I've rejected my bike can anyone recommend a good solicitor .

[DING-DONG]

Today I also called a different bm dealer for a trade in price ( I will not disclose the dealer ) when he asked as to why I was trading I told him the faults he kindly stated they would not take the bike in a trade in because of the back log with getting parts for the new bike and various issues they are having themselves !

The gearbox/clutch issue I'm not the only bike BENHAMS have with this problem Andrew confirmed they had another back with the same issues.

 

[Shep]

Having been though a bit of this in the past, i get a gut feeling you might just be on a loser with this.

I'd be patient and let BMW have the time to sort it in their own way, they are normally very good, maintain a good relationship with your dealer it will be his interface with the BMW warrantee guy that will smooth the repair work. Upset your dealer and it could become a long drawn out process, they just sell a product it's in their best interest that you are happy with it, but if you treat them like shit you might just receive shit support.

If you beat them (BMW) into a corner they will just dig in and accept the judgement by an independent IME, but in your case you don't appear to have a strong case perhaps.

But stranger things have happened.

 

[Loiq]

I'm with Shep on this, I've been in a court case for the last 5 years, (nothing to do with bikes) I'm right but the people I'm fighting have all the money, time and more solicitors on their books and can keep my hanging out to dry forever.

I have to be reasonable, when all I really want to do is set fire to the building and shoot any people than come running out....!

the only people who could do well out of this would be solicitors... cos they get paid win or loose..... so they're laughing all the way to the bank...!

it would be best to have an honest non confrontational meeting with the dealer, ask them for help... recount all the problems, recount the brand loyalty, document this and see what they do.

Once it's written down it happened and can be used to request a response.

 

[DING-DONG]

Ayup shep,

Yeah I've had a good relationship in the past with benhams as I've brought from them before so I don't take my frustration out of them as you say they sell a product that's all but its the first time in several years owning this brand of bike that I've been utterly upset with the outcome, I've had gearboxes and clutch replaced in the past with a k12 that was out of warranty and a new engine in a f800gs under warranty without issues and i mainly come back to buy this brand because of the excellent back up you get ! But I'm not sure now.

 

[Shep]

You bought into an early model run, traditionally these are more error prone, this tends to lead to shortage of spares cos everybody wants the 'flooogle valve' replaced at the same time. The dealers don't know the bike yet so the little workshop tricks to keep you running hav'nt been developed yet.

They can't give you what they havn't got, but as long as they are actively trying to rectify the issue the judge will probably find in their favour.

In my case i explained the problem i was having and i got loan bikes for all my down time, and eventually after many months the issues were still not resolved (04 1200) i got a replacement bike.

BMW at that time had a customer service 'triage' service, it took a while but eventually i got give a phone number, at Bracknell, of a special R1200GS office that was dealing with issues with the new bike. It was a big step beyond the basic BMW crib sheet reading call centre.

Good luck

Best advice is be nice, be firm and keep everybody smiling

 

[mark2jag]

Get yerself off to Citizens advice bureaux. I did just this with my BMW K1300GT SE from Park Lane BMW. I had a reallly quite nasty vibration issue with it even from day one and the wankers at Park Lane did EVERYTHING they could to disclaim liability ,from saying they all do that sir to telling me I wasnt riding it right. Anyway CAB advised me about sale of goods act 1979, and the added inferred terms and services bit about it not being fit for purpose. I wrote and emailed Black Horse and even tried to reject it under sale of goods Act , and they also did everything in their power to fuck me off. AS an aside I bought the P.O.S in 2009, and today i have a nice letter from Black Horse finance saying thank you sir you currently owe us ZERO. BMW themselves were actually worse than useless by giving me misleading and incorrect information.

ALSO be aware that this forum is read by some surprising people. I had some correspondence from this sites owner telling me he had been contacted by the managing director (I think, memory fades after a while!!) of BMW Park Lane and he wanted all my defamatory posts about Park Lane to be removed from the forum. UKGSER's owner asked me if I could back up my allegations with proof, and when I told him I had written evidence he then told the MD of Park Lane to fuck himself, but probably not in those words.

I dont care what the naysayers opinion is: Do not give in to peer group pressure .

Stand your Ground.


that is all..



Mark

P.S. If the bike is less than 6 months old you have a right to reject it under Sale of Goods Act 1979


go here;

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/Aberdeen/con1item.cgi?file=*ADV1002-0100.txt


I do hope this helps.

 

[Davy F]

I've had gearboxes and clutch replaced in the past with a k12 that was out of warranty and a new engine in a f800gs under warranty without issues and i mainly come back to buy this brand because of the excellent back up you get !

Y'see, this is just why BMW laugh all the way to the bank, keep the customers reasonably happy and they'll still buy whatever shite products we put out. Personally, I'd prefer a brand that didn't have so many issues with so many models. But I do wish you the very best with your rejection and hope that you get a satisfactory outcome.

