Mitsubishi ordered to refund Triton owner over exceeded fuel consumption

Mitsubishi Motors Australia has been ordered to buy back a Triton utility from a Victorian man for its original $39,500 sum after it was found to have exceeded advertised fuel consumption claims.

In what could be a landmark decision for Australian consumers and the car industry, Zelko Begovic appeared before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal on May 27 and argued he was misled by the laboratory-based NEDC fuel consumption for the Triton.

Senior member L Forde ordered Mitsubishi dealer Northpark Berwick Investments Pty Ltd pay Mr Begovic the sum of $39,500, stating that “the vehicle the subject of the proceedings becomes the property of the first respondent [Northpark Berwick Investments]".

Mitsubishi Motors Australia has refuted the findings and separately applied for leave to appeal the Tribunal's decision in the Supreme Court.

Mr Begovic purchased the Mitsubishi MQ Triton 4x4 GLS DID Auto DC-PU from a Berwick Mitsubishi dealer in 2017, with a standard fuel consumption label adhered to the vehicle’s windscreen.

Mr Begovic had previously owned a 2008 model Mitsubishi Triton and told the Tribunal he had expected an improvement in fuel consumption in the new model, relying on the information on the label.

In court documents, Begovic claimed the “vehicle’s actual fuel consumption is significantly higher than the fuel consumption represented on the label and the label is misleading”. He also claimed “that the vehicle is defective because of the excessive fuel consumption”.

In evidence presented to the Tribunal, Begovic said he expected to use 8.5L/100km driving in Extra Urban conditions, above the 6.8L/100km claim, but in fact used 12.44L/100km based on 19 different fuel receipts.

Begovic also presented statements from an expert witness.

In July and August of 2018, Begovic and Mitsubishi agreed to jointly conduct testing on the vehicle, including the use of a Dyno meter, to determine the fuel consumption. This testing, conducted on August 9, 2018, documented a fuel consumption rating of between 8.5L/100km and 8.85L/100km, well above the advertised 6.8L/100km Extra Urban claim.

Mitsubishi representatives appeared on behalf of the dealer at the VCAT hearing. The company's position was that the fuel consumption label statistics are correct.

In 2017, several markets including Europe replaced the old NEDC cycle with WLTP (Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure), designed to provide fuel consumption claims that are closer to real-world figures.

In a statement to carsales, a spokesman for Mitsubishi Motors Australia confirmed the car-maker would be applying for leave to appeal the Tribunal's decision in the Supreme Court.

"Mitsubishi Motors Australia strongly disagree with the findings in a VCAT case with Mr Zelko Begovic that the stated fuel consumption on the label on his 2016 Triton GLS was misleading," the statement said.

"The Tribunal took into account test results provided by the customer of their used vehicle, which was tested to a different methodology to the ADR81/02 standard outlined on the fuel consumption label.

"The testing used different standards to achieve a result, including vehicle load, fuel quality standard and the tests were outside laboratory conditions as they utilised portable testing equipment."

The spokesman said that Mr Begovic's own testing presented variations that were "incomparable to the official ADR test cycle figures on the vehicle".

"In regards to the claim of Mr Begovic in the Tribunal that his fuel consumption figures when he drove the vehicle exceeded the ADR mandated test figures; Mitsubishi Motors Australia note that real-world testing is different to laboratory testing," the statement read.

"The fuel consumption label on all vehicles states 'actual fuel consumption and CO2 emissions depend on factors such as traffic conditions, vehicle conditions and how you drive' and this applies to all vehicles on the road today. Mr Begovic also had modified his vehicle from the factory standard which can also lead to increased fuel consumption."

Industry body the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries declined to provide a formal response.