Hi Guys,
Betsy my beloved HJ47, has had a few problems, thanks to all the work carried out by Roo Systems in Brisbane. i bought her on ebay, sent her to RooSystems for a thorough service to prepare her for an outback adventure. They had 3 months to carry out the work!
To cut a long story very short, i had problems from leaving, from suspension through to electrics, bearings, CVs and generally bad workmanship.
i eventually got to a top class 4wd business Near Adelaide, FNB, and they have since reworked and got her into great shape.
I was offered some money to cover the suspension problems, but when i got home, Mr Hadden cut all communication! They also offered some lights and new bar work make up for their failings, but by then all faith in them had gone and work was underway to keep her on the road! Has cost me no end.
Have an interesting read.
20th December 2011Ref: Symonds:JOB2413To whom it may concern,
On or about the 16th November 2011 we were requested to inspect a ToyotaLandcruiser HJ47, Rego number 906-RPS. The vehicle had 372,750kms on theodometer. The vehicle is owned by Tony & Rebecca Symonds.
A number of issues were brought to our attention by the owners for specific checks asthese issues had caused the owners concern during recent travels. Areas of concernrelated to electrical systems such as battery over-charging, poor fridge operation, andconcerns with the integrity and protection of cabling. Other issues related to poorstarting, poor performance with the vehicle only maintaining 80km/hr maximum, andnoises. The owner mentioned some repair work had been carried out during theirtravels to fix problems that had given them grave concerns, such as suspensionfailure, and electrical problems.
We were made aware that the vehicle had been recently purchased and then a majorset up and service work was undertaken by a business known as AMMS in Brisbane,Queensland prior to leaving on their travels. As part of the work provided and invoiced,a roadworthiness inspection was delivered to the owners courtesy of AMMS.
Upon initial inspection in our mechanical service workshop by two qualifiedmechanics, and qualified electrical tradespeople, a number of issues were foundwhich we immediately drew to the attention of the owners.
The issues noted immediately were;Inspection Report
Front differential pinion bearing was loose due to excessive wear and requiresreplacement. This is a roadworthiness defect issue.
Air filter housing was incorrectly assembled, making the seal ineffective and mayhave impacted on the performance of the vehicle.
Both front wheel bearings were loose, displaying significant wheel wobble. This is aroadworthiness defect issue and a serious safety hazard.
The RHS front wheel locking hub was not internally working having parts fittedincorrectly, namely the spring, meaning the hub was always engaged. Plus the outerflange was broken, which is a roadworthiness defect issue.
The engine had a noticeable oil leak from the front seal, this is a roadworthinessdefect issue.
The seal between the gearbox and transfer case was assumed faulty, as a bypasshose was connected between the two, a common remedy for this problem.
The charging system was determined to be faulty, with intermittent overchargingcausing unsafe voltages to be detected at the battery. Further investigation required,as this may cause serious safety hazards from gas emissions.
The steering idler arm was found to be loose, incorrectly fitted and loose on thespline. This is a roadworthiness defect issue and required immediate rectification.
The drag link was found to have been cut and welded, and is a roadworthinessissue.
The u-bolts holding the front differential in place on the leaf springs were loose andrequired tightening. This was the result of suspension repairs which were reported asrequired during travels through Queensland upon leaving AMMS.
Wiring of the dual battery system was found to be done with undersized cable andtherefore contributed towards inefficient operation of the electrical system and fridge.Wiring was poorly secured to the vehicle, was not protected mechanically throughconduit or similar, and connections were poorly terminated. Grommet at panelpenetrations were not in place and cables were exposed to damage from sharp edges.
The electric horns were not working and wiring to both units was damaged. This is aroadworthiness defect issue, however no repair had been attempted.
The front indicator/park light assemblies mounted within the bull bar frame were notworking. The wiring had been cut and no attempt had been made to repair the wiring.This is a roadworthiness defect issue.
The wiper washer system was not functioning at all, and is a roadworthiness issue.
This initial inspection required us to effect a range of repairs immediately so the ownercould continue using the vehicle for the purposes of travelling interstate. A generalservice was performed, a number of critical repairs carried out, and report providedthat showed further work was required to identify any other issues that may be foundfrom a more in-depth investigation.
