When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
They have changed the sun visor twice and have cleaned the windscreen and lens multiple times as well as software upgrades etc. They have refused to change the camera although there is much evidence pointing to the camera lens being contaminated on the inside from the damping of the heater mats in the sun visor. I have specifically asked for the camera to be changed, based on this and other threads but the dealer and importer is stubbornly claiming the camera is fine and the system works as designed. Multiple warning messages each day on a perfectly clean car and clear weather and not one single evening ride with operational auto dim/mask high beam is normal they claim. Unbelievable Mercedes choose to bring this matter to court rather than replace the bogus part or accept a return. Car has been parked for 6 months now awaiting court processing.
Is there a Lemon Law you can fall back to use? I assume not since you mentioned importer. If not there’s not much anyone here can offer. Is it worth taking legal action or making the threat? Write a letter or call direct to Mercedes? Do you have a strong relationship with the Dealer? There may be no good answers.
You might build a case file with dates, pictures, comments about clean windshield, mileage to prove it’s not normal.
@Jcs@acg.no what is meant by "damping of the heater mats in the sun visor?"
How does a sun visor enter the equation?
In front of the camera lens is a triangular “funnel”, see picture below from previous post from user Cbc200, to avoid indirect sun light and reflection from interfering with the view from the camera. On the bottom of this funnel (in Norway described by Mercedes as sun visor) is a heater mat that shall keep the wind screen area in front of the camera dew and snow free. This heater mat is fastened with an adhesive, that at least in some production batches, are suspected of causing gases when heated. See below picture, from Orr’s earlier post. These gases leave a residue on the glass and lens. A pathetic suggestion from Mercedes has been for dealers to bake this part in an oven to stop future gases. Regardless if such procedure works or the part is replaced, the gases has left a screen of contamination on the wind screen, on the camera lens (both of which the dealer can clea ) but also there are suspicions around also the interior of the camera is affected by this residue and cannot be cleaned.
However there is not much interest from MB to replace the dual camera - probably due to cost and availability. However - many that have had their cameras replaced with new sun visor seem to have got rid of the problem.
Is there a Lemon Law you can fall back to use? I assume not since you mentioned importer. If not there’s not much anyone here can offer. Is it worth taking legal action or making the threat? Write a letter or call direct to Mercedes? Do you have a strong relationship with the Dealer? There may be no good answers.
You might build a case file with dates, pictures, comments about clean windshield, mileage to prove it’s not normal.
Yes - we have something kind of equivalent to a Lemon law in Norway. The dealer normally only have two attempts to rectify the same issue. If the issue is still present after two attempts and not considered immaterial the purchaser has the right to return the car and have a full refund plus interest from when such claim was raised. The term immaterial is often cause of discussions - however I believe the lack of adaptive high-beam, distronic, active brake assist and self driving is sufficient enough not to fall in the category immaterial.
The claim has to be raised against the dealer. In this case the dealer is owned by the importer and that’s why the importer is involved.
Neither dealer or importer seem concerned with the legal steps taken, but I am unsure if they understand their position. They have so far not put a lawyer on this. They are dragging their feet.
I have documented with photo more than 200 examples of the warning message showing up with time and date and reference picture for visibility. This is more or less only 1/3 of the warning messages received. I have to have a
passenger in the car to document by photo - heavy fines here for using phone not in a cradle in the car.
We have seen this before from Mercedes here where they drag things out hoping the customer will give up and if he/she do not give up they settle right before trial. Such procedure might work with some people. But not all.
I doubt any legal process will agree Mercedes’ position these warnings are proof these systems are working. I hold the position these warnings are evidence of the systems not working. So I am not planning to accept any settlement. Mercedes has to face the real world and not always assume they can bully their customers to silence. Most people can’t carry the financial burden of having an almost new car parked for months awaiting trial while also buying another one to use. So now this is equally much a principle - not allowing Mercedes to settle to avoid negative PR.
No matter what, if the problem continues, and it's replicable, and there's no customer caused damage, I can't understand their reluctance. Should be a warranty claim.
No matter what, if the problem continues, and it's replicable, and there's no customer caused damage, I can't understand their reluctance.
Yes, it is replicable.
Yes, it is not customer caused
They have even replicated the error on their own while test driving after cleaning and checking to figure out what it could be.
I agree - I can’t understand why they are not changing the darn thing before this now has become a return claim. I had a Tesla X previously and currently have BMW X5 (2020) both with the same sensors and systems without having experienced a fault on these with an exemption when driving through a heavy snow storm - clogging up all sensors and view. No systems are without any limitations - that is fully understandable. But here the fault shows up every ten minutes or every five mile on average all year around. That is not acceptable in any car - and especially a car in this price range.
Thanks. I should mention the dealer has recently offered to take the car in return and give a refund under the following conditions:
1) I must include a set of winter tyres I haven’t bought from the dealer
2) I must accept no interest is to be paid (over the two years since the first claim of return)
3) I must sign a declaration there is nothing wrong with the car
Although 1 and 2 are economical elements I can evaluate up against the process risk in any legal endeavor, item 3 is unacceptable. When one of the largest car manufacturers require their customers to lie then we have gotten to a really rotten place. I have no intentions to give in to such illegal creativity which sole purpose is to resell the car to another customer without being open on the issues and not at least prohibiting me to comment on the facts should I in the future be contacted by the new owner. This is simply not sustainable customer policy.
But at least it could be seen as a sign the dealer is slowly realizing the bad position he is in.
Thanks. I should mention the dealer has recently offered to take the car in return and give a refund under the following conditions:
1) I must include a set of winter tyres I haven’t bought from the dealer
2) I must accept no interest is to be paid (over the two years since the first claim of return)
3) I must sign a declaration there is nothing wrong with the car
Although 1 and 2 are economical elements I can evaluate up against the process risk in any legal endeavor, item 3 is unacceptable. When one of the largest car manufacturers require their customers to lie then we have gotten to a really rotten place. I have no intentions to give in to such illegal creativity which sole purpose is to resell the car to another customer without being open on the issues and not at least prohibiting me to comment on the facts should I in the future be contacted by the new owner. This is simply not sustainable customer policy.
But at least it could be seen as a sign the dealer is slowly realizing the bad position he is in.
PFL205.064 with M276.823 (Oil pump solenoid defeated)
Originally Posted by ChrJS2018
Thanks. I should mention the dealer has recently offered to take the car in return and give a refund under the following conditions:
1) I must include a set of winter tyres I haven’t bought from the dealer
2) I must accept no interest is to be paid (over the two years since the first claim of return)
3) I must sign a declaration there is nothing wrong with the car
Although 1 and 2 are economical elements I can evaluate up against the process risk in any legal endeavor, item 3 is unacceptable. When one of the largest car manufacturers require their customers to lie then we have gotten to a really rotten place. I have no intentions to give in to such illegal creativity which sole purpose is to resell the car to another customer without being open on the issues and not at least prohibiting me to comment on the facts should I in the future be contacted by the new owner. This is simply not sustainable customer policy.
But at least it could be seen as a sign the dealer is slowly realizing the bad position he is in.
Finally got the dreaded "camera view restricted" followed by either adaptive high beam disabled or driving assistance disabled or other errors I can't even remember now. It's been going on more often without the obvious surrounding e.g. foggy inside window due to weather change etc (it's been pretty warm here in the PNW). Sure enough the camera lens looks "cloudy". Took it apart and used a soft cloth specific for camera lens to give it a good wipe. Didn't have my phone with me but the before and after is very obvious. Put it back together and crossed my finger it didn't throw any other errors.
Went for a test drive, the immediate change I notice is that the auto high beam is much more responsive now. I noticed lately it's been slow to respond, at times it was too late when an oncoming car had already been blinded (sorry!), but now it seems to detect it better and able to tell between street lights or head lights.
I only took 20 minutes to do the whole thing, I figure it takes the same time for me to drive to the dealer, minus the song and dance with the SA only to be told to come back when the error appears blah blah blah which will end up taking me 2 hours of my life. Case resolved now.
Finally got the dreaded "camera view restricted" followed by either adaptive high beam disabled or driving assistance disabled or other errors I can't even remember now. It's been going on more often without the obvious surrounding e.g. foggy inside window due to weather change etc (it's been pretty warm here in the PNW). Sure enough the camera lens looks "cloudy". Took it apart and used a soft cloth specific for camera lens to give it a good wipe. Didn't have my phone with me but the before and after is very obvious. Put it back together and crossed my finger it didn't throw any other errors.
Went for a test drive, the immediate change I notice is that the auto high beam is much more responsive now. I noticed lately it's been slow to respond, at times it was too late when an oncoming car had already been blinded (sorry!), but now it seems to detect it better and able to tell between street lights or head lights.
I only took 20 minutes to do the whole thing, I figure it takes the same time for me to drive to the dealer, minus the song and dance with the SA only to be told to come back when the error appears blah blah blah which will end up taking me 2 hours of my life. Case resolved now.
Thanks for posting. Good you found a solution. Now you should hope you do not need to do that twice a year as the damping of the heater mat might continue. Further - are the parts around the camera designed to be disassembled that often or will they break. Is it really acceptable to have to use 20 minutes open up dissect the interior structure of a 130 000 USD car to maintain system operation. Hav had Volvo, Tesla, BMW with same system and never had to do this. The problems seems to occur because damping from the heater mats and problems spreads to camera outside and inside. MB should just redesign and recall.
