BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   6Post.com | BMW 6-Series Forum > BMW 6 Series Forum > BMW M6 Forum (F12 / F13)

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-29-2015, 07:38 AM   #23
HoustonRider
big pimpin
United_States
38
Rep
327
Posts

Drives: 2014 M6 GC and 2015 4 GC
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Houston

iTrader: (0)

So have you called BMW Customer Care?

This is a warranty claim, and unless the dealer can PROVE you were malicious and damaged the car (20s? They HAVE 20s on them from the factory) why would they not repair it. They get paid/reimbursed from BMW and BMW has the final say.

Squeeky wheel and all. BMW dealers are no different than any Toyota/Chevy/Ford dealership, they just have espresso machines.

I couldnt get a certain DFW dealership to call me back when they secretly changed some of my paperwork and added almost $3000 in add-ons to the backside of my deal, but when I called BMW Customer Care, I got a call the next day.

Hit em from the top down.

I will say I had a similar issue with Nissan around 2009. After I paid an atty to write them a letter (Nissan, not the dealership), I ended up with the repairs I needed along with $13,000 plus atty fees in my pocket. Just sayin.
__________________
2014 //M6 GC
2015 750Li
2015 435i GC
Appreciate 0
      09-30-2015, 12:07 PM   #24
someguy1993
New Member
11
Rep
13
Posts

Drives: _
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: LA

iTrader: (0)

I here you man, already have my attorney working on this, she said they might come to their senses before but after being hit with a storage fee I'm sensing my cars going to be tampered with before I even get her out. This isn't about the money anymore, this is about business ethics.

BMW customer care responded today, said the field tech found 50-60 "burnouts" ...not sure where and where that happened but I specifically remember launching the car once and having the axle break once. I don't even think its physically possible to do that many launched in this car?!? you would have to re-fuel if I'm not mistaken...(drive 5-10 miles after a launch, cant launch when you start up blah blah) This isn't a TURBO S!

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonRider View Post
So have you called BMW Customer Care?

This is a warranty claim, and unless the dealer can PROVE you were malicious and damaged the car (20s? They HAVE 20s on them from the factory) why would they not repair it. They get paid/reimbursed from BMW and BMW has the final say.

Squeeky wheel and all. BMW dealers are no different than any Toyota/Chevy/Ford dealership, they just have espresso machines.

I couldnt get a certain DFW dealership to call me back when they secretly changed some of my paperwork and added almost $3000 in add-ons to the backside of my deal, but when I called BMW Customer Care, I got a call the next day.

Hit em from the top down.

I will say I had a similar issue with Nissan around 2009. After I paid an atty to write them a letter (Nissan, not the dealership), I ended up with the repairs I needed along with $13,000 plus atty fees in my pocket. Just sayin.
Appreciate 0
      10-01-2015, 01:33 PM   #25
krown
Private First Class
krown's Avatar
29
Rep
113
Posts

Drives: 2017 Alpina B6
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vancouver

iTrader: (0)

You're welcome for the info, emingabri. Since I experienced the problem firsthand, I know the pain you're feeling. Luckily, I had a dealership that made the right decision (or maybe it was BMW Canada) and warranty the work/parts.

I think it's time for a little social media pressure. It's amazing what a little bad advertisement can do.
Appreciate 0
      10-01-2015, 07:25 PM   #26
Msizzle
Lieutenant
164
Rep
402
Posts

Drives: 2013 M6 Coupe
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Long Island, NY

iTrader: (0)

It normally takes 2 things to break an axel or other driveline parts, lots of power and lots of traction. Im shocked that on street tires that your car found enough grip to break anything. I agree that flooring your car and driving hard should be acceptable with a car like this, but I don't see how normal use can snap an axel, normally you simply spin the tires
Appreciate 0
      10-01-2015, 07:44 PM   #27
someguy1993
New Member
11
Rep
13
Posts

Drives: _
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: LA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msizzle View Post
It normally takes 2 things to break an axel or other driveline parts, lots of power and lots of traction. Im shocked that on street tires that your car found enough grip to break anything. I agree that flooring your car and driving hard should be acceptable with a car like this, but I don't see how normal use can snap an axel, normally you simply spin the tires
I know, but please believe me when I say I dont drive around with drags on my daily, I was on p-zeros, medium tread left.
Appreciate 0
      10-01-2015, 07:45 PM   #28
someguy1993
New Member
11
Rep
13
Posts

