The Sytner Shed has re-appeared
- Thread starter Ninarvana
- Start date
The issue here appears to lie with the dealer. Not only by selling a car in seemingly substandard condition, the seller already mentions brakes and tyres were replaced in the mere 3k miles they drove it. But also sells warranty with the car that because of missing service history may turn out to be worthless!
srhutch said:
And like I said you'll never know unless you bought it or were intending on buying it, it would be something for a potential buyer to look at and enquire with the warranty company. Again we cannot make assumptions on this car as it's not one on here but it is food for thought for anyone looking at it.
AC wheels are beginning to corrode on the one picture shown and certainly not cleaned on the inside.... 
Happy to hear of others experiences if it avoids me buying something not fit for purpose. Of course all the issues identified by Nina may have been rectified - but not perhaps the all important service history.
Happy to hear of others experiences if it avoids me buying something not fit for purpose. Of course all the issues identified by Nina may have been rectified - but not perhaps the all important service history.
exdos said:
Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more strongly with you.
What exactly would your legal representatives say? Nina is voicing an opinion based on her prior experience of viewing / driving the car.
Would your legal representatives also contact those saying that your car was overpriced.
I have seen numerous posts from people stating that a car they looked at drove poorly, had incorrect SH etc. so they didn't buy it. I don't think this thread is essentially any different.
Also, for what it's worth. I wouldn't be happy if I was the seller, but then should I, as the seller, have the right to expect those who have viewed my car not to voice their experiences / opinions?
Should you also ban people from advocating the quality / condition of a car, like many did for Tomscott's. Surely you can't only censor negative comments? Seems a bit autocratic to me?
As I said earlier, this is a community. I only think it's a good idea to offer advice.
Seems as though I need to iron out a few things here as a simple thread aiming to aid potential buyers has turned into world war 3 unnecessarily!
Firstly, I posted about this car because from my personal experience with the vehicle, it was by far the worst MC I have driven to date (and I've now driven a few.) Having felt so strongly about this I didn't wish for someone on here who is looking out for their first MC just like I was this time last year to enter into a bad experience and be put off M ownership for good.
Now, it is fair to assume that some of the issues with this car could have now been ironed out with the current owner, however albeit only a year in distance, one can't argue with the fact that this car went 20,000 miles between oil services for example. In regards to the stone chips, this was taken the wrong way; my car has done 22k miles and has stone chips, my point being was that this car didn't just have a few, it was utterly covered from front wing to front wing and needed re-spraying badly (in my opinion, if it was my car). Again, this could have been rectified by the current owner, but wouldn't you want to know if the car had poor paint work prior to it's current state?
See my original thread from when I viewed two M's at Sytner's a year ago:
http://www.z4-forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=56807&p=832784&hilit=sytner+solihull#p832784
Back then I was still learning about the M's and I was thankful for having driven this car because it opened up my eyes to their sensitive characteristics and you will rarely find that one drives identically to another. It showed me what one SHOULDN'T drive like and I used that as a benchmark when on my 8 month search.
I've been a forum member for just over a year now and in that time I have learnt a wealth of information regarding these cars, not to mention met some great people too. I am a very involved member of the BMW Car Club, I write for Straight Six and Captain the Z4 Register; I'm not trying to pass myself off as a 'know it all' by saying this at-all, but what I am saying is that I am passionate about my interests and seek to help those who cherish their cars as much as I by offering the best advice I can.
Firstly, I posted about this car because from my personal experience with the vehicle, it was by far the worst MC I have driven to date (and I've now driven a few.) Having felt so strongly about this I didn't wish for someone on here who is looking out for their first MC just like I was this time last year to enter into a bad experience and be put off M ownership for good.
Now, it is fair to assume that some of the issues with this car could have now been ironed out with the current owner, however albeit only a year in distance, one can't argue with the fact that this car went 20,000 miles between oil services for example. In regards to the stone chips, this was taken the wrong way; my car has done 22k miles and has stone chips, my point being was that this car didn't just have a few, it was utterly covered from front wing to front wing and needed re-spraying badly (in my opinion, if it was my car). Again, this could have been rectified by the current owner, but wouldn't you want to know if the car had poor paint work prior to it's current state?
See my original thread from when I viewed two M's at Sytner's a year ago:
http://www.z4-forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=56807&p=832784&hilit=sytner+solihull#p832784
Back then I was still learning about the M's and I was thankful for having driven this car because it opened up my eyes to their sensitive characteristics and you will rarely find that one drives identically to another. It showed me what one SHOULDN'T drive like and I used that as a benchmark when on my 8 month search.
I've been a forum member for just over a year now and in that time I have learnt a wealth of information regarding these cars, not to mention met some great people too. I am a very involved member of the BMW Car Club, I write for Straight Six and Captain the Z4 Register; I'm not trying to pass myself off as a 'know it all' by saying this at-all, but what I am saying is that I am passionate about my interests and seek to help those who cherish their cars as much as I by offering the best advice I can.
I welcome your disagreement, which is all part of good debate.StevenH72 said:
So you wouldn't be happy if someone did the same to you as Nina has done to the seller of the car in question, yet you are defending Nina's position. To me, that seems a perverse position to adopt.StevenH72 said:
Are we now to see derogatory threads started for all the cars that you and Nina considered prior the purchases of your own so-called "mint" examples? Had Nina's comments been written in answer to questions raised about this car, then my view would be that her comments were "fair comment", but to deliberately start a thread to blight the car and potentially make the seller's task of selling the car more difficult/impossible, I'm afraid that I find that somewhat vexatious/malicious. :thumbs down: It's the job for potential buyers to beware, not the job of the self-appointed "Z4MC quality control police" on here.
exdos said:I welcome your disagreement, which is all part of good debate.StevenH72 said:
So you wouldn't be happy if someone did the same to you as Nina has done to the seller of the car in question, yet you are defending Nina's position. To me, that seems a perverse position to adopt.StevenH72 said:
Are we now to see derogatory threads started for all the cars that you and Nina considered prior the purchases of your own so-called "mint" examples? Had Nina's comments been written in answer to questions raised about this car, then my view would be that her comments were "fair comment", but to deliberately start a thread to blight the car and potentially make the seller's task of selling the car more difficult/impossible, I'm afraid that I find that somewhat vexatious/malicious. :thumbs down: It's the job for potential buyers to beware, not the job of the self-appointed "Z4MC quality control police" on here.
As I have been around since 2003 in the Z4 world, there have been quite a few cars that I have seen going from the first owner to the subsequent owners. From some cars, I even know that they have been rebuild after serious accidents. So from a Z4MC quality control point - yes, I would let potentially interested parties know the full history of a car. You would find that wrong I take it - but to me it would not sit right that a car that I know has got serious issues, or has had intermittent problems in the past, to be sold as a "good" car or at top money.
exdos said:I welcome your disagreement, which is all part of good debate.StevenH72 said:
So you wouldn't be happy if someone did the same to you as Nina has done to the seller of the car in question, yet you are defending Nina's position. To me, that seems a perverse position to adopt.StevenH72 said:
Are we now to see derogatory threads started for all the cars that you and Nina considered prior the purchases of your own so-called "mint" examples? Had Nina's comments been written in answer to questions raised about this car, then my view would be that her comments were "fair comment", but to deliberately start a thread to blight the car and potentially make the seller's task of selling the car more difficult/impossible, I'm afraid that I find that somewhat vexatious/malicious. :thumbs down: It's the job for potential buyers to beware, not the job of the self-appointed "Z4MC quality control police" on here.
I would suggest it'd be more perverse if I was happy about my car being criticised :wink:. My point was more that whilst I'd be unhappy, I wouldn't expect censorship or criticise people's opinion (unless they were unsupported).
I agree that Nina's thread will make the sellers job more difficult, but if he is merely trying to pass on a Lemon....then shouldn't it be?
If somebody is interested, I'm sure they will still enquire, but they'll now be better equipped to ensure that any pre-existing issues have been resolved.
I would suggest that Nina started this thread as the car's condition really stood out to her. Just because a car had a poor service history, or has a huge amount of stone chips I doubt whether any threads would be created. But conversely, I don't see a problem if they were to be.
This may just be a situation where we agree to disagree. But my view is that any supportable advice should be welcomed.
By supportable, I mean not speculative.
StevenH72 said:
I really can't see how this car can be called a "lemon" when the present owner bought from a commercial dealership over 12 months ago, where the car has a warranty throughout the duration of ownership and the car will be sold with a transferrable warranty. If the car was as bad as Nina suggests then surely the seller would have been able to return the car to the dealership as not fit for purpose, and/or been able to have had remedial work carried out under the warranty? :scratchhead:
interesting post
My feeling is fine to highlight a car that might have had issues a year ago , but i cannot help feel that a few simple jobs a new Maf / sensors maybe why the engine might not felt quite right? as stated above bushes might be when it felt a bit odd or knocking ? Having a respray is fine as long as its be done right I mean OPC resray every porker front end over a number of stone chips before hitting the forecourt. It might of benefit from a number of improvements pre and post the original sale and the date between the initial viewing and where we are today. i bet there is more than one z4m in the UK thats overrun to a 20k service interval and not the book 15k.
For these reasons am uncomfortable with the posts content overall, my current z4m is requiring a few jobs to get her back to show room best, am getting engine work done, some suspension elements , full paint correct , a respray front bumper etc etc am going to be spending ££££'s to get her back to best , with a number a small upgrades along the way, all bmw approved workshops , all bmw approved bodyshop is it fair then to say my z4m is a shed after all the work is done?? When it will be in better condition than most Zed out there time am done, I would be upset and frustrated if i found my Zed was being labeled a bad car.
IMO anyway , either way its posted now ... and its there forever regardless I guess :|
My feeling is fine to highlight a car that might have had issues a year ago , but i cannot help feel that a few simple jobs a new Maf / sensors maybe why the engine might not felt quite right? as stated above bushes might be when it felt a bit odd or knocking ? Having a respray is fine as long as its be done right I mean OPC resray every porker front end over a number of stone chips before hitting the forecourt. It might of benefit from a number of improvements pre and post the original sale and the date between the initial viewing and where we are today. i bet there is more than one z4m in the UK thats overrun to a 20k service interval and not the book 15k.
For these reasons am uncomfortable with the posts content overall, my current z4m is requiring a few jobs to get her back to show room best, am getting engine work done, some suspension elements , full paint correct , a respray front bumper etc etc am going to be spending ££££'s to get her back to best , with a number a small upgrades along the way, all bmw approved workshops , all bmw approved bodyshop is it fair then to say my z4m is a shed after all the work is done?? When it will be in better condition than most Zed out there time am done, I would be upset and frustrated if i found my Zed was being labeled a bad car.
IMO anyway , either way its posted now ... and its there forever regardless I guess :|
exdos said:
Indeed. To me a 'Lemon' is a car with problems that are not so obvious and can't be fixed within reasonable price range. So mostly problems with a structural or severe mechanical background.
Ticking in the engine that may lead to failure, whine in the drivetrain, rust, accident damage. That sort of things. Things that usually only happen by heavy neglect, improper driving etc.
I think Nina's motives were well-intentioned and not malicious but perhaps the tone of the original post (and indeed its title) have not done her any favours.
Perhaps it would've been better for her to preface her remarks along the lines of "you might want to be careful of this car because in my opinion, based on a previous test-drive I found it to be..............blah blah blah".
The current owner may have ironed out all of the problems and I think he/she deserves a fair crack of the whip.
Perhaps it would've been better for her to preface her remarks along the lines of "you might want to be careful of this car because in my opinion, based on a previous test-drive I found it to be..............blah blah blah".
The current owner may have ironed out all of the problems and I think he/she deserves a fair crack of the whip.
Well, I disagree with all of you!
Isn't the answer in this case for a person looking to buy a car, an MC, to post up asking whether anyone has any info on the potential cars they are looking at? At which point, anyone who wants to can chime in with helpful info, based on whatever their evidence is, or general pointers? I've seen a few such requests recently, for Ms, coupes and roadsters; this is a done thing, right?
I understand that sentiment about hey don't criticise a car and make the seller's job more difficult without good reason - I'd hate to be the victim of something like that where the criticism has been dealt with, remedied appropriately and the car has been treated well enough to bring it back to vgc or whatnot. I can also understand the wish to share info and advice, especially when the poster has actual physical experience of the car in question - defence of truth should apply with respect to comments made, albeit the comments need to be tempered by reference to the facts - so you'd say a year ago, this car was cack etc (evidence in pics clearly important) - the problems could have been remedied satisfactorily.
I also accept that in this particular case - the car Nina saw a drove - the "evidence" is the same today as it was a year ago - service history (as I understand it) is somewhat blighted (albeit that in itself is not necessarily fatal).
I should pretend to try to diffuse this spat but having seen requests for info, perhaps that is the better form?
Back as you were.
Stevo
Isn't the answer in this case for a person looking to buy a car, an MC, to post up asking whether anyone has any info on the potential cars they are looking at? At which point, anyone who wants to can chime in with helpful info, based on whatever their evidence is, or general pointers? I've seen a few such requests recently, for Ms, coupes and roadsters; this is a done thing, right?
I understand that sentiment about hey don't criticise a car and make the seller's job more difficult without good reason - I'd hate to be the victim of something like that where the criticism has been dealt with, remedied appropriately and the car has been treated well enough to bring it back to vgc or whatnot. I can also understand the wish to share info and advice, especially when the poster has actual physical experience of the car in question - defence of truth should apply with respect to comments made, albeit the comments need to be tempered by reference to the facts - so you'd say a year ago, this car was cack etc (evidence in pics clearly important) - the problems could have been remedied satisfactorily.
I also accept that in this particular case - the car Nina saw a drove - the "evidence" is the same today as it was a year ago - service history (as I understand it) is somewhat blighted (albeit that in itself is not necessarily fatal).
I should pretend to try to diffuse this spat but having seen requests for info, perhaps that is the better form?
Back as you were.
Stevo