645: Service Pack Problem.
Discussion
A colleague encountered a problem with the service pack on his 6 series. His letter to the dealer covers the issue (as they have not yet responded, we'll not name and shame suffice to say they are in the good county of Essex).
Anyone else come across this?
Dear Sirs,
BMW 645ci.
My car, above registration, came to you for a Stat Vehicle Inspection and MOT test on Thursday 1st May. On collecting the car I was told that everything was fine but it needed new brake pads all round and, as they were borderline, should also have new discs fitted. You supplied me with a quote for the required work (see your quote of 1st May – Account number C0002) and it was booked in for Monday 12th May. Prior to this I received a telephone call telling me that the required parts (I am assuming discs) were not in stock and I would have to re-book the appointment for a later date.
Unfortunately, the following day, Tuesday the 13th May, I was booked into hospital for reconstruction surgery on my right knee and had been told I would probably be unable to drive for at least 4 weeks. I consequently re-booked the work with you for Thursday 12th June but had still not recovered enough from surgery to drive and subsequently re-booked the work for yesterday, 17th June.
The work was carried out but I received a call to say that the originally diagnosed work was not actually required and the requirement was now the replacement of the front pads only, although the diagnostic was now showing that the spark plugs and microfilter needed replacing – which would also have been covered under the service agreement. This surprised me as following the original quote I examined the disc pads and could feel that there is a slight lip on the edge, indicating wear. It also seems strange that, had you had the parts at May 12th. you would have proceeded to do the quoted work for the quoted £934.37 when in actual fact all but £160.25 of it was unnecessary.
At this point it is important to point out that my vehicle has/had a service pack that I was under the misapprehension was for 5 years. I have subsequently been told it is 5 years or 60,000 miles.
When I was told the brakes required replacement (at 1st May) the mileage was 58,925. At the date of the original appointment (12th May) the mileage would have been approximately 59,500 and the work would have been covered under the service agreement. Through no fault of my own (you did not have the required parts) the work was delayed and when my car came to you yesterday, 17th June, the mileage was 60,127. Only one hundred and twenty seven miles over the agreed limit. This cost me £560.16.
Obviously, had I been aware of the 60,000 mileage limit I would have ensured that either my car was used less or somehow I arranged for it to get to you earlier. Considering this I would appreciate your feedback on the following points:
1. The injustice of this costing me £560.16 when the work could have been carried out at no cost to me prior to Monday when the car passed 60,000 miles. The postponement at 12th May was due to you.
2. Why was I quoted for £934.37 of work which turned out to be far less, meaning you almost certainly would have had the required parts (to do the lesser work) on 12th May?
3. Why was I told by your staff on the 1st May (at 58,925 miles) that the front pads needed replacing and then told yesterday (at 60,127 miles) that they now have 19,000 miles of wear left in them?
4. Why was the charge for replacing the rear pads yesterday £218.47 when the quote on 1st May for this part of the work was £160.25?
5. I notice that the headline on your service report document states that you ‘guarantee that the BMW specified work was carried out scrupulously and meticulously’. As this appears to be neither scrupulous nor meticulous could you please explain this.
I look forward with interest to your reply.
Yours faithfully,
Anyone else come across this?
Dear Sirs,
BMW 645ci.
My car, above registration, came to you for a Stat Vehicle Inspection and MOT test on Thursday 1st May. On collecting the car I was told that everything was fine but it needed new brake pads all round and, as they were borderline, should also have new discs fitted. You supplied me with a quote for the required work (see your quote of 1st May – Account number C0002) and it was booked in for Monday 12th May. Prior to this I received a telephone call telling me that the required parts (I am assuming discs) were not in stock and I would have to re-book the appointment for a later date.
Unfortunately, the following day, Tuesday the 13th May, I was booked into hospital for reconstruction surgery on my right knee and had been told I would probably be unable to drive for at least 4 weeks. I consequently re-booked the work with you for Thursday 12th June but had still not recovered enough from surgery to drive and subsequently re-booked the work for yesterday, 17th June.