Drives: _
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: LA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msizzle View Post
It normally takes 2 things to break an axel or other driveline parts, lots of power and lots of traction. Im shocked that on street tires that your car found enough grip to break anything. I agree that flooring your car and driving hard should be acceptable with a car like this, but I don't see how normal use can snap an axel, normally you simply spin the tires
Defiantly, my car is out of the dealer BUT, after I get the okay from my attorney, I am going to start searching for a firm to expose this situation...Open to suggestions, they have a pretty okay YELP review account (probably paid a fortune to have a team set them up to look like a reputable dealer)
Appreciate 1
      10-01-2015, 09:38 PM   #29
M6-Coupe
Major General
M6-Coupe's Avatar
1125
Rep
6,064
Posts

Drives: F92 M8
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by emingabri View Post
I here you man, already have my attorney working on this, she said they might come to their senses before but after being hit with a storage fee I'm sensing my cars going to be tampered with before I even get her out. This isn't about the money anymore, this is about business ethics.

BMW customer care responded today, said the field tech found 50-60 "burnouts" ...not sure where and where that happened but I specifically remember launching the car once and having the axle break once. I don't even think its physically possible to do that many launched in this car?!? you would have to re-fuel if I'm not mistaken...(drive 5-10 miles after a launch, cant launch when you start up blah blah) This isn't a TURBO S!
First of all 50-60 burnout is nothing for this car. There are many people going to race events and do over 10 races per day beside the usual burnout (or launch). Second, you said you purchased the car after lease return. was this car CPO? The reason I'm asking is because if they have the record of 50-60 burnout, they must have time stamp to show when those burnouts happened. With these time stamps (that you and your attorney must ask them and document), you can prove it happened in past and not now while you got a CPO car.
Anyways I wish everything goes well for you.
__________________
Current : 2020 F92 Black Sapphire M8 - ZF8
Gone : 2018 F80 Mineral Gray M3 - 6MT
Gone : 2016 F82 Austin Yellow M4 - 6MT
Gone : 2013 F13 Sakhir Orange M6 -7DCT
Gone: 2013 F13 Alpine White 650i -ZF8
Appreciate 0
      10-01-2015, 10:33 PM   #30
Zmantoo
Enlisted Member
United_States
5
Rep
47
Posts

Drives: 1978 AMC Pacer Xanadu Green
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Richmond Ca, East Bay Nor Cali

iTrader: (0)

Please don't take this the wrong way and you are completely right in this situation but is $3k really worth fighting for? You have a $100K car and $3k is not really that much. I understand principles and being right BUT all the time and money can do more harm, physically and mentally, to you and your family. I am only thinking about the lawyer fees, cost of time, (wasted) and stress to you and your family.

You can use the cost associated with legal fees, for both parties, to have the dealer reduce the labor and parts costs (charge you wholesale prices for parts). You can easily prove that the negative attention created by your case, in social media, WILL effect the dealer’s reputation.

All I am saying is to find the middle ground before it gets out of hand. Since you have already started the legal process, you may want to consider the total legal cost, versus total cost of repairs. I would not want to spend $5k+ on proving I’m right, when I could have spent $3k (more likely $1 to $2k after negotiations) on fixing the car.

Just my thoughts.
Appreciate 0
      10-01-2015, 10:56 PM   #31
2007 to 2016 M6 Cab
Captain
160
Rep
737
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition HS
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Victoria BC Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmantoo View Post
Please don't take this the wrong way and you are completely right in this situation but is $3k really worth fighting for? You have a $100K car and $3k is not really that much. I understand principles and being right BUT all the time and money can do more harm, physically and mentally, to you and your family. I am only thinking about the lawyer fees, cost of time, (wasted) and stress to you and your family.

You can use the cost associated with legal fees, for both parties, to have the dealer reduce the labor and parts costs (charge you wholesale prices for parts). You can easily prove that the negative attention created by your case, in social media, WILL effect the dealer’s reputation.

All I am saying is to find the middle ground before it gets out of hand. Since you have already started the legal process, you may want to consider the total legal cost, versus total cost of repairs. I would not want to spend $5k+ on proving I’m right, when I could have spent $3k (more likely $1 to $2k after negotiations) on fixing the car.

Just my thoughts.

I would like to chime in and agree ... After going through a nasty business divorce myself just over a year ago now ... Taking the high road may be less costly in lawyer fees and stress ... After all life goes on! Now to decide what will it cost to move forward ... What are you willing to leave on the table or spend and really only gain less than your investment with lawyer fees! You need to decide how rich you want to make your lawyer and How Much less you can afford on your lifestyle as a consequence!


Cooler heads need to prevail ... At the cost of discussion and negotiation!

Although I really feel for your situation, I do think you need to step back, take a deep breath and look at the big picture and consequences in $$$


Just my 2 cents based on my experience Bro!

