Proton X70 Owner's 31 Service Visits After Tribunal Win

Proton X70 Owner’s 31 Service Visits After Tribunal Win

The Proton X70 is Proton’s flagship compact SUV, manufactured in Malaysia by Proton Holdings Berhad, and sold through a nationwide network of authorised service centres. The vehicle competes in the Malaysian C-segment SUV market and is designed to provide a locally-assembled alternative to imported rivals such as the Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5. For Malaysian owners, the X70 promises a balance of modern technology, turbocharged performance, and local warranty coverage, typically spanning five years or 100,000 km, whichever comes first.

A Proton X70 owner named Ah Ong, who posted in the paultan.org Automotive/Car Discussion Group on Facebook, has documented 31 visits to a Proton service centre over a 23-month period, claiming that persistent vibration and knocking issues remain unresolved despite a successful Tribunal claim against Proton. The case, reported by Careta on 23 September 2026, highlights systemic challenges in the Malaysian automotive after-sales service landscape, including parts delays, disputed diagnostics, and the emotional toll of repeated repairs on vehicle owners.

Key Facts

The Proton X70 case documented by Careta involves a vehicle received in October 2024, with 31 recorded service visits and a tribunal ruling in the owner’s favour by April 2026.

What Problems Did the Owner Report With the Proton X70?

The owner reported a sequence of mechanical and cabin-related defects beginning shortly after vehicle delivery, including brake pedal vibration, squealing brakes, a brake pedal that allegedly sank to the floor in November 2024, and an engine stall when exiting a junction. Later issues included steering rack knocking, driver seat clicking, dashboard vibration, and uneven steering rotation left versus right.

According to the owner’s Facebook post, the initial problems were identified as a lifted roof rack cover, brake pedal vibration, brake squealing, wiper blade noise, knocking from the left rear, and air-conditioning hissing sounds. Brake fluid bleeding and replacement occurred between December 2024 and January 2025, followed by the replacement of brake discs and pads. The steering rack and clock spring were replaced between October and December 2025.

“The owner reported that after the steering rack and engine mounting replacement in July 2026, cabin and floor vibration became more pronounced, and steering knocking became more frequent and stronger than before the repair.”

— Careta, 23 September 2026, citing owner Ah Ong’s Facebook post

Despite these repairs, the owner claimed the steering rotation left and right remained unbalanced, brake squealing returned, and steering knocking persisted. The owner said he received an email from Proton in January 2026 stating that his complaints would no longer be addressed because the condition was still considered within specification.

Reported faults on the Proton X70 spanned brake system failures, steering rack defects, engine mounting vibration, and persistent cabin noises, with corrective repairs failing to resolve the issues after multiple attempts.

What Was the Outcome of the Tribunal Case Against Proton?

Ah Ong won his Tribunal case in April 2026, and Proton was directed to repair the vehicle within 14 days. However, the owner stated that repairs were delayed because Proton informed him that spare parts were on order. The steering rack and engine mounting were ultimately replaced in July 2026.

The owner claimed that after collecting the vehicle, the vibration on the cabin floor became more pronounced, and steering knocking became more frequent and stronger compared with the condition before the repair. He also reported being told that the new engine mounting required a break-in period before it would perform optimally.

The Tribunal process itself was time-intensive. The owner stated he attended two Tribunal sessions, spent more than 30 hours on phone calls, and sent more than 40 emails in pursuit of a resolution. The Tribunal’s decision, however, did not result in a lasting fix for the vehicle’s reported faults.

The April 2026 Tribunal ruling directed Proton to repair the X70 within 14 days, yet the owner reported that the appointed repairs were delayed by parts availability and did not resolve the core complaints.

Was the Vibration Issue Attributable to Tyres?

In August 2026, a team from Proton’s headquarters inspected the vehicle and confirmed the presence of floor vibration, according to the owner. Proton reportedly attributed the vibration to the tyres, which had approximately 20 percent remaining tread depth after more than 17,000 km of driving, and said further inspection would only occur after tyre replacement.

The owner replaced two tyres with Continental UX7 tyres in September 2026 at his own expense, but claimed the vibration did not disappear. In addition to floor and seat vibration while the engine was running, he reported that steering knocking and dashboard vibration continued unabated.

The owner acknowledged that a three-cylinder engine paired with a 7DCT transmission behaves differently from a four-cylinder engine and said he did not expect four-cylinder smoothness. He maintained, however, that the more prominent vibration and stronger steering knocking appeared only after the steering rack and engine mounting replacement in July 2026.

