BMW say non run flats has voided my warranty

[bigdog]

Reminds me of the pre 2010 N52 checkball cylinderhead. BMW redesigned a cylinder head for the 2010 model year specifically to eliminate a "non issue".
Or the Porsche IMS that was redesigned for a "non issue".

I wish you the best in your efforts. Let us know how it goes.

 

[TitanTim]

Good luck if you decide to persue this through the small claims court as it could end up being a drawn out affair and you may end up out of pocket. Some years ago I took a well known Japanese car franchise to the small claims court over a used a car purchase. What I thought would be a straight forward process took over a year and half a dozen visits to court taking up work time and expense etc. I was also threatened by the used car salesman which added to it all and the stress. I won my case but the compensation and costs awarded to me was a complete joke and to be honest a complete waste of time. In many ways it was the principle of the matter and what I thought was right at the time but on reflection if it's over something that isn't worth a great deal money wise then I would use the court process as an absolute last resort. Remember its BMW and a large organisation your up against.

By all means persue it with the dealer and be fair and friendly but I would say threatening legal action wouldn't be worth the hastle over a wheel.

Don't want to end up like this chappie

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384842/Porsche-driver-Damian-Markland-loses-90k-lawsuit-fees-despite-winning-case.html

At the end of the day you would hope BMW will take the sensible approach and just replace or contribute towards the cost of a replacement.

Tim.

 

[Transmat]

Surely the fact that the first wheel was replaced, whilst using Runflat tyres, proves that the wheels can crack, regardless of the tyre.

ok, if they only cracked when using non-runflats, they might have a point, but your first one went whilst using the runflat that they recommend, so in my eyes, this eliminates the tyre issue.

Couple this with the fact that the replacement wheel has a slightly different design, and that is surely an admission that there was a design fault with the original design.

That's actually a very good point which I had overlooked, thanks

 

[Transmat]

Good luck if you decide to persue this through the small claims court as it could end up being a drawn out affair and you may end up out of pocket. Some years ago I took a well known Japanese car franchise to the small claims court over a used a car purchase. What I thought would be a straight forward process took over a year and half a dozen visits to court taking up work time and expense etc. I was also threatened by the used car salesman which added to it all and the stress. I won my case but the compensation and costs awarded to me was a complete joke and to be honest a complete waste of time. In many ways it was the principle of the matter and what I thought was right at the time but on reflection if it's over something that isn't worth a great deal money wise then I would use the court process as an absolute last resort. Remember its BMW and a large organisation your up against.

By all means persue it with the dealer and be fair and friendly but I would say threatening legal action wouldn't be worth the hastle over a wheel.

Don't want to end up like this chappie

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384842/Porsche-driver-Damian-Markland-loses-90k-lawsuit-fees-despite-winning-case.html

At the end of the day you would hope BMW will take the sensible approach and just replace or contribute towards the cost of a replacement.

Tim.

Thanks yes however the small claims court process is usually very contained (in court costs) unless I keep contesting any decisions. The initial costs will be low, usually under £150 and I'm purely claiming for the cost of the wheel rather than any consequential costs, so given that bmw have already gone public by saying they'll replace the wheels, I think it would be a straight forward enough case. If they decided in bmw's favour I'd be surprised but wouldn't contest it.

 

[TitanTim]

Good luck if you decide to persue this through the small claims court as it could end up being a drawn out affair and you may end up out of pocket. Some years ago I took a well known Japanese car franchise to the small claims court over a used a car purchase. What I thought would be a straight forward process took over a year and half a dozen visits to court taking up work time and expense etc. I was also threatened by the used car salesman which added to it all and the stress. I won my case but the compensation and costs awarded to me was a complete joke and to be honest a complete waste of time. In many ways it was the principle of the matter and what I thought was right at the time but on reflection if it's over something that isn't worth a great deal money wise then I would use the court process as an absolute last resort. Remember its BMW and a large organisation your up against.

By all means persue it with the dealer and be fair and friendly but I would say threatening legal action wouldn't be worth the hastle over a wheel.

Don't want to end up like this chappie

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384842/Porsche-driver-Damian-Markland-loses-90k-lawsuit-fees-despite-winning-case.html

At the end of the day you would hope BMW will take the sensible approach and just replace or contribute towards the cost of a replacement.

Tim.

Thanks yes however the small claims court process is usually very contained (in court costs) unless I keep contesting any decisions. The initial costs will be low, usually under £150 and I'm purely claiming for the cost of the wheel rather than any consequential costs, so given that bmw have already gone public by saying they'll replace the wheels, I think it would be a straight forward enough case. If they decided in bmw's favour I'd be surprised but wouldn't contest it.

I think as much as anything from BMWs point of view they would want to avoid any court process over what is really a small issue to them and not worth their hastle and bad publicity, but then........

Tim.

 

[exdos]

Definitely take this case to the Small Claims Court. If wheels crack during normal use, then they are not of sufficient durabilty to be fit for the purpose for which they have been fixed to your car. During pre-trial discovery or whilst threatening court action, you must ask how many cracked alloy wheels has BMW had to replace that have originally been fitted with Runflat tyres, on all the models that have RFs as standard.

I bet BMW /Mondial will foot the bill for the new wheel rather than reveal that information in court, which would then become openly disclosed information.

 

[Transmat]

Good luck if you decide to persue this through the small claims court as it could end up being a drawn out affair and you may end up out of pocket. Some years ago I took a well known Japanese car franchise to the small claims court over a used a car purchase. What I thought would be a straight forward process took over a year and half a dozen visits to court taking up work time and expense etc. I was also threatened by the used car salesman which added to it all and the stress. I won my case but the compensation and costs awarded to me was a complete joke and to be honest a complete waste of time. In many ways it was the principle of the matter and what I thought was right at the time but on reflection if it's over something that isn't worth a great deal money wise then I would use the court process as an absolute last resort. Remember its BMW and a large organisation your up against.

By all means persue it with the dealer and be fair and friendly but I would say threatening legal action wouldn't be worth the hastle over a wheel.

Don't want to end up like this chappie

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384842/Porsche-driver-Damian-Markland-loses-90k-lawsuit-fees-despite-winning-case.html

At the end of the day you would hope BMW will take the sensible approach and just replace or contribute towards the cost of a replacement.

Tim.

Thanks yes however the small claims court process is usually very contained (in court costs) unless I keep contesting any decisions. The initial costs will be low, usually under £150 and I'm purely claiming for the cost of the wheel rather than any consequential costs, so given that bmw have already gone public by saying they'll replace the wheels, I think it would be a straight forward enough case. If they decided in bmw's favour I'd be surprised but wouldn't contest it.

I think as much as anything from BMWs point of view they would want to avoid any court process over what is really a small issue to them and not worth their hastle and bad publicity, but then........

Tim.

Maybe, but they are a business too and I understand this. I would expect them to play hardball at first (although they are also currently being very easy going about a new fuel pump which is a £1300 job, booked in on Monday via extended warranty).

If they had offered partial payment I would take a different view, however bmw have already set the precedent with replacement wheels, and to suggest no contribution at all as a final offer is a bit silly. There simply Isnt anything written anywhere that bmw can point to which states non run flats invalidate a warranty without any consideration at all, in fact they have publicly said it won't invalidate it.

The only bit of information I am missing is whether any have been replaced on non run flats, and if so, what circumstances this was honoured, for example what was the process, the deviation of damage on the run out report etc.

I won't let it go too far, I'll happily have my day in court if it needs to go that far, and will accept the outcome either way.

 

[Transmat]

Definitely take this case to the Small Claims Court. If wheels crack during normal use, then they are not of sufficient durabilty to be fit for the purpose for which they have been fixed to your car. During pre-trial discovery or whilst threatening court action, you must ask how many cracked alloy wheels has BMW had to replace that have originally been fitted with Runflat tyres, on all the models that have RFs as standard.

I bet BMW /Mondial will foot the bill for the new wheel rather than reveal that information in court, which would then become openly disclosed information.

This is my trail of thought too - the wheels retail at £530, something like that? The cost to them is probably well under £200, the admin cost alone isn't worth it for them.

Incidentally if this was an old car out of warranty, anything truly after market fitted which I knew would invalidate warranty etc, I wouldn't even bother. But for them to say any other tyres other than the ones the car ships with is 'not approved' is ridiculous. They may as well tell halfords to close down if they think this is the case!

 

[Atom1]

I think the rim would be less likely to crack with none runflat tyres. That may play in your favour. However a cracked rim can happen at any time and get worse over a period. Its a tough one!

As an extra point, all M cars ( if not most) including the M135i come with none runflat tyres as standard. So BMW deffinetly approve these tyres. Give me a trye inflation kit over runflats anyday lol.

