Advice : BMW warranty claim

[Jon_Bmw]

daniel1920 said:

Jon_Bmw said:

That is because it is a mechanical failure... How would the computer know, other than eventually low oil pressure as it all sloshes out of the engine!

02 sensor, cam position sensor, MAF doing strange things for a start

I don't see how the CAM sensor would see anything. The crank is still spinning in time with the Cams.

The other two, I could understand, but presumably it stalled pretty quickly and did not have enough time to illuminate the MIL. The o2 sensor and MAF will almost certainly need a certain amount of time getting poor readings before illuminating the MIL, otherwise they would be popping up all the time during normal driving every time something is slightly out of spec.

[carparkno1]

Jesus what a terrible situation. BMW need to pull their fingers out and resolve this the right way.

After all the n47 engine fiasco they should be far more orientated towards honesty and helping a customer who just dropped 30k+ on their product.

Not to mention all the paraphernalia they clearly use to create the image of a racing car. If a 235i is available for use with their permission on track then they should be damn well honouring this one.

OP hopefully BMW sort it but if they mention anything like part payment etc stand your ground. Either they admit full liability or get them into court. If you don't get a decent resolution then I absolutely think you should go full social media on them. Facebook, Twitter, Watchdog (they've got previous with them), and don't be afraid to go into the supplying dealership and give them an absolute caning.

I'm normally a very calm reserved guy but nothing winds be up more than this. I'd be an absolute hand grenade in this situation as nothing upsets me more than a company absolving itself from responsibility whilst selling a product clearly on its ability to go through corners fast with impeccable build quality.

[liner33]

Its shameful , but its not the first time I've heard of a manufacturer pulling a trick like this , you do however expect more from a manufacturer who very much trades on the motorsport theme.

Best of luck OP

BTW I found this thread posted on another forum , I suspect there will be a lot of people following what happens here

[Soov535]

carparkno1 said:

get them into court.

Sure, bet your house on the outcome.

If he goes to Court and loses, he has to pay BMWs costs as well as his own. Unless he has £100k he doesn't need then that's suicide.

BMW know this.

[Durzel]

The car should last a track day, but their warranty at least makes mention of coverage excluding competitive activities. Most would argue that a regular track day wouldn't qualify for this, but BMW will likely (especially given the value of the claim) maintain the opposite - that it doesn't matter if the car lasts a track day or not, they say you aren't covered if you do "competitive or racing" activities, so you aren't covered unless you can convince them (and more likely a court) otherwise - ala getcarter.

As for the M badge semantics - I'm calling a spade a spade. BMW trade off the M badge having motorsport connotations. I don't think it matters whether it is manifestly a track car or not - e.g. roll cages and sequential gearboxes, if they give a strong impression in their advertising that the car is a track weapon then a customer would reasonably make the assumption that this is an activity they can take part in in such a car.

Either way the OP is probably going to be in for a fight. I don't think BMW would capitulate on such a high value claim at this early stage, I suspect legal wheels would have to start turning for them to even feel pressured to do so. They may even bank, as many entities do, that their pockets are deeper and resolve stronger than the OPs when it comes to legal action. As said above they will have expensive lawyers on retainer and I suspect won't hesitate to throw their weight around to disincentivise a formal claim against them.

Will be watching this thread with interest - hopefully the OP gets it resolved.

[McSam]

Soov535 said:

Sure, bet your house on the outcome.

If he goes to Court and loses, he has to pay BMWs costs as well as his own. Unless he has £100k he doesn't need then that's suicide.

BMW know this.

Much as I'm disappointed you haven't been able to pull anything out of the hat this time, I'm with you on that point. Going to court against a global company with a case that is quite subjective is bonkers.

OP: have you considered my earlier suggestion of contacting Goldtrack for a clarification of what is and isn't permitted on their track days? It may not help, but if they produce a letter clearly stating that racing, timing and competitive behaviour are all strictly prohibited then it can't hurt your case.

[balls-out]

Having watched the Blue brothers many times. the phase "thrown a Rod" has a certain coolness to it.

Have you got any picture of what it looks like (no custard required)

[carparkno1]

Soov535 said:

Sure, bet your house on the outcome.

If he goes to Court and loses, he has to pay BMWs costs as well as his own. Unless he has £100k he doesn't need then that's suicide.

BMW know this.

So his other option is take a 13k hit or sell his knackered car?

[Soov535]

carparkno1 said:

Soov535 said:

Sure, bet your house on the outcome.

If he goes to Court and loses, he has to pay BMWs costs as well as his own. Unless he has £100k he doesn't need then that's suicide.

BMW know this.

So his other option is take a 13k hit or sell his knackered car?

Or hope that they capitulate on the basis of sympathy/bad publicity. But they already sell all the cars they make - and despite what we might think, PHers are a very small subset of their clientele.

[fourspoons]

McSam said:

uch as I'm disappointed you haven't been able to pull anything out of the hat this time, I'm with you on that point. Going to court against a global company with a case that is quite subjective is bonkers.

OP: have you considered my earlier suggestion of contacting Goldtrack for a clarification of what is and isn't permitted on their track days? It may not help, but if they produce a letter clearly stating that racing, timing and competitive behaviour are all strictly prohibited then it can't hurt your case.

Yes I have, I asked them for a letter confirming the nature of the day and that the rules specifically prohibit anything competitive and that I was driving within the rules of the event during the day.