No malice or ill will ... Just some brotherly advice for what it's worth!!!

Best wishes with what ever you decide as you go forward!!

Last edited by 2007 to 2016 M6 Cab; 10-02-2015 at 08:32 AM..
Appreciate 0
      10-02-2015, 08:31 AM   #32
2007 to 2016 M6 Cab
Captain
160
Rep
737
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition HS
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Victoria BC Canada

iTrader: (0)

i GUESS THE THINKING IS

"DON'T LOSE THE WAR FOR THE SAKE OF A BATTLE "
__________________
Current Garage:
2019 M2 Comp, 2019 GLC 63 AMG , 2017 GLS 63 AMG, 2015 S63 Amg, 2008 John Dheer Gator XUV
Past Cars:
2016 M6 Cabrio, 2015 GLK 250 Bluetec, 2007 M6 Cab, 2011 S63 Amg, 2008 S450, 2006 330xi, 1998 Z24, 2002 Chev Suburban
Appreciate 0
      10-02-2015, 02:22 PM   #33
VDBimmer
First Lieutenant
132
Rep
324
Posts

Drives: YMB F82
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: California, USA

iTrader: (0)

I have never heard of an M6 breaking because of "flooring the car" from the light. Especially when the car is still this new.

There is 1 point that was mentioned earlier by another member that should resolve this whole issue if the stance they are taking to deny your warranty has to do with driving hard or accelerating aggressively from a light.


If we aren't allowed to accelerate so fast then why in the world would you offer a "Launch Control" option with the car?

If anyone from BMW is reading this you may have just lost another M6 sale because we have been considering it recently and will obviously start looking at the competition and taking them more seriously because this is ridiculous.
Appreciate 0
      10-03-2015, 09:49 PM   #34
someguy1993
New Member
11
Rep
13
Posts

Drives: _
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: LA

iTrader: (0)

Here is the lettter I sent to BBB, Forget to include it with the attachments

It is worth going through all this, because it is wrong. I pay $1485.00 a month for this car. I did NOTHING wrong, and I have to pay for a problem that BMW should have fixed for free. This problem should not have even happened....


"CASE: BMW1528084 Gabrimassihi vs BMW of North America WBSLX9C59DC968437


This letter is intended to establish that my case is in fact applicable to the manufacturer’s new vehicle warranty AND the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
BMW’s new vehicle warranty is applicable up to 48 months, or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. My 2013 BMW M6 has 30,000 miles, which meets the first requirement. Furthermore, BMW states “the vehicle must be brought, upon discovery of a defect in material or workmanship, to the workshop of any authorized BMW center.” The vehicle was taken to an authorized BMW center, so this claim still lies under the factories new vehicle warranty. This vehicle was manufactured as a powerful performance vehicle intended to deliver a higher level of performance than the lesser and more inexpensive 6 series models. [Please refer to attachment #1, #2, and #3]. Not only has the engine been modified to deliver more horsepower from the factory, the suspension and chassis have also been reinforced by BMW to be able to handle the increased power. I believe that that failed component on this vehicle, which was a broken axle, is the result of a defective part. I believe that because the manufacturer increased the power of the vehicle without taking into account the reliability of the axle, caused this axle to fail under circumstances not alien to this vehicles intended purpose.


BMW has claimed that an “outside influence” was the cause of this failure. The representative I spoke with, Nancy McDonald, has explained that BMW denied the warranty claim because the repairs needed were “due to aftermarket wheels and multiple burnouts.” The Federal Trade Commission states that The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket or recycled part. The FTC also states that the manufacturer or dealer must show that the aftermarket or recycled part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage. Neither the dealership nor manufacturer has provided any evidence that the aftermarket wheels installed on the vehicle caused the axle to fail. The wheels that are installed are the same 20 inch diameter as the wheels BMW offers, and I believe there is no factual evidence that can show the wheel had any effect causing the axle to fail. As for the statement that the repair will not be covered under warranty because the vehicle has performed “multiple burnouts,” I have made it clear that negligent “burnouts” were not performed, the vehicle is manufactured with a factory launch control, and using it evidently causes the wheels to lose traction because of the massive tourqe the engine produces, this is not abnormal and there is no possible way to prevent this from happening when a customer is using the launch control feature because of the precise settings the vehicle must be in order to use the feature. The only way to use the launch control feature is to set the cars suspension, steering, and throttle response setting to “sport plus” and also to disengage the vehicles traction control. This is the only possible way to use the launch control, which the customer will know is functioning when the launch control indicator flag is visible on the vehicle dash board [Please see attachment #3.5]. This feature was used only once when this failure occurred. While there is no exact number of launches that BMW has expressed will be deemed as “negligent” driving, I do not believe a single instance constitutes negligence. Under section 1792.2 of the Song Beverly Warranty Act, subsection (a)

“Every sale of consumer goods that are sold at retail in this state by a retailer or distributor who has reason to know at the time of the retail sale that the goods are required for a particular purpose, and that the buyer is relying on the retailer's or distributor's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods shall be accompanied by such retailer's or distributor's implied warranty that the goods are fit for that purpose.”

