Quote Originally Posted by bluuford View Post
This is the point I wanted to highlight. Peugeot should be responsible for what he is selling. It is absolutely against any logic... When I buy smokes from big supermarket and it comes out that supermarket is selling tobacco without tax stickers, then I am not the one who is going to get penalised, it is supermarket. Can you imagine that you buy new Ford from official dealer and while you drive out police stops you and it comes out that you have red lights in front instead of normal lights.. it is clear that the fine and replacement costs will be covered by the official dealer not you.
We take it like it should be like this.. but why? Maybe because it is easier for FIA. But why it should be easy for them? why something should be with such an ill logic?
There is no "ill logic" here at all. As the entrant of the car/team, the competitor has the relationship with the organizer and the responsibility to present a compliant car. This car was not compliant so it is automatically determined that the entrant is at fault. All that is left to decide is the level of penalty. In this case it would seem that the stewards allowed some leniency due to the circumstances.
However the stewards do not have any jurisdiction over the parts supplier. One would expect that in the normal course of events the competitor would be claiming the costs back from the parts supplier themselves.