 

[zoltan]

Collected the bike on Thu. Rejected the bike on Mon. Had the bike for 4 days and 50 miles. Inexplicable oil leak. New bike ordered Tue. That was 4 weeks ago, collecting my new LC next week.
Keep calm , be civil, you will be dealing with your dealer not BMW UK.
If you want help drop me a pm, I sure my legal eagle will help you out

 

[Fanum]

I'm with Shep on this, I've been in a court case for the last 5 years, (nothing to do with bikes) I'm right but the people I'm fighting have all the money, time and more solicitors on their books and can keep my hanging out to dry forever.

I have to be reasonable, when all I really want to do is set fire to the building and shoot any people than come running out....!

the only people who could do well out of this would be solicitors... cos they get paid win or loose..... so they're laughing all the way to the bank...!

it would be best to have an honest non confrontational meeting with the dealer, ask them for help... recount all the problems, recount the brand loyalty, document this and see what they do.

Once it's written down it happened and can be used to request a response.

Playing 'keepy uppy' with a mahoosive TV screen is a bit different from rejecting a bike though

If it was me (with the bike, not the techno headbutting) I'd talk to a Trading Standards type knowledgeable person......they should have the facts and paperwork describing in fairly good detail what acceptable grounds for rejecting a motor vehicle are.

 

[JohnnyBoxer]

Thx for the comments

Regarding the duc I've owned several so aware of issues and the bike I've seen is a pikes peak dripping in bling.

The issues I have with my bike.

1- The clutch is fooked and drags gearbox clunks thro changes.
2- rear pads are down to metal @ 3k
3- The rear drive gaitor is holed
4- The vario's don't fit because rear subframe is out of tolerance the dealers benhams told me to modify the vario's to fit as I was going to Austria 2 days after I got the vario's and so the vario's had the plastic brackets trimmed down (these unbolt so can be replaced) the dealer said they will sort out on return.

The bike had its first service at 700 miles than I went to Austria and did the remaining miles taking it to 3k on my return the bike went back to benhams they gave me a rt12 that they want back, they made a puma report and sent it last Saturday it took nearly a week for BMW to get back to them, they said yes to brake pads as long as bike has not done more than 4k so be aware ! yes to gaiter but its on long term back order, the clutch they have not replied because they don't no how to fix I presume so that's ongoing, the vario's they will not fix or replace and suggested fitting washers under pillion pegs this I feel this is poor they have not stated why they don't fit when the same panniers fitted other bikes, they do not no when it will be fixed either I have another holiday booked can't cancel as ill lose my money they said I can have a f700 gs to use but can't take out the uk !

My argument is I brought a r1200gs TE model TE standing for touring edition ready to take the fitting of vario panniers, so my bike is not fit for purpose nor is it of satisfactory quality, if they had agreed to sort the panniers out and let me use a bike for my trip than i would have been happy as the bike is good just tarnished now by poor customer service.

I don't think you've hot a cat in hell's chance - seriously

 

[digga]

a friend of mine ended up sending his bike back to BMW , due to corrosion issues etc.
it took him ages, he had some inside info from an ex BM service manager bod and he'll re iterate that it wasn't easy.
keep calm, as siad previuosly its BMW Uk you are up against NOT the dealer, they're the ones being kicked from both ends..

drop me a pm and i'll see if he would be prepared to talk to you if required.

 

[Nutty]

I'd think BMW would probably go down the route of replacing the bike rather than refunding you. If that's the case, make sure you get a 2014 model year, and all should be well. Oh, and tell them you want a loan bike in the meantime

 

[Loiq]

I had a quick look at the sale of goods act and it does seem pretty simple to reject your side of the contract of sale.

Still would start with the fair approach, to document it all in a nice timeline.... then once it's written and in black and white... start with these bits....



Section 13(1) provides that where the buyer is sold goods by description, the goods must correspond with this description. Harlingdon v Christopher Hull held that this implied term may only be breached if the buyer relied upon the description. Therefore if the buyer is an expert, reliance may not be established.

Section 14 states that terms are implied about quality and title and are only relevant where the seller is acting in the course of a business. There is no requirement as to the status of the buyer. The phrase "in the course of a business" has received much judicial consideration. Some judges have applied definitions found in other acts, but the recent case of Stevenson v Rogers gives a wide definition to this requirement. It will encompass activity which is ancillary or loosely related to the business of a company. To use Richards' example, a bank that sells a company car will be acting in the course of a business.

Satisfactory quality, s 14(2)
The quality of the goods sold must be satisfactory (prior to 1994, this provision required 'merchantable' quality; this requirement has been retained in most Commonwealth versions of the Act). The Act provides an objective test to determine satisfactory quality; the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price, description and any other relevant factors. The courts have identified certain factors that may raise or lower the expectation of satisfaction. Second hand goods, per Bernstien v. Pamson Motors Ltd., will attract a lower expectation. On the other hand goods of a reputable brand may attract a higher expectation, the judge in Bernstien used the example of a small ping on a Rolls-Royce being unsatisfactory. 'Other relevant factors' may include advertising in the case of consumer contracts.