Furthermore under section 1793.1 subsection (a)

(1) Every manufacturer, distributor, or retailer making express warranties with respect to consumer goods shall fully set forth those warranties in simple and readily understood language, which shall clearly identify the party making the express warranties, and which shall conform to the federal standards for disclosure of warranty terms and conditions set forth in the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 2301 et seq.)

Since the outcome of my warranty claim is “solely the prerogative of BMW NA,” I believe it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to sincerely review this case and investigate why the field technician whose credentials or factual finding are still unknown to me, assumedly determined that this vehicle was in fact driven in “negligible” manner. According to BMW’s new vehicle warranty, repairs will not be covered under warranty if the driver was “negligent,” driving “improperly,” or if “the vehicle has been used in any competitive event.” This vehicle was being driven on a public road. This vehicle had no performance tune or any type of performance enhancing parts installed that would cause stress unforeseen by BMW’s engineers. The vehicle was being driven in manner that should have been appropriate for the parts installed on the vehicle to handle. If BMW does not agree that this vehicle should be driven in a way its customers are regularly being advised is safe and permissible to drive, I would like to ask why such features such as “launch control” and “sport plus” settings are provided with the purchase of this car and why no warning that using such features may cause a significant component of the vehicle to fail unexpectedly or even worse, why using such features may endanger one’s life because of the unexpected failure of a part. While I believe that this problem may have arisen due in part of the dealership, I have provided Nancy McDonald proof that a similar customer, Stephan Lui in Vancouver, launched his BMW M5 (Exact same vehicle specification as the M6, but with 4 doors) and had BMW provide the warranty services [See attachment #5 #6, and #7].

I believe it is in the manufacturer’s interest to review this case, and determine why

1. The dealership has been so negligent with a loyal customer who has purchased over 5 BMW’s, repeatedly refraining from providing informative pieces of information such as the actual reasons as to why the vehicle was being denied warranty, [Please see attachment #4: Conversation with dealership Service Advisor] and also why the dealership has decided to charge a “storage fee” of $50.00 dollars a day without contacting me in a reasonable amount of time in advance or having the decency to contact me via phone.

2. This repair has been plagued by excuses to exclude loyal customers from their legal right to have their vehicle repaired under warranty and returned to them in a reasonable amount of time. The payments for this vehicle are about $1485.00 per month, the price of the vehicle should reflect the service that will be provided. Not only has this vehicle been out of service, but no effort has been made to investigate this matter. I am disturbed the manufacture would disregard such a serious complaint and not look into the customers dissatisfaction on such matter especially since this vehicle is suppose to be the flagship performance vehicle, regarded as the best performance vehicle this company has.

Thank you for taking the time to read and acknowledge a frustrated, yet loyal customers concerns regarding his vehicle,

Emin Gabrimassihi
September 28, 2015"
Appreciate 0
      10-03-2015, 10:12 PM   #35
someguy1993
New Member
11
Rep
13
Posts

Drives: _
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: LA

iTrader: (0)

Btw, car is fix.....BUT

THE FACT THAT I AM TOO SCARED TO "ACCELERATE" IN MY M6 MAKES THIS CAR POINTLESS TO ME!!! Seriously, I do not want this to happen again, am I not suppose to "floor" the gas pedal...ever?
Appreciate 0
      10-04-2015, 12:33 AM   #36
M6-Coupe
Major General
M6-Coupe's Avatar
1125
Rep
6,064
Posts

Drives: F92 M8
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay area

iTrader: (0)


Hopefully you will get good answer with this letter.
BTW regarding to this sentence:
The only way to use the launch control feature is to set the cars suspension, steering, and throttle response setting to “sport plus” and also to disengage the vehicles traction control. This is the only possible way to use the launch control, which the customer will know is functioning when the launch control indicator flag is visible on the vehicle dash board [Please see attachment #3.5].

