Problem with a dealer bought car (2016 updated for 2020)

I feel your pain, had the same problem on a 650i, the cost of repair was fairly eye watering (quoted around £3k at BMW on car worth £6.5-7 tops), lots of labour involved, and from the look of it a fairly specialist job on such a complex engine. If you check the american forums you will see this is a very common problem on the N62 engines, certainly enough for me to not even consider another BMW with the N62, absolute pain that affects an otherwise superb piece of engineering, and goes some way to explain the number of V8 6s and 7s being offloaded on the cheap these days.
 
As others have said he's shot himself in the foot with that advert. Follow CAB's advice, get the independent report and present this to the garage. Personally I would be wanting it rectified if you really like the car but otherwise get the refund and consider your options.
 
So it seems if I am to get the car refunded, it is up to me to prove the fault was present, but if i get it inspected/repaired by the garage, then it is up to the them to prove it was not faulty before i got it.
I have gone down this route, and the dealer wants the car returned asap.
 
I'd certainly be looking at a refund, why a 50k mile car has stem seal problems would worry me, never mind 5+ owners, are you sure it's not been clocked? - they hide mileage easily....
 
Time for an MOT history check to make this thread truly 5*

e: assume this is it

MOT history of this vehicle
• Test date15 February 2016
• Expiry date19 February 2017
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading50,152 miles
• MOT test number9760 4629 6290
• Advisory notice item(s)
front Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 10mm circle within zone 'A' (8.3.1a)

• Test date15 February 2016
• Test ResultFail
• Odometer reading50,151 miles
• MOT test number2608 3093 2539
• Reason(s) for failure
nearside rear Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
• Advisory notice item(s)
front Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 10mm circle within zone 'A' (8.3.1a)

• Test date20 February 2015
• Expiry date19 February 2016
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading29,032 miles
• MOT test number5985 8125 5088

• Test date21 March 2014
• Expiry date1 April 2015
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading27,315 miles
• MOT test number8072 0048 4029
• Advisory notice item(s)
Under-trays fitted obscuring some underside components
Engine covers fitted obscuring some components in the engine bay
both rear tyres perrished

• Test date28 March 2013
• Expiry date1 April 2014
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading25,245 miles
• MOT test number7386 0768 3033

• Test date2 April 2012
• Expiry date1 April 2013
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading24,120 miles
• MOT test number4279 0329 2068

• Test date12 February 2011
• Expiry date1 March 2012
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading22,144 miles
• MOT test number6082 0384 1093

• Test date16 February 2010
• Expiry date1 March 2011
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading18,073 miles
• MOT test number1737 7724 0460
• Advisory notice item(s)
front and rear brake pads wearing low

• Test date25 February 2009
• Expiry date1 March 2010
• Test ResultPass
• Odometer reading10,817 miles
• MOT test number3521 3645 9028
• Advisory notice item(s)
Nail in nearside front tyre
 
Last edited:
Gaygle said:
You only need to pay £100 on the credit card and the card company becomes joint liable for the entire purchase. A lot of dealers will allow you to do this without any penalty, but even if they did charge you 3% - £3 is worth it for the protection you'll get.
Click to expand...

Yeah, exactly that.

It's funny when they pull out of a sale because of it, when you've already pointed out to them they state CC accepted in the advert and offer to pay the charge. Alarm bells right away.
 
Skillmister said:
Would have been a nice low mileage example if the last owner hadn't plonked 20k on it in a year!
Click to expand...

That is an incredibly odd mileage history isn't it. I'm sure its legit but wow, what a contrast.

'I need a car to do 20k a year in, for 1 year'

'How about an ultra low mile 9 year old 750i'

:D
 
Wasn't necessarily a new owner, the existing owner could have had a work secondment or something I guess
 
[TW]Fox;29337381 said:
That is an incredibly odd mileage history isn't it. I'm sure its legit but wow, what a contrast.

'I need a car to do 20k a year in, for 1 year'

'How about an ultra low mile 9 year old 750i'

:D
Click to expand...

Stranger things are suggested on OcUK daily :p
 
Malt_Vinegar said:
So it seems if I am to get the car refunded, it is up to me to prove the fault was present, but if i get it inspected/repaired by the garage, then it is up to the them to prove it was not faulty before i got it.
I have gone down this route, and the dealer wants the car returned asap.
Click to expand...

Out of interest who told you that? Under the new Consumer Rights Act you should have the right to reject within the first 30 days if the vehicle is either not of satisfactory quality, not fit for purpose or not as described. It sounds like it's neither of satisfactory quality nor as described (it's not perfect anyway). The reason for the initial question is that my understanding is that whoever does the inspection there is a rebuttable presumption the fault was present at the time of sale unless it would be typically caused by wear and tear - i.e. it's up to the seller to prove that the fault was not present at time of sale.

It's probably wise to be reasonable and allow the garage the chance to inspect the car but I'd be considering very carefully whether you're under any obligation to accept an offer of repair should they make one.
 
I'm totally at a loss now.
CAB are telling me one thing and other people as above.

I'm also doubting the problem with the car now. It only seems to happen when it's cold outside and the car is cold. So I'm led to believe that these cars can pump out a lot of water vapor when cold due to the large exhaust and condensation.

Debating calling the whole thing off and dropping it. Maybe I am just paranoid.
 
Maybe an idea to have it checked by a specialist to confirm? No use guessing.
 
If it does have an issue get it in writing and for them to confirm that it must have been present at the point of purchase and not wear and tear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom