"Customer Service", or "F**K the Customer"?

[Paul Wakefield]

The OP still owns the bike.

Except that is was disposed of and bought back in between.

The bike still has corrosion present that should have been repaired under warranty.

Could rather than should.

I could agree with you if the dealer said "tough, we will do it after the Winter". I can not agree if the dealer suggested something which the owner went along with or if the owner suggested it.

The dealer's suggestion (and I do assume the dealer suggested it first) 99 times out of 100 will give an extra Winter's corrosion free life once it is out of warranty. Still good advice. Still don't see why the dealer should pay because of the way things turned out.

We'll have to agree to differ.

Just as a touch of irony, I have some corrosion to be dealt with under warranty which I am trying to defer but BM won't let me.

 

[Paul Wakefield]

Playing Devils Advocate again, but my guess would be because its still within its 2yr warranty and the build quality is shot to shit. They already admitted as such by accepting that they were going to do the work before the crash. They suggested putting it off till after Winter presumably because

1. they didn't want him coming back in another 6 months to get even more work (quite possibly even the same work) done under warranty and
2. it would eat further into the 2 yrs.

Those decisions would come from BM not the dealer (and that is not BMs' attitude - see above). Can't see that its in the dealer's interest to put it off.

 

[oscar3769]

If the bike was insured third party only and the owner decided to repair it and then taken the bike in for warranty work how would the dealer know it had been effectively written off, also does the main dealer do an HPI check on all bikes before doing any warranty work? Im with you Im afraid, the warranty is for the bike and regardless of how many owners and the fact that the corrosion was nothing whatsoever to do with the accident then they should have replaced under warranty.

 

[D6]

people keep goin on about it being scrapped??????
cant be scrapped, he bought it back, damaged repairable is way diff from scrapped

 

[Nice 'n' Fat]

I'm with BMW on this but have every sympathy with Herr Ford. Once the bike was written off and he accepted the deal on the table it was game over for the warranty

Let this be a sober lesson for us all

 

[pablo666]

My twopennyworth!
A warranty isn't a god given right on the sale of goods. It is a contract between buyer and seller and is transferable to new sellers over a limited period of time.

It is offerred as an inducement to purchase.

Like all contracts, it is governed by contract law.

Every contract has written (and unwritten, but lets not go there!) terms.

If one of the written terms says: 'Void in the event of being written off' or similar terms, then that is the end of the story.

The only way to enforce a contract is in a court claiming BMW were in breach of their contract. If the Contract says 'void when bike written off'---no court in the land will make BMW pay.

Pablo

 

[Big Nick]

I can't really side with you on this one mate

If your insurance payout was seriously reduced owing to the corrosion then I may take a different view

The fact is you accepted the value put on your crashed bike and bought it back 'as seen'. I think you were expecting a lot to think BMW would honour a warranty claim after the bike had been written off. I hardly think write-off bikes are looked after whilst in storage after the crash so it would be impossible after the event to prove how bad the corrosion had been at the time of the crash.

 

[karlp]

My only point is that if the dealership recognised that the corrosion was covered by warranty, they should have dealt with it as soon as it was practicable.

Had the deferral been to suit the dealer and at their suggestion, they should replace the parts at their expense.

Now if the owner is the one who chose to defer the warranty-corrosion work, that's down to him and tough-titty.

From your original post -- you agreed to the deferment- so as you say tough-titty

 

[MikeP]

From your original post -- you agreed to the deferment- so as you say tough-titty

 

[Decompressing]

guess the lesson here is that, if you follow the dealer advice about waiting longer before replacing something under warranty, you have to accept the risk of never getting it honoured if you crash the bike later.....I can see your frustration, but it's just unfortunate.

Moral of the story? If you have a warranty issue, get it done NOW!

 

[digga]

If i had of bought the bike as a Cat D, (knowing full well its age[i.e less than 2 yrs]) would i have expected BumW to honour the 'warranty' ??


NO

I can just imagine Piddy's though...... "Bring it back in the spring Dave, then we'll sort all the issues in one hit" just a verbal exchange that any reasonable person would accept IMO.