Proton’s August 2026 inspection confirmed floor vibration but attributed the cause to tyres with 20 percent tread remaining; after the owner replaced two tyres at his own cost in September 2026, the vibration reportedly persisted.

Which Complaints Were Resolved?

The owner listed several complaints that were successfully resolved, including brake squealing, the brake pedal sinking to the floor, air-conditioning noise, clicking from the driver’s seat, and steering friction noise. The issue of uneven steering rotation left versus right was reportedly resolved after a computer-based reset was performed.

However, the owner claimed that obtaining confirmation and repair for each complaint required repeated effort, including submitting video evidence and asking a foreman to ride with him to hear the knocking sounds. He emphasised that the process of repeated repairs consumed his leave days and time with his two children, including a newborn, causing physical and mental exhaustion.

The owner also noted that because the car was still under warranty, he had been advised to avoid inspections or repairs at outside workshops for fear of jeopardising warranty coverage. His next scheduled appointment for vehicle data collection was set for 24 September 2026.

Resolved complaints on the Proton X70 included brake squealing, pedal sinking, air-conditioning noise, seat clicking, and steering friction, while unresolved issues included floor vibration, dashboard vibration, and steering knocking.

Who Is the Affected User in Malaysia?

The affected user in this case is a Malaysian private vehicle owner who uses his Proton X70 as a family car, evidenced by his reference to two children, including a newborn. His situation reflects the broader experience of Malaysian consumers who rely on authorised service centres for warranty-covered repairs and face logistical and emotional burdens when faults persist.

The owner’s case is relevant to Malaysian SUV buyers in the mid-range segment, particularly those who have purchased Proton’s locally-assembled models and expect after-sales support consistent with national automotive standards. The owner’s experience also raises questions about warranty enforcement, parts supply chain efficiency, and the practical limits of Tribunal remedies under Malaysian consumer law.

• The vehicle was used in Malaysia, where service centres operate under Proton’s authorised network.
• The owner’s complaint process involved the Malaysian Tribunal for Consumer Claims, a statutory body under the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Cost of Living.
• The reported tyre replacement cost was borne by the owner, reflecting a typical out-of-pocket expense in Malaysian vehicle ownership.

Malaysian Proton X70 owners who experience repeated faults under warranty may face service delays, out-of-pocket expenses for disputed parts, and the practical challenge of enforcing Tribunal orders for satisfactory repairs.

Common Questions

Can a Tribunal order force Proton to repair the vehicle?

Yes, a Tribunal award is legally binding, but enforcement may require further action if the order is not complied with. In this case, Proton was ordered to repair within 14 days, yet parts delays pushed the appointed repair to July 2026, three months after the ruling.

Does replacing tyres outside the authorised service centre affect the Proton warranty?

Tyres are wear-and-tear items and can be replaced at any reputable workshop without voiding the vehicle warranty, provided the replacement meets manufacturer specifications. However, the owner was advised against other outside repairs because Proton might attribute future faults to third-party workmanship.

How long should a Proton X70 owner wait for warranty repairs?

There is no statutory fixed timeframe in Malaysia, but a Tribunal ordered 14-day repair period is commonly used as a benchmark. In this case, the owner waited from April 2026 to July 2026 for parts to arrive, highlighting supply chain delays as a practical limitation.

Sources and Methodology

This article is based on a single source: the Careta article “31 kali ke pusat servis, pemilik Proton X70 dakwa masalah berterusan walaupun menang kes Tribunal” by Qalif Latif, published on 23 September 2026, and available at https://careta.my/article/31-kali-ke-pusat-servis-pemilik-proton-x70-dakwa-masalah-berterusan-walaupun-menang-kes. The original article is in Malay; all facts have been translated into English with British spelling, and the names of individuals, brands, and the Facebook group have been preserved as they appear in the source.

The owner’s statements were made in the public Facebook group paultan.org Automotive/Car Discussion Group and were reproduced by Careta. This article does not include the Tribunal decision document or Proton’s official response, as neither was provided in the source material. The approximate current exchange rate was not applied because the source article contains no USD-denominated prices; all monetary references in the original are qualitative or unspecified.

This article was last updated on 24 September 2026. Information specific to Malaysia was verified against the cited Careta article and the owner’s original Facebook post as summarised therein. No additional external sources were used.