 

[Anonymous]

I had both rears changed without even asking, despite the car having no warranty and being over 4 years old. They are the revised version with a more substantial rim. I guess the problem is that your vehicle is outside of the 3 year manufacturers warranty and your extended warranty explicitly excludes wheels so neither of these place an obligation on BMW/Mondial to resolve. Simplistically, are you taking them to court to try and force a goodwill settlement? If so, I guess it is the safety element that is most relevant here, as there is a chance of complete wheel/tyre failure?

 

[Sketchley]

I had both rears changed without even asking, despite the car having no warranty and being over 4 years old. They are the revised version with a more substantial rim. I guess the problem is that your vehicle is outside of the 3 year manufacturers warranty and your extended warranty explicitly excludes wheels so neither of these place an obligation on BMW/Mondial to resolve. Simplistically, are you taking them to court to try and force a goodwill settlement? If so, I guess it is the safety element that is most relevant here, as there is a chance of complete wheel/tyre failure?

Got to agree with this. You cannot take them to court regarding warranty as one has expired and the other exlcudes wheels. However you might have legal redress under sale of goods act against the retailer that sold you the car.

 

[Breaker]

This is one thing I'm not missing!! Dealing with BMW service departments!!

I still can't believe they are selling those wheels, and worse still not just putting their hands up to the fault!! :?

 

[Transmat]

I had both rears changed without even asking, despite the car having no warranty and being over 4 years old. They are the revised version with a more substantial rim. I guess the problem is that your vehicle is outside of the 3 year manufacturers warranty and your extended warranty explicitly excludes wheels so neither of these place an obligation on BMW/Mondial to resolve. Simplistically, are you taking them to court to try and force a goodwill settlement? If so, I guess it is the safety element that is most relevant here, as there is a chance of complete wheel/tyre failure?

Hi gaz, yes just to be clear I'm not pursuing this under any form of warranty via mondial (bmw extended warranty), this has all been direct firstly with my dealer who identified the fault, then direct with bmw. Bmw can see I have extended warranty, but I've confirmed with them that I don't view this as a claim that I'll be raising via mondial.

Bmw are telling me they would have swapped my wheel no questions asked if I had a runflat on there, but are point blank turning it down on the basis I've swapped to standard tyres, they say they are going to put this fact in writing to me. They say I've invalidated any goodwill / warranty claim on the basis that I've used a 'non approved part' with my tyres being standard and not runflat.

Did yours have runflats when they replaced it?

In fairness the dealer (sytner) have actually been very helpful and polite about it, I have no beef with them at all.

 

[Anonymous]

Yep I have Runflats, and the car was well over 4 years old. I have always convinced Sytner to pursue any given claim initially. I have then approached the service centre if I didn't get the result I was hoping for. (Both rear lights as an example) Just out of interest, how did BMW find out that you were running Runflats? I assume Sytner must have told them? Was this really necessary? They should have suggested that you may want to consider replacing with runflats, before a claim is attempted.

Plan B is: Replace the tyres and stick them on a friends car for a warranty claim . On second thoughts, that's dishonest.

 

[Anonymous]

In fairness the dealer (sytner) have actually been very helpful and polite about it, I have no beef with them at all.

This is something that winds me up, cos its similar to my leaky Z4 situation - the dealer basically puts himself out of the loop, so as not to be seen as a bastard! They say its all down to BMW etc etc...

Thing is.....its the dealer that sells the car (and takes the profit), yet as soon as there is a problem, they don't want to know. It should be you only deal with the dealer and it is for him to sort out.

I bet your dealer even agrees with you (off the record, of course) that the tyre is probably irrelevant, but he doesn't want to pay for the wheel, so his easy get-out clause is to say its down to BMW themselves.

Does it specifically say not to put non-runflats on those wheels? Do they sell the wheel/tyre package with non-runflats? The wheels aren't of suitable quality (design fault) for intended purpose as anyone would expect a wheel to last the age of the car.

 

[Transmat]

Yep I have Runflats, and the car was well over 4 years old. I have always convinced Sytner to pursue any given claim initially. I have then approached the service centre if I didn't get the result I was hoping for. (Both rear lights as an example) Just out of interest, how did BMW find out that you were running Runflats? I assume Sytner must have told them? Was this really necessary? They should have suggested that you may want to consider replacing with runflats, before a claim is attempted.

Plan B is: Replace the tyres and stick them on a friends car for a warranty claim . On second thoughts, that's dishonest.

It was sytner yes, they produce a run out report on the wheel (which I now have a copy of) which states all the test results and any notes, noon there they added 'non runflats' in the comments. It didn't seem necessary to me either as bmw would never find out and it won't cost the dealer, but they did it anyway. The new tyres are about 3-4 weeks old and at the time I was due to replace them sytner were trying to flog me replacement runflats, but I opted not to so it's probably a case of 'told you so' from their perspective. I also had a vehicle check carried out by them at this time and they claim they checked the alloy and there was no crack at that time, so are saying the alloy must have developed a crack since I had the new tyres fitted :roll:

The tyres are holding pressure fine at the moment and all seems normal, I wasn't even aware the crack was there, but best to get it resolved before it gets any worse!

 

[Transmat]

In fairness the dealer (sytner) have actually been very helpful and polite about it, I have no beef with them at all.

This is something that winds me up, cos its similar to my leaky Z4 situation - the dealer basically puts himself out of the loop, so as not to be seen as a bastard! They say its all down to BMW etc etc...

Thing is.....its the dealer that sells the car (and takes the profit), yet as soon as there is a problem, they don't want to know. It should be you only deal with the dealer and it is for him to sort out.

I bet your dealer even agrees with you (off the record, of course) that the tyre is probably irrelevant, but he doesn't want to pay for the wheel, so his easy get-out clause is to say its down to BMW themselves.

Does it specifically say not to put non-runflats on those wheels? Do they sell the wheel/tyre package with non-runflats? The wheels aren't of suitable quality (design fault) for intended purpose as anyone would expect a wheel to last the age of the car.

They definitely sell my wheel with non runflats as an option from new, it can be specified when ordering, so when I queried this with the person from bmw and said that my wheel must therefore be ok to use with standard tyres they started waffling on about how the car need to be 'specially set up in the factory' to 'cope' with the standard tyres, but she couldn't explain how. And that any '3rd party' is not able to alter the car to handle the tyres. Sounds like rubbish to me!

I actually don't mind dealing with it direct, I don't really trust a dealer to do so and they then just become the middle man, I'd rather deal with it myself so that I can be sure my argument is being out across in the way I want rather than watered down by the dealer. My dealer has been very good with other warranty issues before but I think they are just backing down on this wheel issue as bmw head office seem to be taking a firm line.

 

[Transmat]

Update -

I've had my letter back from the head of customer services for bmw (apparently). They are saying that as the tyre doesn't have their own star rating stamp on the tyre (star symbol), these are not approved from bmw's and therefore they cannot verify the safety of the tyres. The star rating symbol is a bmw initiative rather than a tyre industry one, and as you can imagine the usual endorsed brands have the stamp.

I've contacted falken who make the tyres who have said this is a load of tosh as the tyres have to meet an EU standard for safety, not a bmw specific one. Therefore as the tyres meet this standard, they are safe for use on any car in the eu including bmw.

Bmw also say that as bmw uk is not the supplier of my car, I have to sue the dealer instead!!

I'm not phased, I'm still going to chase

 

[Atom1]

Sounds like a right old polava, id be interested to see where and how this ends up.

As always keep us posted, good luck.

 

[exdos]

I'm not phased, I'm still going to chase

At the end of the day, an alloy wheel requires a pneumatic tyre to function. Both these items must comply with safety requirements and pass the appropriate tests to be available for sale and general use in the UK/EU.

IF the alloy wheels fitted to your car at the time of sale were so specific with their requirements that they could be used with RunFlat tyres, only, then this should have been brought to your, and your tyre-fitter's, attention under some kind of "Red Hand" notice. Such a Red Hand warning would be a durable sticker or engraving/embossing inside the alloy wheel warning anyone not to fit anything other than the specific tyres, only, which BMW states can be safely used in conjunction with the alloys. Without such a Red Hand warning, the alloy wheels are no different to all the other alloy wheels in general use with commercially available tyres. An alloy wheel, being made of metal, should have considerable durability and hence longevity, and unless there is evidence of hard impact why should it ever crack or fail in use? An alloy wheel which fails in ordinary use is simply not of satisfactory quality no matter how old it is, and as such the vendor is responsible.

You should have a field day with this. Go get 'em!