£12000 for a 'Premium' motorcycle that rots like that is shi'ite, whatever made you buy another after all your woes is beyond me..

 

[zerocool]

I dont see the issue here, its yet another example of somebody paying top dollar for what should be a bike thats capable of laying down in mud, water, sand snow, and riding for a decade or reasonable riding without falling apart or rusting to high hell. If I wanted that I would buy a brand new chinese import with no name for £2,000.

So BMW make a part that corrodes and then the guy asks for a new part, not fitting or a chrome fancy pants version of the product. I dont think thats unreasonable.

The conditions of his claim only prove that yet again BMW are offering sub standard service in what should be a executive market.

Its easy for companies to pay some monkey £13k to sit on a phone and read out term and conditions and blank out and block claims, but if a company cares that little about their customers then emails like this should be brought to public eye and next time we may just buy a Aprillia/KTM/Triumph/Buell/etc instead.

Companies sometimes outgrow their own shoes, its not worth fighting it unless you get some job from it as your VERY unlikely to win over them or change their thoughts on business. Just find a company that looks after their customers and make sure they are on your list next time round.

The only mistake this guy made was buying the same bike after he had already been bitten once.

 

[D6]

The fact is you accepted the value put on your crashed bike and bought it back 'as seen'.

a man who has hit it right on the head,

 

[Sgt Bilco]

a man who has hit it right on the head,

In a nutshell Digger.

BuMW state that all warranty is null and void after a write off which seems reasonable enough and I`m sure that`s an industry standard. The argument (if there is one) should be with the dealer who suggested (probably quite rightly) putting off the warranty claim in the 1st place.

Still, look on the bright side, if the bike was cheap enough to buy and put right, there should be a profit in it. Just don`t advertise it on here

 

[WindyChuffer]

Has anyone seen these BMW warranty terms and conditions that state that the warranty is void in the event of an insurance write off? I don't recall seeing any such terms.

Dave Ford owned the bike, and it was involved in accident. So what. The insurance company decided that the bike was beyond economical repair, not that it was unrepairable. They paid out and took ownership. BMW warranty transfers to the new owner, the insurer. Dave Ford then bought the bike off the insurance company. BMW warranty transfers to the new owner, Dave Ford.

I don't get the issue here.

If there are such terms in the BMW warranty that it expires in the event of the bike being declared an insurance write off, then those conditions should be clearly made available to the owner at the time of purchase. If not, then that is unreasonable. I don't know the legal terms, but there is very strong case law on this matter where contractual terms are withheld.

Therefore until such time as I see these insurance-write-off-warranty-terminated terms of the warranty, I'm 100% behind Dave Ford. Sorry chaps !

Has anyone seen the warranty t's and c's and if so, can they publish a link to them here? I'd like to read them...

 

[Dave Ford]

For what it's worth, I didn't actually think that BMW would agree to replace the part - after all I've twice experienced their attitude to "customer service" with EWS failures - the whole EWS debacle was a disgrace - BMW, in their arrogance, refused to implement a recall.

To be honest I'm surprised at the level of support expressed for BMW. I did not, in any way, expect them to cover any of the costs resulting from the accident. They fit a "premium" bike with components that self-destruct and use the write-off situation as an excuse to absolve themselves of any responsibility to their customers. I think it wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect them to show some sort of flexibility, given the circumstances. I can think of few other companies that would show such utter contempt for their customers, but now I know.

An the fact that I'm stupid enough to buy another one doesn't alter any of the above - it just confirms that I'm stupid!

 

[Sgt Bilco]

Has anyone seen these BMW warranty terms and conditions that state that the warranty is void in the event of an insurance write off? I don't recall seeing any such terms.

Dave Ford owned the bike, and it was involved in accident. So what. The insurance company decided that the bike was beyond economical repair, not that it was unrepairable. They paid out and took ownership. BMW warranty transfers to the new owner, the insurer. Dave Ford then bought the bike off the insurance company. BMW warranty transfers to the new owner, Dave Ford.

I don't get the issue here.

