, and suggested the fire might have been caused by someone else performing work on it, including by tampering with – or removing – its radio.
However, Carter rejected that explanation as well as the suggestion the fire might have been “deliberately” lit. He added the NZFS’ report made no mention of any sign of it being intentionally lit.
“Accordingly, I consider it most likely that – as set out in Watson’s report – that the fire was caused by an unidentified fault in the wiring or electrical system that caused the vehicle to spontaneously ignite,” said Carter. “It was, therefore, not of acceptable quality for the purposes of section six of the act.”
Powierza attended the first hearing by phone, but passed away a few days later before the matter could be completed. With the consent of his estate, his claim was continued with son-in-law Stuart Mitchell representing Powierza’s estate.
The details of the case
The tribunal heard the vehicle caught fire on July 17, 2019, while parked at Powierza’s home. His son Stefan was nearby and was able to extinguish the flames, but not before significant damage was done.
The vehicle was subsequently assessed by Robert Watson, a senior fire risk-management officer with the New Zealand Fire Service (NZFS) and his report was provided to the tribunal.
That report contained colour photos showing the front of van, particularly its dashboard, had been damaged. Watson considered the fire was accidental and believed it resulted from an undetermined fault in the electrical wiring behind the dashboard.
Stuart Mitchell, Powierza’s son-in-law, and Powierza’s son Stefan both alleged the fire was caused by an inherent defect within the van, possibly caused by repairs to its A-pillar before it was supplied.
Stefan Powierza suggested that, while welding the pillar, Robert Allen Wholesale might have inadvertently tampered with the wiring loom, causing an electrical fault that triggered the fire.
Robert Allen Wholesale denied performing any repairs that could have interfered with the wiring. It said that, despite Stefan Powierza’s claims, it didn’t perform any welding on, or touch, the vehicle’s wiring. It added it performed only work required to obtain a warrant of fitness, none of which required any interference with the wiring or electrical system.
The adjudicator, Brett Carter, said: “I accept Robert Allen Wholesale’s evidence on this point and am satisfied the evidence does not show the fire was caused by any work it performed before sale.”
In its defence, Robert Allen Wholesale suggested the fire might have been caused by Stefan Powierza, or someone else, working on the van – including by tampering with, or removing, its radio.
The trader said that Stefan Powierza had expressed an intention to replace the radio and it believed the fire might have been caused by his attempt to do so.
Robert Allen Wholesale also suggested photos provided by Watson showed the radio had been removed before the fire because its LED display was undamaged.
Carter said: “I’m not satisfied the evidence shows any such work was performed. Stefan Powierza denied performing any work on the radio and I accept his evidence. Further, I’m not satisfied the undamaged LED display proves the radio had been removed.
“The photos show most of the fire damage was caused to the area above the back of the radio, with little damage to the front of the dashboard where the radio’s face would have been located.
“I note, in particular, there are air-conditioning controls directly beneath the radio, which have been largely unaffected by the fire, suggesting it was not particularly intense in the part of the dashboard where the radio’s face was located.
“Additionally, there are clear scorch marks on the top rear of the radio in precisely the location where the fire appears to have been most intense, suggesting the radio was in-situ at the time. I am therefore satisfied the radio was intact when the fire occurred and that it hadn’t been removed or tampered with.
“There was also some suggestion Stefan Powierza may have deliberately lit the fire. I am satisfied he did not. Watson’s report made no mention of any sign of the fire being intentionally lit and I accept Stefan’s evidence that he didn’t start it.
“Accordingly, I consider it most likely that, as set out in Watson’s report, the fire was caused by an unidentified fault in the wiring or electrical system that caused the vehicle to spontaneously ignite.”
During his evidence on the first day of the hearing, Marek Powierza said he purchased the van to enable Stefan to move from Auckland to Whanganui. Powierza’s estate also sought to recover $1,800 being the cost incurred in hiring a rental to transport Stefan’s belongings to Whanganui in October 2019.
However, Carter wasn’t satisfied the buyer was entitled to recover that cost. “Although the cost was incurred, I’m not satisfied it was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the vehicle catching fire,” he said.
“If Robert Allen Wholesale had been told the vehicle was being purchased with the specific intention of transporting belongings to Whanganui, then this cost may have been reasonably foreseeable consequence of the vehicle becoming unusable. However, Robert Allen Wholesale wasn’t told of this purpose, and I’m not satisfied it should be obliged to compensate Powierza’s estate in those circumstances.”
Marek Powierza attended the first hearing by telephone, but passed away a few days later before this matter could be completed. With the consent of his estate, his claim was continued. Stuart Mitchell – son-in-law – represented Powierza’s estate.
Tribute to Marek – a man with a ‘great’ personality
Read Marek Powierza’s obituary. It includes a tribute to him by Fred Lewis, founder of Enterprise Motor Group, who described Powierza as his “right-hand man”.