On or about the 1st December 2011 the client brought the vehicle back to ourworkshop for further investigation of issues we considered necessary. There wasconcern the work performed to the front differential was not done correctly and therewas potential for other issues to be found.
A thorough inspection of the vehicle was performed on the front differential, requiringfull disassembly. Upon inspection we found numerous issues that were as result ofpoor workmanship, and work that had not been done even though the AMMS invoiceshowed it had.
The issues found with the front differential included;
Wheel bearings were new but incorrectly fitted and incorrectly pre-loaded, causing
extreme heating of the bearings rendering them unserviceable for re-installation (b).The kingpin bearings had been fitted but installed with such high pre-load that it
created and wore a notch in the cups and made the wheels difficult to turn. Pre-loadwas measured at 20lbs on the driver’s side and 14lbs on the passenger side, howevernormal preload should be only 8lbs for this model.
The CV joints were found to be unserviceable, even though they had been re-packedwith grease which means they had to have been cleaned down and normally wouldalso be inspected. The damage to the CV bearings and cup surfaces relegated themto the rubbish bin. They should not have been repacked and used again. The internalaxles to the CVs were showing severe wear at the oil seal again requiring remedywork. Normally an axle seal surface issue can be overcome be disassembling theCV/axle unit then using a speedy-sleeve to replace the surface, but unfortunately theCVs could not be disassembled due to long term wear issues and therefore the wholeCV and axle assembly must be discarded (a).
The pinion bearing was found at the initial inspection to be well worn, and showing fartoo much play across the face of the pinion. The differential centre was removed andfurther evidence of poor maintenance and significant wear was found. The crown gearwas found to have significant rust across the gear which indicated the centre hadbeen sitting in water for some time. Flakes of rust had started to develop on the backof the gear, and a horizontal line showed wear the water level had been up to. Theside gears inside the carrier were found to have chipping and the hard-coating on thesurface of the gear teeth was worn off. This significant amount of wear rendered thedifferential centre unserviceable and required complete replacement (a).
The manual locking hub assemblies were found to be incorrectly assembled andfitted, and included a broken section to a flange on the hub. These requiredreplacement.
Replacement parts for the front differential need to be sourced to effect a proper repairsuch as new hub assemblies, new bearings, as well as the new CVs, new axles, newdiff centre, new seals, new gaskets, new wipers, new oil. The cost to make good thepoor workmanship of this repair now totals in the order of almost AUD$4000.00
Further investigation of other issues was undertaken and a number of repairs carriedout.
The vehicle had been reported as difficult to start. New glow plugs had been fitted, butthe system was not operating correctly with insufficient voltage at ignition on. Systemcomponents were checked and found to be operating, except for the solenoid whichprovided the initial 12 volt supply. The wiring was traced to locate the solenoid as itwas not immediately visible. Eventually an aftermarket solenoid was found bolted tothe new radiator. Unfortunately the new radiator fitted by AMMS meant the solenoidbolted to it was also removed and on installation of the new radiator it had beenoverlooked and not wired into the electrical system. As a consequence the glowsystem could not function correctly causing hard starting.
The wiper washer system was not operating, and was repaired by disassembling thedashboard to remove the operating switch and repairing the switch. The systemshould have been repaired prior to undertaking travel in remote regions, as much asbeing a roadworthiness issue.
The steering system was repaired by tightening of the idler arm using thicker washerto allow the nut to be tightened up correctly, removing the looseness of the arm on thespline.
The air cleaner box issue was rectified by installing the spinner section the correctway to ensure an adequate seal. The manner in which it was installed meant thatdamage could occur to the motor through ingress of dust and particles, as no seal wasachieved.
A new horn assembly was fitted to the vehicle as the standard horns still fitted to thevehicle had broken terminals and were never going to work again, and were not viableto repair.
The driving lights needed to be re-wired as incorrect size cabling had been used, poorinstallation methods and insufficient mechanical protection provided. Poor mounting ofthe lights using only one of three mounting points available meant the lights had to bere-fitted using newly fabricated brackets. One driving light was found not to beworking, and new parts had to be sourced by the owner under warranty.
The u-bolts to the front leaf springs were re-tightened as they were loose oninspection. The u-bolts needed to be re-tensioned after the suspension and steeringgeometry was repaired during travels after leaving AMMS. This indicates the castorangle alignment had not been checked or corrected during the major works.