[chrisABP]

Sounds like the OP has gathered enough support on here to pursue through the correct channels which is great news and I wish him luck.

So are BMW saying that any BMW car which has been used on a track day is void of warranty? If so that means most press cars (usually used on tracks by journalists) should be either sold through the BMW network with no warranty or should be destroyed after being on the press fleet? A customer of mine has just purchased the ex-Chris Harris M235i from a BMW dealer so does his car (with its well filmed track past) therefore have no warranty because its been used on track?

Sounds like the dealership that you have foolishly trusted for the last 7 years buying 3 new cars from actually don't like you as a customer and have decided to alienate you as opposed to help you! I find most dealerships are staffed by both great people and complete arse holes! My local BMW dealership are the main reason why I wouldn't buy another new BMW since I sold my 1M. Useless is an understatement.

Good luck OP

[Durzel]

As a side issue, and somewhat playing Devil's Advocate again...

Any car can be driven to destruction fairly easily, and that doesn't in and of itself mean that it isn't fit for purpose. Terribly poor roadcraft can nuke a clutch in fairly short order, but that doesn't mean the clutch or the car is not fit for purpose. Likewise a poorly maintained car can seize its engine, or throw a conrod, or do whatever else when it doesn't have enough oil in, etc. Proving that the car had been properly maintained in the 4 months of ownership, when the oil is now sat on Goodwood's track, will likely be harder than just saying "but.. but I did look after it".

I think the "car wasn't fit for purpose" is a non-starter, and just dilutes the OP's genuine claim about his activities (not competitive, not racing) not being excluded from warranty cover.

[SFO]

BMW .. ultimate driving machine

but only if you are not using the power on offer

Pathetic

It's a 4 month old car!!

[DarylB90]

liner33 said:

Its shameful , but its not the first time I've heard of a manufacturer pulling a trick like this , you do however expect more from a manufacturer who very much trades on the motorsport theme.

Best of luck OP

BTW I found this thread posted on another forum , I suspect there will be a lot of people following what happens here

I found this thread on Facebook so word is already spreading and it's not even been 24 hours yet!
Good luck OP, I'll be following with some interest.
I currently own an M135i and have been pricing up an M3 over the past few weeks so I'm intrigued to see the outcome.

[The Turbonator]

Durzel said:

As a side issue, and somewhat playing Devil's Advocate again...

Any car can be driven to destruction fairly easily, and that doesn't in and of itself mean that it isn't fit for purpose. Terribly poor roadcraft can nuke a clutch in fairly short order, but that doesn't mean the clutch or the car is not fit for purpose. Likewise a poorly maintained car can seize its engine, or throw a conrod, or do whatever else when it doesn't have enough oil in, etc. Proving that the car had been properly maintained in the 4 months of ownership, when the oil is now sat on Goodwood's track, will likely be harder than just saying "but.. but I did look after it".

I think the "car wasn't fit for purpose" is a non-starter, and just dilutes the OP's genuine claim about his activities (not competitive, not racing) not being excluded from warranty cover.

If it was starved of oil, the op would have seen a warning light first and a fault would have been logged in the ECU.

[tjs79]

I maintain there's no need to 'get legal' but check your home insurance in case you have legal cover. Talk of 100k expenses in relation to a 13k claim is scaremongering nonsense, no court is going to award that. There are a lot of miles between the pre action letter and a day in court, hopefully if this grabs enough attention none of this will be necessary.

[Soov535]

tjs79 said:

I maintain there's no need to 'get legal' but check your home insurance in case you have legal cover. Talk of 100k expenses in relation to a 13k claim is scaremongering nonsense, no court is going to award that. There are a lot of miles between the pre action letter and a day in court, hopefully if this grabs enough attention none of this will be necessary.

Thanks for the legal lecture.

If this goes to Court costs will EASILY be £100k+

[KFC]

Soov535 said:

carparkno1 said:

get them into court.

Sure, bet your house on the outcome.

If he goes to Court and loses, he has to pay BMWs costs as well as his own. Unless he has £100k he doesn't need then that's suicide.

BMW know this.

And BMW also know that even by winning in court, they lose. I'd be willing to gamble on starting the legal process and BMW folding before it got that far.

[fourspoons]

tjs79 said:

I maintain there's no need to 'get legal' but check your home insurance in case you have legal cover. Talk of 100k expenses in relation to a 13k claim is scaremongering nonsense, no court is going to award that. There are a lot of miles between the pre action letter and a day in court, hopefully if this grabs enough attention none of this will be necessary.

That's a good suggestion, I do have legal expenses cover on my household policy

[carparkno1]

Soov535 said:

Or hope that they capitulate on the basis of sympathy/bad publicity. But they already sell all the cars they make - and despite what we might think, PHers are a very small subset of their clientele.

I don't disagree with you there. You're absolutely the voice of reason on not taking a hammering in the courts, I just don't think I could live with myself accepting a huge bill whilst BMW laugh at me and repair my car. But then a huge bill in court and still having the knackered motor is even worse.

I think BMW should honour this. I don't think it should be sympathy, they should be flat out holding themselves accountable for an engine that went bang just 2000 miles in. Irrespective of conditions in which it was driven. They'll weasel out though it appears.

Huge sympathy for the OP. I wonder, do we have other historical cases of this sort of thing from Merc and Audi and their S badge type cars. Not full fat, much like the m-lite. Wonder what porsche would do if you tracked a cayman and it blew up straight away.