For Launch Control you don't need to put suspension/steering in sport+; however I set them to sport+ for more fun
For LC all you need is S3 and DSC OFF
__________________
Current : 2020 F92 Black Sapphire M8 - ZF8
Gone : 2018 F80 Mineral Gray M3 - 6MT
Gone : 2016 F82 Austin Yellow M4 - 6MT
Gone : 2013 F13 Sakhir Orange M6 -7DCT
Gone: 2013 F13 Alpine White 650i -ZF8
Appreciate 0
      10-04-2015, 12:37 AM   #37
M6-Coupe
Major General
M6-Coupe's Avatar
1125
Rep
6,064
Posts

Drives: F92 M8
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by emingabri View Post
Btw, car is fix.....BUT

THE FACT THAT I AM TOO SCARED TO "ACCELERATE" IN MY M6 MAKES THIS CAR POINTLESS TO ME!!! Seriously, I do not want this to happen again, am I not suppose to "floor" the gas pedal...ever?
Don't be scared. This car is designed and manufactured to be driven hard.
Many people (I would say most of M5/M6 owners) have had several hard accelerations and burnouts and launches with no issue...
IMO the only reason (or the most important one) anybody takes M5/M6 over 550/650 is the power, acceleration and sporty character of these high performance M cars...
__________________
Current : 2020 F92 Black Sapphire M8 - ZF8
Gone : 2018 F80 Mineral Gray M3 - 6MT
Gone : 2016 F82 Austin Yellow M4 - 6MT
Gone : 2013 F13 Sakhir Orange M6 -7DCT
Gone: 2013 F13 Alpine White 650i -ZF8
Appreciate 0
      10-04-2015, 09:02 AM   #38
SpeedChamp
Private First Class
United_States
9
Rep
103
Posts

Drives: 18' F80 M3
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (0)

That sounds like a typical bad BMW dealership... I have made my fair share of experiences with BMW before
Appreciate 0
      10-04-2015, 10:14 AM   #39
2007 to 2016 M6 Cab
Captain
160
Rep
737
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition HS
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Victoria BC Canada

iTrader: (0)

WOW!!

Very well written!

Fingers crossed!!!
__________________
Current Garage:
2019 M2 Comp, 2019 GLC 63 AMG , 2017 GLS 63 AMG, 2015 S63 Amg, 2008 John Dheer Gator XUV
Past Cars:
2016 M6 Cabrio, 2015 GLK 250 Bluetec, 2007 M6 Cab, 2011 S63 Amg, 2008 S450, 2006 330xi, 1998 Z24, 2002 Chev Suburban
Appreciate 0
      10-05-2015, 10:06 AM   #40
RiverRunner
Second Lieutenant
RiverRunner's Avatar
United_States
16
Rep
277
Posts

Drives: 2014 M6 Gran Coupe
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
The only way that broken axle would not be covered is if they can prove that you hit something on the road, or if the car shows evidence of a prior collision repair that was not repaired by BMW.

Document everything, as it appears you've done, and take it to court. To avoid legal fees, you could just file a Small Claims case and just pay now to get your car fixed and back in your hands.
__________________
2014 M6 Gran Coupe-Alpine White/Blk
2015 740i Sapphire Blk/Blk
2018 Tahoe RST 6.2
2019 Porsche 911 Turbo 991.2
Appreciate 0
      10-11-2015, 03:22 PM   #41
bigbrian
riding on rails
bigbrian's Avatar
United_States
117
Rep
655
Posts

Drives: 2o13 m6 f13
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: wichita kansas

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twitch Massacre View Post
@mjr24 Give it a rest already. Your arguments trying to defer the blame in this shameless situation back to the driver/op are ridiculous and invalidated immediately by the simple fact that BMW offers a feature on this vehicle called "Launch Control" which requires kickdown ("flooring" the accelerator) to function. A manufacturer cannot void your warranty for normal use of the Launch Control feature, just ask Nissan, they know. OP, a five minute conversation with an attorney will open your eyes to the 1,001 ways you can amend this situation. There are countless laws that protect you from this shameless denial of warranty duties by your dealership, specifically the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. What happened to your car is not normal. I and many others have launched heavily modified M6s with much more power than the drivetrain has been originally designed to support with no issues. What happened here was a freak accident and the dealership is simply trying to defer blame back to you. In any case I would refrain from getting into too many details of the situation here before consulting with my attorney. At this moment the less you reveal, the stronger your hand against your dealer
^^ thank you. I was about to chime in but this about sums it up. If we are purchasing a $120k car that we cannot "floor" from a stoplight (without it breaking) then something is obviously wrong.

It sounds to be like someone is blowing smoke up your ass OP. I wouldn't lie down and take that at all. Good luck with it!

