Advice : BMW warranty claim

[robm3]

Follow Carter's advice and you'll get the resolution you need.

Document everything.

I've had a few items fixed under goodwill with BMW. They're aren't the 'evil empire' some are making out. I think your problem was a Service Manager who speared the initial claim. BMW UK then have to follow the dealerships lead.

Again, keep escalating and someone in BMW UK will see sense and sort it for you. They should also send the engine back to Germany to inspect what the real issue was (rev limiter should not have allowed the fault to occur - perhaps in combination with oil starvation?? -- Speculate).

[tjs79]

As a lawyer and bmw owner I have always interpreted the exclusion clause as prohibiting competitive activity, a track day is not competitive for the reasons discussed already. Given the value of the claim it seems reasonable to take some legal advice here if needed. Bmw will have to show the exclusion is reasonable and covers this type of activity not just racing and competitive events. I'm not sure that it does for the above reasons and any ambiguity here will go against them but, from a corporate PR view, I would be rasing merry hell with their press office, involving the motoring press in your cause and awaiting a satisfactory resolution. BMW need to clarify their stance here and make the right decision or lose a lot of credibility and potential sales. It seems total nonsense given their marketing and presentation to refuse a claim where the car has simply used on track to experience its performance in a safe and legal environment.

Edited by tjs79 on Wednesday 4th February 06:27

[balls-out]

tjs79 said:

As a lawyer and bmw owner I have always interpreted the exclusion clause as prohibiting competitive activity, a track day is not competitive for the reasons discussed already. Given the value of the claim it seems reasonable to take some legal advice here if needed. Bmw will have to show the exclusion is reasonable and covers this type of activity not just racing and competitive events. I'm not sure that it does for the above reasons and any ambiguity here will go against them but, from a corporate PR view, I would be rasing merry hell with their press office, involving the motoring press in your cause and awaiting a satisfactory resolution. BMW need to clarify their stance here and make the right decision or lose a lot of credibility and potential sales. It seems total nonsense given their marketing and presentation to refuse a claim where the car has simply used on track to experience its performance in a safe and legal environment.

Edited by tjs79 on Wednesday 4th February 06:27

tjs79 - unlike me, you may know what you are talking about (because I am not a laywer) but I'm surprised at the importance being placed on the warranty. Surely with such a low mileage and age this car wasn't fit for purpose. I would expect that to he the best line of attack rather than t&cs in the warranty, which are surely irrelevant to consumer protection law.

[Neil McRae]

please name the dealer as the world needs to know that this is a place to avoid. I expect BMW will solve this pretty quickly. However:

If the car is financed through BMW FS and this goes no where I'd talk to them also, I had an issue with an E46 M3 that applying pressure through BMW FS got it resolved.

I would also remind BMW that they themselves run track day events to aid in selling the car and they offer through MSV BMW beginner track days also.

http://www.msvtrackdays.com/bmwdrivingexperiences

I went to one of the MSV BMW days with my E92 on the insured warranty without realising track days were specifically excluded! Not sure I would have done if I had read the small print!

Neil.

[fuchsiasteve]

This is a total disgrace OP and as others have said kick off and kick some ass with all the bods at BMW. That previous documented case should definitely help in resolving the issue. Failing that we'll show them my 1999 t reg honda accord type r which has covered a galactic 211,000 miles on its original engine with the last 30k being all track miles!!

For a car engine to fail in less than 5k and being an auto is total b*****s. Its a premium product as well for gods sake!

Also point out if performance BMW's shouldn't be used on track why do Motorsportvision have a whole fleet of them for novice driver training days at oulton park! Its total nonsense.

http://www.palmersport.com/our-cars/bmw-m4-gtp.asp...

Rant over.

Good luck!

Edited by fuchsiasteve on Wednesday 4th February 07:18

Edited by fuchsiasteve on Wednesday 4th February 07:23

[Neil McRae]

oh and I went to the oulton park event myself and they had M235i's for battering round the track:

[Johnd52]

Another angle that should not be ignored is what failed? Assuming no warnings came up prior to the Big Bang, the presumption must be that the vehicle was operating within design limits. If what happened was a failure which coul have taken place anyway, at another location, this would further strengthen OP's case.

[Johnd52]

Another angle that should not be ignored is what failed? Assuming no warnings came up prior to the Big Bang, the presumption must be that the vehicle was operating within design limits. If what happened was a failure which coul have taken place anyway, at another location, this would further strengthen OP's case.

[fuchsiasteve]

How ironic ! Read auto expresses opening paragraph on reviewing the M235i!:

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/bmw/2-series/85291/bm...

Its like they were psychic are something !!

[bennyboysvuk]

sday12 said:

gaz1234 said:

Is it an m car?

I
Yes, M for Motorsport, ironically.

Just like the M-sports are full M-cars.

Regardless, I still hope the OP gets refunded. It's pretty poor form for it to break so early in its life and not be covered, regardless of how it was driven. I'd bet engines go through far worse during testing and don't break, thus the failure must have been due to either a part of dubious quality or perhaps a build error and nothing to do with what it was doing at the time.

[derin100]

I'm surprised by this...and surprised at several levels.

Firstly, I'm surprised that a supposedly overtly sporting brand new car should fail in this manner. However, "st happens" and with something mechanically complex as one of these sorts of cars "freak", unexpected things can happen, I guess?

However, I'm more surprised that BMW are allowing this to happen to the OP at all. This is not just bad publicity in relation to their product, it is actually even worse publicity in relation to the manner in which they are handling things!