The indicators fitted to the bull bar were broken and the wiring was hanging loose. Thelight assemblies showed evidence of being broken for some time. The wiring hadsimply been cut and never re-wired into the vehicle electrics. New indicatorassemblies were sourced and fitted, and correctly wired into the vehicle system.
The electrical wiring recently added to the vehicle was deemed to be of sub-standardworkmanship. There was a high degree of probability of electrical shorting occurringfrom poorly routed and poorly protected cabling, creating the potential for fire orserious damage to the vehicle electrical systems. The wiring for the secondary batterysystems was removed and new wiring installed to standard, and correct cable sizesand protection used to ensure the system would perform as required. An additional8.25 hours was spent correct this poor work and fitting.
We found the ignition key was not retained within the barrel assembly, aroadworthiness issue, and we went about changing locks and key assemblies. Duringthe process of changing door locks we found why the radio was not working. Newspeakers had been fitted by AMMS and in order to do so they had cut the internalmetal structure of the door (c), plus had cut off the end of the passenger windowregulator gear (d). This caused the window to fail to work once wound down. Fresh cutmarks show clear evidence of being a recent operation. A new regulator is to be fitted.
Upon review of the invoice provided by AMMS we also discovered the followingconcerns relating to the fact the owner was charged for parts which were not used atthe service in Brisbane. The owner was charged for 4 new brake pistons, 1 brand newcalliper (whole unit) and 2 calliper kits. The owner should have one kit left over, butthere are none here. The owner was also charged for 6 Anderson plugs but we canonly locate one fitted to the vehicle and one on a camp light.
In view of all the parts required and additional hours spent correcting work notperformed adequately, as well as parts charged and not used, we find the value of ourwork to date and estimated work yet to be performed will total approximately$10,000.00.
We have to date performed work to the value of approximately $6500.00 andimportant aspects of the work such as the electrical over-charging issues anddifferential repairs are yet to be sorted and finalised.
However we reasonably estimate a value of approximately $10,000 to correct thiswork.
If you wish to discuss any aspects of this report with us, we can be contacted per thedetails at the header of this letter.
Appendix A: Photographs
(a)
(b)
(c) (d)
Betsy my beloved HJ47, has had a few problems, thanks to all the work carried out by Roo Systems in Brisbane. i bought her on ebay, sent her to RooSystems for a thorough service to prepare her for an outback adventure. They had 3 months to carry out the work!
To cut a long story very short, i had problems from leaving, from suspension through to electrics, bearings, CVs and generally bad workmanship.
i eventually got to a top class 4wd business Near Adelaide, FNB, and they have since reworked and got her into great shape.
I was offered some money to cover the suspension problems, but when i got home, Mr Hadden cut all communication! They also offered some lights and new bar work make up for their failings, but by then all faith in them had gone and work was underway to keep her on the road! Has cost me no end.
Have an interesting read.
On or about the 16th November 2011 we were requested to inspect a ToyotaLandcruiser HJ47, Rego number 906-RPS. The vehicle had 372,750kms on theodometer. The vehicle is owned by Tony & Rebecca Symonds.
A number of issues were brought to our attention by the owners for specific checks asthese issues had caused the owners concern during recent travels. Areas of concernrelated to electrical systems such as battery over-charging, poor fridge operation, andconcerns with the integrity and protection of cabling. Other issues related to poorstarting, poor performance with the vehicle only maintaining 80km/hr maximum, andnoises. The owner mentioned some repair work had been carried out during theirtravels to fix problems that had given them grave concerns, such as suspensionfailure, and electrical problems.
We were made aware that the vehicle had been recently purchased and then a majorset up and service work was undertaken by a business known as AMMS in Brisbane,Queensland prior to leaving on their travels. As part of the work provided and invoiced,a roadworthiness inspection was delivered to the owners courtesy of AMMS.
Upon initial inspection in our mechanical service workshop by two qualifiedmechanics, and qualified electrical tradespeople, a number of issues were foundwhich we immediately drew to the attention of the owners.
The issues noted immediately were;Inspection Report
Front differential pinion bearing was loose due to excessive wear and requiresreplacement. This is a roadworthiness defect issue.
Air filter housing was incorrectly assembled, making the seal ineffective and mayhave impacted on the performance of the vehicle.