Brian
__________________
/// 2o13 m6 f13 . jb4 tuned . meth injected . msr intake . 21" adv1 wheels . eisenmann race w/ catless DPs . vorsteiner full aero . accuair e-level w/ bagged KW V3 struts . dinan sways . bel stir+ w/ alp jammer . jl audio subs
/// 2o13 x5m e70 . velos tuned . 22" adv1 wheels . dropped on kw variant3 coilovers . passport 9500ci radar & jammer. gets groceries fast
Appreciate 0
      10-12-2015, 10:16 PM   #42
varanj_16
New Member
United_States
5
Rep
28
Posts

Drives: Porsche Cayenne
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Los Angeles

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by emingabri View Post
It is worth going through all this, because it is wrong. I pay $1485.00 a month for this car. I did NOTHING wrong, and I have to pay for a problem that BMW should have fixed for free. This problem should not have even happened....


"CASE: BMW1528084 Gabrimassihi vs BMW of North America WBSLX9C59DC968437


This letter is intended to establish that my case is in fact applicable to the manufacturer’s new vehicle warranty AND the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
BMW’s new vehicle warranty is applicable up to 48 months, or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. My 2013 BMW M6 has 30,000 miles, which meets the first requirement. Furthermore, BMW states “the vehicle must be brought, upon discovery of a defect in material or workmanship, to the workshop of any authorized BMW center.” The vehicle was taken to an authorized BMW center, so this claim still lies under the factories new vehicle warranty. This vehicle was manufactured as a powerful performance vehicle intended to deliver a higher level of performance than the lesser and more inexpensive 6 series models. [Please refer to attachment #1, #2, and #3]. Not only has the engine been modified to deliver more horsepower from the factory, the suspension and chassis have also been reinforced by BMW to be able to handle the increased power. I believe that that failed component on this vehicle, which was a broken axle, is the result of a defective part. I believe that because the manufacturer increased the power of the vehicle without taking into account the reliability of the axle, caused this axle to fail under circumstances not alien to this vehicles intended purpose.


BMW has claimed that an “outside influence” was the cause of this failure. The representative I spoke with, Nancy McDonald, has explained that BMW denied the warranty claim because the repairs needed were “due to aftermarket wheels and multiple burnouts.” The Federal Trade Commission states that The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket or recycled part. The FTC also states that the manufacturer or dealer must show that the aftermarket or recycled part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage. Neither the dealership nor manufacturer has provided any evidence that the aftermarket wheels installed on the vehicle caused the axle to fail. The wheels that are installed are the same 20 inch diameter as the wheels BMW offers, and I believe there is no factual evidence that can show the wheel had any effect causing the axle to fail. As for the statement that the repair will not be covered under warranty because the vehicle has performed “multiple burnouts,” I have made it clear that negligent “burnouts” were not performed, the vehicle is manufactured with a factory launch control, and using it evidently causes the wheels to lose traction because of the massive tourqe the engine produces, this is not abnormal and there is no possible way to prevent this from happening when a customer is using the launch control feature because of the precise settings the vehicle must be in order to use the feature. The only way to use the launch control feature is to set the cars suspension, steering, and throttle response setting to “sport plus” and also to disengage the vehicles traction control. This is the only possible way to use the launch control, which the customer will know is functioning when the launch control indicator flag is visible on the vehicle dash board [Please see attachment #3.5]. This feature was used only once when this failure occurred. While there is no exact number of launches that BMW has expressed will be deemed as “negligent” driving, I do not believe a single instance constitutes negligence. Under section 1792.2 of the Song Beverly Warranty Act, subsection (a)

“Every sale of consumer goods that are sold at retail in this state by a retailer or distributor who has reason to know at the time of the retail sale that the goods are required for a particular purpose, and that the buyer is relying on the retailer's or distributor's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods shall be accompanied by such retailer's or distributor's implied warranty that the goods are fit for that purpose.”

Furthermore under section 1793.1 subsection (a)

(1) Every manufacturer, distributor, or retailer making express warranties with respect to consumer goods shall fully set forth those warranties in simple and readily understood language, which shall clearly identify the party making the express warranties, and which shall conform to the federal standards for disclosure of warranty terms and conditions set forth in the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 2301 et seq.)