If there are such terms in the BMW warranty that it expires in the event of the bike being declared an insurance write off, then those conditions should be clearly made available to the owner at the time of purchase. If not, then that is unreasonable. I don't know the legal terms, but there is very strong case law on this matter where contractual terms are withheld.

Therefore until such time as I see these insurance-write-off-warranty-terminated terms of the warranty, I'm 100% behind Dave Ford. Sorry chaps !

Has anyone seen the warranty t's and c's and if so, can they publish a link to them here? I'd like to read them...

FWIW, I did quite a bit of work on an in house warranty for a truck manufacturer for used vehicles. The warranty department along with outside warranty companies specifically excluded any warranty if a vehicle had been declared a write off and rebuilt. This is because an insurance company assessor has deemed the vehicle too damaged to be fit for the road so the manufacturer cannot be sure of the cause if there were a claim on a faulty item. Makes sense to me because of the potential lawsuit which would undoubtedly follow if anything happened because the bike wasn`t rebuilt to the manufacturers spec.

In Dave`s case, you would think the corrosion issue wouldn`t count but any manufacturer will stand behind this "write off / rebuild exclusion.

To be honest, I can`t really think of any other manufacturer who would stand on a warranty after the vehicle has been rebuilt. I also think you would struggle to find any warranty company to give you a warranty if you wanted to take one out on this bike.

This isn`t being negative or pro BuMW but is a realistic view.

 

[WindyChuffer]

FWIW, I did quite a bit of work on an in house warranty for a truck manufacturer for used vehicles. The warranty department along with outside warranty companies specifically excluded any warranty if a vehicle had been declared a write off and rebuilt. This is because an insurance company assessor has deemed the vehicle too damaged to be fit for the road so the manufacturer cannot be sure of the cause if there were a claim on a faulty item. Makes sense to me because of the potential lawsuit which would undoubtedly follow if anything happened because the bike wasn`t rebuilt to the manufacturers spec.

In Dave`s case, you would think the corrosion issue wouldn`t count but any manufacturer will stand behind this "write off / rebuild exclusion.

To be honest, I can`t really think of any other manufacturer who would stand on a warranty after the vehicle has been rebuilt. I also think you would struggle to find any warranty company to give you a warranty if you wanted to take one out on this bike.

This isn`t being negative or pro BuMW but is a realistic view.

Hi Sgt Bilco - You make some good points, but to be honest, unless what you are saying is in the terms of the BMW warranty, and those terms are made available to the customer, then BMW would be in default of their contractual obligations by failing to sort these warranty issues.

Its clear in this case what warranty issues are under question as Dave Ford had logged those issues with a dealer prior to the incident.

I've looked on BMW Motorrad website and cannot find their warranty terms. I'm on my 3rd new GS, and don't recall ever being given a copy of the warranty terms.

So my view is that BMW are contractually bound by the warranty.

What others do with regard to warranty is heresay and irrelevant.

 

[MikeP]

I can understand any manufacturer/importer not continuing warranty cover to something re-built after a 'beyond economical repair' assessment.

That's not what's being asked for here. All that is requested, is that someone honours the agreement (entered into prior to the collision) that parts would be replaced.

As long as that warranty work did not include anything that was damaged as a result of the collision, what difference does it make?

 

[Nice 'n' Fat]

For what it's worth, I didn't actually think that BMW would agree to replace the part - after all I've twice experienced their attitude to "customer service" with EWS failures - the whole EWS debacle was a disgrace - BMW, in their arrogance, refused to implement a recall.

To be honest I'm surprised at the level of support expressed for BMW. I did not, in any way, expect them to cover any of the costs resulting from the accident. They fit a "premium" bike with components that self-destruct and use the write-off situation as an excuse to absolve themselves of any responsibility to their customers. I think it wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect them to show some sort of flexibility, given the circumstances. I can think of few other companies that would show such utter contempt for their customers, but now I know.

An the fact that I'm stupid enough to buy another one doesn't alter any of the above - it just confirms that I'm stupid!

Dave, am I correct in assuming that you have bought both your bikes from the same dealer? If so, why can't your supplying dealer do the parts at cost?

Every little helps!