The work was carried out but I received a call to say that the originally diagnosed work was not actually required and the requirement was now the replacement of the front pads only, although the diagnostic was now showing that the spark plugs and microfilter needed replacing – which would also have been covered under the service agreement. This surprised me as following the original quote I examined the disc pads and could feel that there is a slight lip on the edge, indicating wear. It also seems strange that, had you had the parts at May 12th. you would have proceeded to do the quoted work for the quoted £934.37 when in actual fact all but £160.25 of it was unnecessary.
At this point it is important to point out that my vehicle has/had a service pack that I was under the misapprehension was for 5 years. I have subsequently been told it is 5 years or 60,000 miles.
When I was told the brakes required replacement (at 1st May) the mileage was 58,925. At the date of the original appointment (12th May) the mileage would have been approximately 59,500 and the work would have been covered under the service agreement. Through no fault of my own (you did not have the required parts) the work was delayed and when my car came to you yesterday, 17th June, the mileage was 60,127. Only one hundred and twenty seven miles over the agreed limit. This cost me £560.16.
Obviously, had I been aware of the 60,000 mileage limit I would have ensured that either my car was used less or somehow I arranged for it to get to you earlier. Considering this I would appreciate your feedback on the following points:
1. The injustice of this costing me £560.16 when the work could have been carried out at no cost to me prior to Monday when the car passed 60,000 miles. The postponement at 12th May was due to you.
2. Why was I quoted for £934.37 of work which turned out to be far less, meaning you almost certainly would have had the required parts (to do the lesser work) on 12th May?
3. Why was I told by your staff on the 1st May (at 58,925 miles) that the front pads needed replacing and then told yesterday (at 60,127 miles) that they now have 19,000 miles of wear left in them?
4. Why was the charge for replacing the rear pads yesterday £218.47 when the quote on 1st May for this part of the work was £160.25?
5. I notice that the headline on your service report document states that you ‘guarantee that the BMW specified work was carried out scrupulously and meticulously’. As this appears to be neither scrupulous nor meticulous could you please explain this.
I look forward with interest to your reply.
Yours faithfully,
My 3er is on service and maint pack. Last year the car went in for a service, they told me that all brakes and pads needed replacing. I told them to crack on and send BMW the bill 
They delivered the car back later. I was busy so didn't check it until the next day. The brakes had not been serviced.
I rang them and they told me that because it was on the BMW scheme I would have to drive it until the brake warning lights came aon and then book it in again for another day of work. So in short if I was paying the brakes needed doing that day and if they were paying it could wait.
The warning lights came on a month later.
At this time I was driving to and from the hospital daily as my Dad was dying. They knew this but still decided I could do with the hassle of another full day of servicing only a month later.
retards.
They delivered the car back later. I was busy so didn't check it until the next day. The brakes had not been serviced.
I rang them and they told me that because it was on the BMW scheme I would have to drive it until the brake warning lights came aon and then book it in again for another day of work. So in short if I was paying the brakes needed doing that day and if they were paying it could wait.
The warning lights came on a month later.
At this time I was driving to and from the hospital daily as my Dad was dying. They knew this but still decided I could do with the hassle of another full day of servicing only a month later.
retards.
Edited by Olf on Wednesday 18th June 23:24
Olf said:
So in short if I was paying the brakes needed doing that day and if they were paying it could wait.
Sounds like the deal I had with a headlamp unit that was full of condensation. While the car was under warranty with MOT insurance it was never a 'fail' item, but the first year I was without MOT insurance they said it was an MOT fail and that it had to be changed. Needless to say I had 'words' so they charged for labour only, but the new unit was just as bad so maybe they charged labour for a job they didn't actually do. I never questioned this because I was fed up of dealing with them by that point.Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff