The Purpose Of This Blog

NEWS: November 15, 2010 - My car has finally been returned to me - but I do not have satisfaction.

If you have a remarkable customer service experience to report, please email your story to:

Click on the Sagas link below to see a listing of current issues.

PLEASE FOLLOW THIS BLOG! The more people that follow this blog, the more of a difference this site can make in ongoing issues. Just click the FOLLOW link below in the right, top column and enter your gmail address - it only takes ten seconds. Thanks for reading!

Monday, November 15, 2010

BMW: Calling Any Good Researchers

I got a new email from Levy today chronicling a discouraging exchange with BMW Legal.  On friday he received this email:
From: "" <>
Sent: Fri, November 12, 2010 1:23:06 PM
Subject: Joshua Logan, 2009 BMW Z4, E160844
November 12, 2010

Re:  Joshua Logan
       2009 BMW Z4 SDrive30i, VIN:  E160844

Dear Mr. Levy:

I am in receipt of your letter dated October 21, 2010 proposing BMW of North America, LLC reacquire the above-referenced vehicle from your client.

After carefully reviewing the service records, it is our position that this vehicle does not qualify for repurchase and is not in violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, as there is no defect in material or workmanship.

Kind regards,

Avery Dawson
Executive Customer Assistance Manager
BMW of North America, LLC
Customer Relations and Services


Levy replied thusly:


Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: Joshua Logan, 2009 BMW Z4, E160844

Dear Mr. Dawson:  While I do not agree with your assessment of the qualifications of this case for purposes of the Lemon Law-  there is certainly the issue that the public is entitled to have parts for their vehicle available from the dealer within a reasonable period of time.  Further, the the evaluations of the vehicle would have been comprehensive and thorough so that the parts being ordered were not spread over months of time.

I would ask you to consider what you might be able to offer my client for the egregious conduct and unreasonable delays.

This was disappointing as my situation does not seem to be covered by these laws as they refer mostly to manufacturing defects or corporate misrepresentations.  While Levy does his thing, I decided to do some cursory research on California laws that might protect me, but didn't come up with much.

My first hit was to the California Bureau of Auto Repair, which seemed to at first be an agency that might be able to help, so I sent them an email stating my case.  Very shortly afterwards I got an email back from them saying I should contact the State of California Department of Insurance to see if they could help.  I went to their website and was forced to send them an email limited to 500 characters describing my situation.  Needless to say I wasn't able to say too much, but now I guess I'll wait to see what they have to say.

It is amazing that I continue to hit these walls in my search for justice as this is so clearly an unreasonable situation.  I'm sure that I'm not the first person to encounter this problem, but so far in my search there doesn't seem to be any legal remedy for this egregious lack of responsibility.  Under these circumstances it seems like BMW would have the right to hold my car indefinitely all the while I'm still tied to my lease and insurance responsibilities, as well as any ancillary costs.  If this part were just wholly unavailable, under the apparent law, they could have the right to hold the car for the full term of the lease and just be able to sit and watch me bleed.

Anyone out there who might know if there are any laws or regulations that might protect me I would love to know.

As of 3pm PST I still have not received word that my insurance company has approved the final claim approval.  I'm still waiting.

Thanks for reading.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.