Since the outcome of my warranty claim is “solely the prerogative of BMW NA,” I believe it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to sincerely review this case and investigate why the field technician whose credentials or factual finding are still unknown to me, assumedly determined that this vehicle was in fact driven in “negligible” manner. According to BMW’s new vehicle warranty, repairs will not be covered under warranty if the driver was “negligent,” driving “improperly,” or if “the vehicle has been used in any competitive event.” This vehicle was being driven on a public road. This vehicle had no performance tune or any type of performance enhancing parts installed that would cause stress unforeseen by BMW’s engineers. The vehicle was being driven in manner that should have been appropriate for the parts installed on the vehicle to handle. If BMW does not agree that this vehicle should be driven in a way its customers are regularly being advised is safe and permissible to drive, I would like to ask why such features such as “launch control” and “sport plus” settings are provided with the purchase of this car and why no warning that using such features may cause a significant component of the vehicle to fail unexpectedly or even worse, why using such features may endanger one’s life because of the unexpected failure of a part. While I believe that this problem may have arisen due in part of the dealership, I have provided Nancy McDonald proof that a similar customer, Stephan Lui in Vancouver, launched his BMW M5 (Exact same vehicle specification as the M6, but with 4 doors) and had BMW provide the warranty services [See attachment #5 #6, and #7].

I believe it is in the manufacturer’s interest to review this case, and determine why

1. The dealership has been so negligent with a loyal customer who has purchased over 5 BMW’s, repeatedly refraining from providing informative pieces of information such as the actual reasons as to why the vehicle was being denied warranty, [Please see attachment #4: Conversation with dealership Service Advisor] and also why the dealership has decided to charge a “storage fee” of $50.00 dollars a day without contacting me in a reasonable amount of time in advance or having the decency to contact me via phone.

2. This repair has been plagued by excuses to exclude loyal customers from their legal right to have their vehicle repaired under warranty and returned to them in a reasonable amount of time. The payments for this vehicle are about $1485.00 per month, the price of the vehicle should reflect the service that will be provided. Not only has this vehicle been out of service, but no effort has been made to investigate this matter. I am disturbed the manufacture would disregard such a serious complaint and not look into the customers dissatisfaction on such matter especially since this vehicle is suppose to be the flagship performance vehicle, regarded as the best performance vehicle this company has.

Thank you for taking the time to read and acknowledge a frustrated, yet loyal customers concerns regarding his vehicle,

Emin Gabrimassihi
September 28, 2015"
Thank you for sharing this, i wish i should have studied law as i recently lost close to 60k in business (not connected to cars) inclusive of attorney fee
Appreciate 0
      10-15-2015, 05:31 PM   #43
RiverRunner
Second Lieutenant
RiverRunner's Avatar
United_States
16
Rep
277
Posts

Drives: 2014 M6 Gran Coupe
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
My car's been mostly trouble free. In July, my dealer approved replacing the driver seat leather due to abnormal wear. The first set was ordered wrong, still waiting, but at least it was approved to be done at no charge under warranty.
__________________
2014 M6 Gran Coupe-Alpine White/Blk
2015 740i Sapphire Blk/Blk
2018 Tahoe RST 6.2
2019 Porsche 911 Turbo 991.2
Appreciate 0
      10-17-2015, 08:03 PM   #44
2007 to 2016 M6 Cab
Captain
160
Rep
737
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition HS
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Victoria BC Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by emingabri View Post
It is worth going through all this, because it is wrong. I pay $1485.00 a month for this car. I did NOTHING wrong, and I have to pay for a problem that BMW should have fixed for free. This problem should not have even happened....


"CASE: BMW1528084 Gabrimassihi vs BMW of North America WBSLX9C59DC968437


This letter is intended to establish that my case is in fact applicable to the manufacturer’s new vehicle warranty AND the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
BMW’s new vehicle warranty is applicable up to 48 months, or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. My 2013 BMW M6 has 30,000 miles, which meets the first requirement. Furthermore, BMW states “the vehicle must be brought, upon discovery of a defect in material or workmanship, to the workshop of any authorized BMW center.” The vehicle was taken to an authorized BMW center, so this claim still lies under the factories new vehicle warranty. This vehicle was manufactured as a powerful performance vehicle intended to deliver a higher level of performance than the lesser and more inexpensive 6 series models. [Please refer to attachment #1, #2, and #3]. Not only has the engine been modified to deliver more horsepower from the factory, the suspension and chassis have also been reinforced by BMW to be able to handle the increased power. I believe that that failed component on this vehicle, which was a broken axle, is the result of a defective part. I believe that because the manufacturer increased the power of the vehicle without taking into account the reliability of the axle, caused this axle to fail under circumstances not alien to this vehicles intended purpose.