This should have been hushed-up very quickly indeed. Rather than some relatively low-level person within the warranty side wrangling about the fine print and wording of the warranty, in an attempt to avoid paying out what is after all, on the scale of the potential publicity damage, going to be a relatively small amount, someone should have taken charge of this very quickly and resolved it to the OP's complete satisfaction.

If I, as a dyed-in-the-wool BMW fan with over 33 years of unbroken BMW ownership behind me, am appalled by their handling of this matter what message does this send out to potential future customers or those not so strongly committed to the brand? If any potential new customer was wavering in their decision to buy a new BMW over a car offered by one of their competitors stories such as this regarding the way they treat their customers could be so damaging.

I suspect, as others have already said, that this will need to reach a certain level in the corporate hierarchy before it is resolved. At which point there will be a sudden: "Why the hell wasn't this sorted immediately?!" and then the "st" will start flowing back down the corporate chain and somebody will be in big trouble!

It is bad enough that it's already out here on PH ...and I wouldn't under-estimate the range and clout that this website carries amongst people interested in sporting cars. If it gets out even further.....!!!

Good luck OP. I'm confident that if anyone has got any sense within the BMW management hierarchy they'll get this sorted pronto!

[NORTS]

What's the wording in the driver manual? This will be crucial, I'm sure it mentions track driving voids the warranty? Plus it has not been sold as a track car has it? It's a 2 series road car. If it was a Caterham or Atom you would expect race track warranty. As I said before I wish you all the best but I'm not surprised with BMWs stance. It's known manufactures have people at track days taking note of cars and taking photos for evidence in cases like this. As mentioned BMW do offer track days for their M Power cars on there website but although the M235i has M badges everywhere it isn't an M Power car.

I can only think of Porsche offering full track day warranty cover? Well I know they use to at least...

[balls-out]

NORTS said:

What's the wording in the driver manual? This will be crucial, ...

Really? So when you spend vast amounts of money on a new car, you are expected to have studied the driver manual so you know what you can and can't do with the car when you have purchased it. It probably says only to use washer fluid from BMW and BMW badged air freshener too.

I would say its irrelevant.

[tjs79]

balls-out said:

tjs79 said:

As a lawyer and bmw owner I have always interpreted the exclusion clause as prohibiting competitive activity, a track day is not competitive for the reasons discussed already. Given the value of the claim it seems reasonable to take some legal advice here if needed. Bmw will have to show the exclusion is reasonable and covers this type of activity not just racing and competitive events. I'm not sure that it does for the above reasons and any ambiguity here will go against them but, from a corporate PR view, I would be rasing merry hell with their press office, involving the motoring press in your cause and awaiting a satisfactory resolution. BMW need to clarify their stance here and make the right decision or lose a lot of credibility and potential sales. It seems total nonsense given their marketing and presentation to refuse a claim where the car has simply used on track to experience its performance in a safe and legal environment.

Edited by tjs79 on Wednesday 4th February 06:27

tjs79 - unlike me, you may know what you are talking about (because I am not a laywer) but I'm surprised at the importance being placed on the warranty. Surely with such a low mileage and age this car wasn't fit for purpose. I would expect that to he the best line of attack rather than t&cs in the warranty, which are surely irrelevant to consumer protection law.

I agree but wanted to point out their warranty is far from black and white making it legally difficult to exclude liability on this basis, irrespective of any overriding statutory rights here. Ignore the legal avenue though - I endorse the PR approach as the most simple and effective. I work inhouse and know the fear that management have of any negative press ruining their carefully orchestrated public image.

Edited by tjs79 on Wednesday 4th February 08:44

[The Turbonator]

How did it break op? Did it just go bang all of a sudden or were there any warning lights, strange noises, first?

[fourspoons]

The Turbonator said:

How did it break op? Did it just go bang all of a sudden or were there any warning lights, strange noises, first?

No warning at all, thought I felt a loss of power, then it cut out completely. Ironically there were no warning lights or error messages in iDrive afterwards either.

[fourspoons]

tjs79 said:

I agree but wanted to point out their warranty is far from black and white making it legally difficult to exclude liability on this basis, irrespective of any overriding statutory rights here. Ignore the legal avenue though - I endorse the PR approach as the most simple and effective. I work inhouse and know the fear that management have of any negative press ruining their carefully orchestrated public image.

Edited by tjs79 on Wednesday 4th February 08:44

Thanks for the advice. I agree the PR approach is hopefully the most direct. If it doesn't work, then legal representation and the fit for purpose route will be my next avenue I think. Any recommendations for who could represent me?

[NORTS]

balls-out said:

Really? So when you spend vast amounts of money on a new car, you are expected to have studied the driver manual so you know what you can and can't do with the car when you have purchased it. It probably says only to use washer fluid from BMW and BMW badged air freshener too.

I would say its irrelevant.

Call it irrelevant all you like but in the courtroom this is what counts. It's their disclaimer.

[hornetrider]

fourspoons said:

Thanks for the advice. I agree the PR approach is hopefully the most direct. If it doesn't work, then legal representation and the fit for purpose route will be my next avenue I think. Any recommendations for who could represent me?

Soovy or BV will draft you a nice lawyery letter I'm sure. This one's as juicy as they come.

[fourspoons]

NORTS said:

Call it irrelevant all you like but in the courtroom this is what counts. It's their disclaimer.

The driver's handbook makes no reference to driving on track or racing or anything of the sort as far as I can find