Both front wheel bearings were loose, displaying significant wheel wobble. This is aroadworthiness defect issue and a serious safety hazard.
The RHS front wheel locking hub was not internally working having parts fittedincorrectly, namely the spring, meaning the hub was always engaged. Plus the outerflange was broken, which is a roadworthiness defect issue.
The engine had a noticeable oil leak from the front seal, this is a roadworthinessdefect issue.
The seal between the gearbox and transfer case was assumed faulty, as a bypasshose was connected between the two, a common remedy for this problem.
The charging system was determined to be faulty, with intermittent overchargingcausing unsafe voltages to be detected at the battery. Further investigation required,as this may cause serious safety hazards from gas emissions.
The steering idler arm was found to be loose, incorrectly fitted and loose on thespline. This is a roadworthiness defect issue and required immediate rectification.
The drag link was found to have been cut and welded, and is a roadworthinessissue.
The u-bolts holding the front differential in place on the leaf springs were loose andrequired tightening. This was the result of suspension repairs which were reported asrequired during travels through Queensland upon leaving AMMS.
Wiring of the dual battery system was found to be done with undersized cable andtherefore contributed towards inefficient operation of the electrical system and fridge.Wiring was poorly secured to the vehicle, was not protected mechanically throughconduit or similar, and connections were poorly terminated. Grommet at panelpenetrations were not in place and cables were exposed to damage from sharp edges.
The electric horns were not working and wiring to both units was damaged. This is aroadworthiness defect issue, however no repair had been attempted.
The front indicator/park light assemblies mounted within the bull bar frame were notworking. The wiring had been cut and no attempt had been made to repair the wiring.This is a roadworthiness defect issue.
The wiper washer system was not functioning at all, and is a roadworthiness issue.
This initial inspection required us to effect a range of repairs immediately so the ownercould continue using the vehicle for the purposes of travelling interstate. A generalservice was performed, a number of critical repairs carried out, and report providedthat showed further work was required to identify any other issues that may be foundfrom a more in-depth investigation.
On or about the 1st December 2011 the client brought the vehicle back to ourworkshop for further investigation of issues we considered necessary. There wasconcern the work performed to the front differential was not done correctly and therewas potential for other issues to be found.
A thorough inspection of the vehicle was performed on the front differential, requiringfull disassembly. Upon inspection we found numerous issues that were as result ofpoor workmanship, and work that had not been done even though the AMMS invoiceshowed it had.
The issues found with the front differential included;
Wheel bearings were new but incorrectly fitted and incorrectly pre-loaded, causing
extreme heating of the bearings rendering them unserviceable for re-installation (b).The kingpin bearings had been fitted but installed with such high pre-load that it
created and wore a notch in the cups and made the wheels difficult to turn. Pre-loadwas measured at 20lbs on the driver’s side and 14lbs on the passenger side, howevernormal preload should be only 8lbs for this model.
The CV joints were found to be unserviceable, even though they had been re-packedwith grease which means they had to have been cleaned down and normally wouldalso be inspected. The damage to the CV bearings and cup surfaces relegated themto the rubbish bin. They should not have been repacked and used again. The internalaxles to the CVs were showing severe wear at the oil seal again requiring remedywork. Normally an axle seal surface issue can be overcome be disassembling theCV/axle unit then using a speedy-sleeve to replace the surface, but unfortunately theCVs could not be disassembled due to long term wear issues and therefore the wholeCV and axle assembly must be discarded (a).
The pinion bearing was found at the initial inspection to be well worn, and showing fartoo much play across the face of the pinion. The differential centre was removed andfurther evidence of poor maintenance and significant wear was found. The crown gearwas found to have significant rust across the gear which indicated the centre hadbeen sitting in water for some time. Flakes of rust had started to develop on the backof the gear, and a horizontal line showed wear the water level had been up to. Theside gears inside the carrier were found to have chipping and the hard-coating on thesurface of the gear teeth was worn off. This significant amount of wear rendered thedifferential centre unserviceable and required complete replacement (a).
The manual locking hub assemblies were found to be incorrectly assembled andfitted, and included a broken section to a flange on the hub. These requiredreplacement.
Replacement parts for the front differential need to be sourced to effect a proper repairsuch as new hub assemblies, new bearings, as well as the new CVs, new axles, newdiff centre, new seals, new gaskets, new wipers, new oil. The cost to make good thepoor workmanship of this repair now totals in the order of almost AUD$4000.00
Further investigation of other issues was undertaken and a number of repairs carriedout.
The vehicle had been reported as difficult to start. New glow plugs had been fitted, butthe system was not operating correctly with insufficient voltage at ignition on. Systemcomponents were checked and found to be operating, except for the solenoid whichprovided the initial 12 volt supply. The wiring was traced to locate the solenoid as itwas not immediately visible. Eventually an aftermarket solenoid was found bolted tothe new radiator. Unfortunately the new radiator fitted by AMMS meant the solenoidbolted to it was also removed and on installation of the new radiator it had beenoverlooked and not wired into the electrical system. As a consequence the glowsystem could not function correctly causing hard starting.
The wiper washer system was not operating, and was repaired by disassembling thedashboard to remove the operating switch and repairing the switch. The systemshould have been repaired prior to undertaking travel in remote regions, as much asbeing a roadworthiness issue.
The steering system was repaired by tightening of the idler arm using thicker washerto allow the nut to be tightened up correctly, removing the looseness of the arm on thespline.
The air cleaner box issue was rectified by installing the spinner section the correctway to ensure an adequate seal. The manner in which it was installed meant thatdamage could occur to the motor through ingress of dust and particles, as no seal wasachieved.
A new horn assembly was fitted to the vehicle as the standard horns still fitted to thevehicle had broken terminals and were never going to work again, and were not viableto repair.
The driving lights needed to be re-wired as incorrect size cabling had been used, poorinstallation methods and insufficient mechanical protection provided. Poor mounting ofthe lights using only one of three mounting points available meant the lights had to bere-fitted using newly fabricated brackets. One driving light was found not to beworking, and new parts had to be sourced by the owner under warranty.
The u-bolts to the front leaf springs were re-tightened as they were loose oninspection. The u-bolts needed to be re-tensioned after the suspension and steeringgeometry was repaired during travels after leaving AMMS. This indicates the castorangle alignment had not been checked or corrected during the major works.
The indicators fitted to the bull bar were broken and the wiring was hanging loose. Thelight assemblies showed evidence of being broken for some time. The wiring hadsimply been cut and never re-wired into the vehicle electrics. New indicatorassemblies were sourced and fitted, and correctly wired into the vehicle system.
The electrical wiring recently added to the vehicle was deemed to be of sub-standardworkmanship. There was a high degree of probability of electrical shorting occurringfrom poorly routed and poorly protected cabling, creating the potential for fire orserious damage to the vehicle electrical systems. The wiring for the secondary batterysystems was removed and new wiring installed to standard, and correct cable sizesand protection used to ensure the system would perform as required. An additional8.25 hours was spent correct this poor work and fitting.
We found the ignition key was not retained within the barrel assembly, aroadworthiness issue, and we went about changing locks and key assemblies. Duringthe process of changing door locks we found why the radio was not working. Newspeakers had been fitted by AMMS and in order to do so they had cut the internalmetal structure of the door (c), plus had cut off the end of the passenger windowregulator gear (d). This caused the window to fail to work once wound down. Fresh cutmarks show clear evidence of being a recent operation. A new regulator is to be fitted.
Upon review of the invoice provided by AMMS we also discovered the followingconcerns relating to the fact the owner was charged for parts which were not used atthe service in Brisbane. The owner was charged for 4 new brake pistons, 1 brand newcalliper (whole unit) and 2 calliper kits. The owner should have one kit left over, butthere are none here. The owner was also charged for 6 Anderson plugs but we canonly locate one fitted to the vehicle and one on a camp light.
In view of all the parts required and additional hours spent correcting work notperformed adequately, as well as parts charged and not used, we find the value of ourwork to date and estimated work yet to be performed will total approximately$10,000.00.
We have to date performed work to the value of approximately $6500.00 andimportant aspects of the work such as the electrical over-charging issues anddifferential repairs are yet to be sorted and finalised.
However we reasonably estimate a value of approximately $10,000 to correct thiswork.
If you wish to discuss any aspects of this report with us, we can be contacted per thedetails at the header of this letter.
That is absolutely horrific. I feel for you Tony, I really do. Big repair bills are hard enough to stomach but when they're due to having to correct crap workmanship that you've already paid for, there is little that stresses/depresses me more. 