Fitness for purpose, s14(3)
If the buyer expressly or impliedly makes his purpose for the goods known to the seller, the seller is obliged to make sure the goods provided are fit for that purpose, if it is reasonable for the buyer to rely on the seller's expertise. An example of the application of this provision can be found in Godley v Perry.

 

[JJH]

What do you suggest ! Get spanked by BMW for £15k and let em walk all over me ! I'm afraid its not going to happen to be able to earn £15k to pay for this bike meant I had to sell my sole to the devil so I'm deffo not letting them off the hook, ill seek some legal advice failing that I may get a better reaction if I load the bike on my trailer get some professional signs made up and park outside BMW uk than every other dealer, a different one everyday a bit of press in MCN and a blog on here and various other forums with pics parked outside dealers than hopefully someone should take note.

It's all a bit OTT but they need to accept responsibility rather than bury there heads in the sand.

I did not mean you. Maby the dealer should give you a more suitable bike while they sort out yous. Or something. JJH

 

[Time Traveller]

My Bruv took on a Mercedes dealer over a gearbox issues with a new S class. They said there was no fault (after checking the car over) and refused to take it back. So he took then to court

After over 12 months he lost. It cost him thousands of pounds in independent witness reports and legal fees not to mention leasing another car in the meantime. He was stuck with the car.

When he took it to another dealer for a service he non-chantly mentioned an issue with the box - to which they said it was a known fault and promptly got it repaired under warranty (not quite sure what the issue was TBH). Feckin bonkers!!!

He then went back to court and got all his money back.


All I'm saying is, check what another dealer thinks first

 

[Yellow Peril]

Unfortunately the sale of goods act works both ways as it mentions somewhere that you have to give the dealer a reasonable amount of attempts to fix the problem before "rejecting the object".

Having said that if the dealership has put in writing that the rear subframe is "out of tolerance " then it is not of merchantable quality and therefore could be reject but trading standards is where you need to be talking, you need proper informed advise and also an independent report on the bike, although under the sale of goods act up to 6 months you don't have to "prove" the fault.

But as other have said be fair with the dealer, but if you can get a direct line with BMW Uk miss the dealer out and go for HQ.

 

[GS_or_bust]

Life is too short for this. I bet it would be cheaper to put washers under the pillion pegs and then trade it in as a perfect bike (that bmw say it is) for a Ducati, if that is what you want. My father went through a dispute that he could have settled for 5k and as he fought it it ended up costing him 20k. He was convinced he was right. You are not really being taken for 15k but for the depreciation whilst you owned it. If you can only just afford the bike then you can't to fight them.

 

[ronnie69]

Don't mean to p on anyone's parade or hinder the good fight, but Trading Standards are likely to have little or nothing to do with this. If it was a scam or there was a suggestion the dealer had intended to rip you off, they might be interested, but this is between you and dealer/BMW. You might get some helpful guidance from TS, but I wouldn't bank on it.

I hope you get sorted to your satisfaction, but tread very carefully at every stage.

Check your insurances and see if you've got legal expenses cover. You never know. If you have, you'll get some free initial legal advice over the phone and if they think you've a decent chance of winning, they may fund it all the way, subject to the indemnity limit and you complying with the policy terms.

However well meaning and helpful many peeps are on here, don't make any legal decisions based on anything on a forum. We can't possibly have the full story that you'll need to give a Solicitor to get proper advice. If a Solicitor gets it wrong, you can sue them and they're insured for it. If somebody on here gets it wrong and you lose out as a result, there's nowt you can do about it. Same applies to trading standards - they are not there to give out legal advice so if they advised you and got it wrong, you'd have little chance of redress imho. A Solicitor stands to lose something if they get it wrong. Nobody on here does. Harsh maybe, but true.

Despite some on here suggesting all Solicitors eat babies, usually after raping grannies, they are unbelievably highly regulated. Complaints against solicitors which are upheld are typically about failures to return calls/bad communication, rather than getting the law wrong, which is extremely rare. They do have the brass neck to usually charge money for what they do (unlike so many other professions which often charge nothing ) but there we are.

Go on - check your legal expenses cover - do it today. Enough Good luck.

 

[uncle buck]

Having been a warranty administrator for many years I would say you are on very thin ice. I can understand your frustration with BMW, however having worked for a host of different manufacturers including BM I would be having a long think about the best way to resolve this. As said previously I think you should give the dealer and bmw a little more time before rushing to a solicitor. Play ball & it will probably resolve in your favour.

 

[Captain Black]

Why not get some leaflets printed and a large banner and take to weeks off work and park ( with your new bmw if possible on a trailer) outside the dealership.
If you feel genuine grievance that's the way to smack em where it hurts. Do it at weekends as well see where that gets you.
Good luck.