Thanks for posting. Good you found a solution. Now you should hope you do not need to do that twice a year as the damping of the heater mat might continue. Further - are the parts around the camera designed to be disassembled that often or will they break. Is it really acceptable to have to use 20 minutes open up dissect the interior structure of a 130 000 USD car to maintain system operation. Hav had Volvo, Tesla, BMW with same system and never had to do this. The problems seems to occur because damping from the heater mats and problems spreads to camera outside and inside. MB should just redesign and recall.
Definitely worth submitting a complaint with NHTSA and MBUSA:
Now that you mention it, the part surrounding the camera does feel hot to the touch when I took it apart (I got to work right after driving it, but it was ~ 60F at the time). Makes me wonder if that's the heater, or the camera components themselves which is pretty normal in my case - I work in a surveillance industry and around high quality cameras a lot; I'm used to how they generate heat.
I'm used to maintenance on cars and pretty much in my career so taking things apart doesn't bother me, but for the most clients that MB is catering to, they will just bring it to the dealer. Interesting that you mention other brands, I'll start noticing these cameras on my family's XC90 and X3 more now.
Now that you mention it, the part surrounding the camera does feel hot to the touch when I took it apart (I got to work right after driving it, but it was ~ 60F at the time). Makes me wonder if that's the heater, or the camera components themselves which is pretty normal in my case - I work in a surveillance industry and around high quality cameras a lot; I'm used to how they generate heat.
I'm used to maintenance on cars and pretty much in my career so taking things apart doesn't bother me, but for the most clients that MB is catering to, they will just bring it to the dealer. Interesting that you mention other brands, I'll start noticing these cameras on my family's XC90 and X3 more now.
After a 3hr drive today, I touched my camera housing on the stereo cameras in 65F ambient temp and cloudy outside with climate set at 72F AC in the car and they were cool to the touch.
I've never received the camera obstruction warning so last week I tested it by blocking the camera with cellophane. After 2 miles , I received the warning. Shortly after, it started raining and my wipers took the cellophane off and the warning went away. It was an easy way to test if they were working.
Forget how many miles cleaned the lens, at around 30k got the error again. Took it in and forget what all they replaced but Wife is happy again. Looks like the plastic trim/cover is a slightly different grain now. Will have to find the paper work to see what was done.
This error popped up on my wife’s 580 intermittently the past few months. Took it to the dealer last week and turns out it had to do with humidity and the camera getting foggy. They installed updated lens covers which is supposed to over more ventilation. All good so far, but will reply back if error comes back.
This error popped up on my wife’s 580 intermittently the past few months. Took it to the dealer last week and turns out it had to do with humidity and the camera getting foggy. They installed updated lens covers which is supposed to over more ventilation. All good so far, but will reply back if error comes back.
I've been through the same route.
The issues came back, and then they replaced the whole part that contain the dual Multi Function Cameras, it is OK ever since, but time will tell how long it'll last.
The part # is a newer version than what I had with hardware from 2020 and software from 2021, so there's some hope they may have solved the fogging issue.
It is made by Veoneer in Sweden for MB. https://www.veoneer.com/
Now that my car can "see" again, I can speed through the speed bumps in my area, and have the eABC take care of it, it is amazing when road scanning is working again!
This error popped up on my wife’s 580 intermittently the past few months. Took it to the dealer last week and turns out it had to do with humidity and the camera getting foggy. They installed updated lens covers which is supposed to over more ventilation. All good so far, but will reply back if error comes back.
Can you please attach a picture of what this new cover looks like?
The part # is a newer version than what I had with hardware from 2020 and software from 2021, so there's some hope they may have solved the fogging issue.It is made by Veoneer in Sweden for MB. https://www.veoneer.com/
Absolutely bang on, you guys are a brilliant.👍 I have taken apart the adaptive high beam camera and cleaned the lens and the windscreen. The only problem, its not dark till late so may have to keep off the Rum😃
Managed to get it out but had to take out three metal clips where I’ve drawn a circles on the photo.
The camera camera lens was definitely dirty - cleaned it very carefully.
All that’s left to clean is the inside of the windscreen where the camera sits.
Did you manage to get the triangle bit of plastic off to clean the glass?
Absolutely bang on, you guys are a brilliant.👍 I have taken apart the adaptive high beam camera and cleaned the lens and the windscreen. The only problem, its not dark till late so may have to keep off the Rum😃
04-23-2023, 01:43 PM