BMW has claimed that an “outside influence” was the cause of this failure. The representative I spoke with, Nancy McDonald, has explained that BMW denied the warranty claim because the repairs needed were “due to aftermarket wheels and multiple burnouts.” The Federal Trade Commission states that The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket or recycled part. The FTC also states that the manufacturer or dealer must show that the aftermarket or recycled part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage. Neither the dealership nor manufacturer has provided any evidence that the aftermarket wheels installed on the vehicle caused the axle to fail. The wheels that are installed are the same 20 inch diameter as the wheels BMW offers, and I believe there is no factual evidence that can show the wheel had any effect causing the axle to fail. As for the statement that the repair will not be covered under warranty because the vehicle has performed “multiple burnouts,” I have made it clear that negligent “burnouts” were not performed, the vehicle is manufactured with a factory launch control, and using it evidently causes the wheels to lose traction because of the massive tourqe the engine produces, this is not abnormal and there is no possible way to prevent this from happening when a customer is using the launch control feature because of the precise settings the vehicle must be in order to use the feature. The only way to use the launch control feature is to set the cars suspension, steering, and throttle response setting to “sport plus” and also to disengage the vehicles traction control. This is the only possible way to use the launch control, which the customer will know is functioning when the launch control indicator flag is visible on the vehicle dash board [Please see attachment #3.5]. This feature was used only once when this failure occurred. While there is no exact number of launches that BMW has expressed will be deemed as “negligent” driving, I do not believe a single instance constitutes negligence. Under section 1792.2 of the Song Beverly Warranty Act, subsection (a)

“Every sale of consumer goods that are sold at retail in this state by a retailer or distributor who has reason to know at the time of the retail sale that the goods are required for a particular purpose, and that the buyer is relying on the retailer's or distributor's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods shall be accompanied by such retailer's or distributor's implied warranty that the goods are fit for that purpose.”

Furthermore under section 1793.1 subsection (a)

(1) Every manufacturer, distributor, or retailer making express warranties with respect to consumer goods shall fully set forth those warranties in simple and readily understood language, which shall clearly identify the party making the express warranties, and which shall conform to the federal standards for disclosure of warranty terms and conditions set forth in the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 2301 et seq.)

Since the outcome of my warranty claim is “solely the prerogative of BMW NA,” I believe it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to sincerely review this case and investigate why the field technician whose credentials or factual finding are still unknown to me, assumedly determined that this vehicle was in fact driven in “negligible” manner. According to BMW’s new vehicle warranty, repairs will not be covered under warranty if the driver was “negligent,” driving “improperly,” or if “the vehicle has been used in any competitive event.” This vehicle was being driven on a public road. This vehicle had no performance tune or any type of performance enhancing parts installed that would cause stress unforeseen by BMW’s engineers. The vehicle was being driven in manner that should have been appropriate for the parts installed on the vehicle to handle. If BMW does not agree that this vehicle should be driven in a way its customers are regularly being advised is safe and permissible to drive, I would like to ask why such features such as “launch control” and “sport plus” settings are provided with the purchase of this car and why no warning that using such features may cause a significant component of the vehicle to fail unexpectedly or even worse, why using such features may endanger one’s life because of the unexpected failure of a part. While I believe that this problem may have arisen due in part of the dealership, I have provided Nancy McDonald proof that a similar customer, Stephan Lui in Vancouver, launched his BMW M5 (Exact same vehicle specification as the M6, but with 4 doors) and had BMW provide the warranty services [See attachment #5 #6, and #7].

I believe it is in the manufacturer’s interest to review this case, and determine why

1. The dealership has been so negligent with a loyal customer who has purchased over 5 BMW’s, repeatedly refraining from providing informative pieces of information such as the actual reasons as to why the vehicle was being denied warranty, [Please see attachment #4: Conversation with dealership Service Advisor] and also why the dealership has decided to charge a “storage fee” of $50.00 dollars a day without contacting me in a reasonable amount of time in advance or having the decency to contact me via phone.

2. This repair has been plagued by excuses to exclude loyal customers from their legal right to have their vehicle repaired under warranty and returned to them in a reasonable amount of time. The payments for this vehicle are about $1485.00 per month, the price of the vehicle should reflect the service that will be provided. Not only has this vehicle been out of service, but no effort has been made to investigate this matter. I am disturbed the manufacture would disregard such a serious complaint and not look into the customers dissatisfaction on such matter especially since this vehicle is suppose to be the flagship performance vehicle, regarded as the best performance vehicle this company has.

Thank you for taking the time to read and acknowledge a frustrated, yet loyal customers concerns regarding his vehicle,

Emin Gabrimassihi
September 28, 2015"
How did it turn out Bro ... resolution or still waiting?
__________________
Current Garage:
2019 M2 Comp, 2019 GLC 63 AMG , 2017 GLS 63 AMG, 2015 S63 Amg, 2008 John Dheer Gator XUV
Past Cars:
2016 M6 Cabrio, 2015 GLK 250 Bluetec, 2007 M6 Cab, 2011 S63 Amg, 2008 S450, 2006 330xi, 1998 Z24, 2002 Chev Suburban
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:15 PM.




6post.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST