Thanks for the response - was appreciated - on this basis I pursued BMW Financial Services with the FSO and they made an offer at the last minute before it was kicked upstairs for adjudication (sound familiar!) - from my experience BMW FS really don't want to get involved at all, and several times claimed they were just a finance company and wouldn't admit any liability unless this was agreed with the dealer/manufacturer - annoying as they are in the business of supplying cars and feel it's a bit cheap to rely on this defence My only gripe is that the guidelines clearly state that if it's clear they are in the wrong they should resolve without forcing the consumer to go down the adjudication route - wondering now if there is their anyway to complain about how they handled my rejection now that I've signed for full and final settlement? I feel they use the Ombudsman as a second tier complaints process, and only pay up when forced to by the adjudicator which is wrong

Just going through same sort of motions with BMW FS and Dealer - did you get a result from this? Apologies for bumping old thread but would be good to understand the final outcome, e.g. did you take court action, did they defend, did you win, did they settle? Thanks

Hello, Aware this is a 2 year old thread but thought it helpful for others to update on similar experience and my approach. I received a new iphone from orange - with an intermittent mic problem that manifested on the first day after receiving the phone. I called orange support and was first advised to call apple, which I did and explained the problem, they advised they would repair or replace with a refurnished phone. I told them it was actually DOA (dead on arrival) as it was supplied faulty and that I would like a new phone, not refurbished - apple advised I would have to have reported it within 14 days to them and it was past that period I then called orange back - I had reported the fault within 10 days to them, advised that it was NOT a warranty repair but actually a DOA handset and that I would like a new one to replace it - they eventually agreed and one should be delivered to me later today. If you raise the problem within a certain time on receipt of the goods then it is a different process - one of faulty goods supplied, not of working goods then developing a fault and the process for replacement is different. Regards the posting referencing SOGA - it is the company supplying the goods who are liable, not the manufacturer of those goods so respectfully disagree with previous posts - Orange may have a service agreement with apple to repair faults under warranty but that does not negate the fact that it is Orange who supplied them to you, not apple Hope that helps others

Hi - appreciate the input - I do have an excess milage rate on the HP agreement that they would have levied to me per mile so think I'll start with this as and see what the response is

Hi, No luck finding any information on the web for this calculation - I'm assuming it may be a per mile figure but not sure if it involves all costs when rewinding a contract (such as insurance, servicing e.t.c.) so still interested in peoples opinions of this?

Hi All, There is a possibility that my HP credit agreement for a motorbike may be rewound by the finance company (independent report confirms manufacturing default - just waiting for the HP company and dealer to sort out liability) They state that if this happens one option could be to place me in the financial position I was in before I purchased the vehicle, less the value of benefit I've had for the 4000 miles/11 months use, Is there a set calculation for this so I know what is/isn't reasonable? Thanks, Lard

Hi, Assume from lack of replies that I'm on the right tracks for this As it happens - dealer has called and advised that they will not be repairing the bike (the frame in particular) under warranty so have now started procedure to reject under CCA and will see how I get on!

Hi, Firstly - thanks for the advise I've found so far on this forum, the answers/resources here keep me sane! Some background on my issue: I purchased a new bike from a main dealer in 2009 In Feb 2010 I noticed corrosion on frame, swingarm, mudguards e.t.c. Took it into the dealer - they finally agreed to fix under warranty (took a lot of wrangling) They advised they would remove all parts (quite major considering it's everything but tank & engine) and send to be repaired. I rejected this fix as, once a frame has started rusting, no amount of repainting would fix it - I'd also lost faith in the quality of the vehicle (it also took 2/3 months to do) We agreed to replace the bike as a compromise - I received PX on the faulty bike (at current value) and then purchased a new bike (different model, bigger engine) Fast forward to Feb 2011 Noticed corrosion on frame, swingarm, forks, mudguards e.t.c. Dealer has offered to remove parts and send for re-coating/replace with new. I've rejected this as I don't believe that: a/ The repair is satisfactory and that the parts are now inherently faulty - repainting corroded metal isn't acceptable b/ From my experience the quality of any replacement new parts can also be called into question(from my experience, considering we replaced the whole bike and it still happened again) c/ finally, I've lost all faith in the quality of their products - we've tried replacing it (at my expense) now I would like a refund I'm also dealing with the customer services of the manufacturer who are overseeing the case - I've advised them that I would like a refund, as a replacement bike/parts/fix is not acceptable given the seriousness of the corrosion (main welds on frame e.t.c.) and that, following 2 years of owning their bikes, I now intend to take a break from both them and motorcycling in general. The bike is under finance - I see my options as: 1. Carry on with the manufacturer and once they have confirmed the dealer will only consider a warranty repair see what their reaction is - will they stand by the dealer or offer a compromise 2. Start the process of lodging a claim with the finance company under consumer credit act 1975 - goods of sufficient quality 3. Start the process of formally rejecting the vehicle under SOGA as not of sufficient quality with the supplying dealership Hopefully I haven't missed anything? The only area I am concerned about is the fact that they are offering to repair the bike under warranty, but that this process is anything but convenient and I consider the repair suggested to not be a suitable fix - they need to replace faulty parts, and as above - I have no faith in the parts they will use to do so Under SOGA/consumer credit act - am I entitled to choose a refund/replacement if I don't consider their suggested course of action to be reasonable? TIA