ComplaintsforBMW of Peoria

• Initial Complaint

  09/27/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On Sept 9th 2023 I went to BMW of Peoria to look at a 2015 Cadillac SRX. I test drove it with the salesmen, ****. As we drove down the street a ways, the check engine light came on. We drove it back to the dealership. He took it back to the service department to run a diagnostic on it. He said it was just the O2 sensor and it's not a big deal. I could still drive the car and it would not effect how it drives. I said no, I was not going to purchase the vehicle if it had the check engine light on. He then spoke to his manager and they agreed to replace the O2 sensors and that would turn off the check engine light. I agreed to purchase it then bc they said it was a simple fix and they agreed to fix it. I paid $12,317.00 that is with tax title and licenses. On Sept 22nd, The dealership picked my car up and took it in for servicing. On September 26th I received a call stating that the catalytic converter needed to be replace first before they can replace the O2 sensors. They dealership said that I would have to pay $4000 to fix the catalytic converter. I refused bc that was not part of the deal. They never told me the catalytic converter was bad after running the diagnostic text. I would have NEVER purchased if I had to pay and additional $4000! I ask for my money back, they said they could not take the car back bc It's already registered in my name and the taxed were already paid on it. But they could put me in another vehicle. I do not want another vehicle. I want this one fixed or my money back! As of 9/27/23 I still do not have the car back in my possession. They still have.

  Business response

  10/12/2023

  Dear BBB,

  The vehicle in question is a 2015 Cadillac SRX with approximately 158,000 miles. Due to mileage in excess of 150,000 it is not eligible for the Illinois Implied Warranty and was sold "As Is". A check engine suggested service light was on and the electronic scan showed it to be an o2 sensor. We agreed to replace that sensor. It was later determined the light was in regards to the Catalytic Converter. The issue did not interfere with the operation of the vehicle, so we offered to refund the cost of the O2 sensor as a goodwill gesture. That offer was not accepted. We also offered to trade the Cadillac in on a different vehicle. As expected, this would need to be agreeable to both parties. At this juncture, that offer has not moved forward. 

  Unfortunately during the process, ***** elected to post her experience along with our mangers picture on multiple social media sites. She also confessed to taping phone conversations without that managers authorization or approval. Our manger elected to sever all future communication.

  While we understand her frustration, this vehicle was sold "AS IS" with the offer to replace the O2 sensor only. We would still honor that offer or a refund of the cost to complete that specific work. She can each out to our *** Clinton to schedule that work or discuss a refund.

• Initial Complaint

  08/01/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I, ******* ******, Original Creditor and Natural Woman/Man hereby rescind my consent to be liable to perform on the contract agreement i entered with BMW of Peoria on AUGUST 20, 2020. I entered into this contract agreement with BMW of Peoria without Full disclosure of my right to rescind 2). Transparency regarding the process of the consumer credit application being the financial asset ( 12 CFR 360.6 ( 2 ) ) as well as self-liquidating paper ( 17 CFR 260.11b-6 ) ). I have reason to believe that BMW of Peoria willingly and knowingly took advantage of me and my consumer credit. I am not terminating or canceling this contract, I am deducting my liability to pay on behalf of the obligor as i have found several violations and fraud. Notice that Pursuant to 15 U.S. Code § 1635(b) upon receipt of this rescission I am not liable for any finance charge, security interest, etc. becomes void effective immediately. In addition, I was given false and deceptive information (violation of 1692e) as i was told that a down payment of {$15,000} was needed in order to drive off of the lot. Pursuant to 15 usc 1605 a finance charge is sum of all charges. Down Payment Reimbursement shall be made by check payable to to: ******* ****** ******** ******* ******** Furthermore, BMW of Peoria failed to clearly & conspicuously disclose my right to rescind. Take further note of the laws bmw of peoria have violated against I, a consumer and living flesh and blood man, ******** ******. 1. 15 U.S. Code § 1635 Right of rescission as to certain transactions 3 days 2. 15 U.S. Code § 1662(b) It is illegal to require any downpayment in connection with a consumer credit transaction. 3. 15 U.S.Code § 1605(a) finance charge sum of all charges insurance for the vehicle and insurance to cover health, life, accident, and gap insurance and NO CASH DOWNPAYMENT

  Business response

  08/03/2023

  Dear BBB,

  Mr. ******  complains that he provided BMW of Peoria with a notice of rescission with respect to his automobile loan dated 08/20/2020. He brings his action under TILA, pursuant to which he has certain rights due from BMW of Peoria, as he is a consumer and BMW of Peoria is a creditor under TILA. See 15 U.S.C. §1602(i), (g). Mr. Easley correctly cites 15 U.S.C. §1635 for the proposition that a consumer has a right to rescission under TILA. The rescission provision of TILA, however, does not extend to automobile loans.

  The rescission provision applies only to credit transactions involving “property which is used as the principal dwelling of the” consumer. 15 U.S.C. §1635(a). Section 1635(a) provides in full:  “Except as otherwise provided in this section, in the case of any consumer credit transaction (including opening or increasing the credit limit for an open end credit plan) in which a security interest, including any such interest arising by operation of law, is or will be retained or acquired in any property which is used as the principal dwelling of the person to whom credit is extended, the obligor shall have the right to rescind the transaction until midnight of the third business day following the consummation of the transaction or the delivery of the information and rescission forms required under this section together with a statement containing the material disclosures required under this subchapter, whichever is later, by notifying the creditor, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, of his intention to do so. The creditor shall clearly and conspicuously disclose, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, to any obligor in a transaction subject to this section the rights of the obligor under this section. The creditor shall also provide, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, appropriate forms for the obligor to exercise his right to rescind any transaction subject to this section.  15 U.S.C. §1635(a) (emphasis added).

  Mr. ******** property is an automobile, not a principal dwelling. For that reason, he does not have a right to rescind his transaction with BMW of Peoria or the lienholder involved.

  We will consider this matter closed.

  Sincerely, BMW of Peoria

  Customer response

  08/03/2023

   I am rejecting this response because:  15 U.S. Code § 1662(b) It is illegal torequireany downpayment in connection with a consumer credit transaction.

   

  You are also in violation of 15U.S. Code § 1605(a) The finance charge does not include
  •
  charges of a type payable in a comparable cash transaction (i.e. depositsor monthly payments).

   

  15 U.S.Code § 1605(a) 1605(a) No downpayments or any cash in connection with afinance charge.
  TERMS
  

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  11/30/2021

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Bought a vehicle from a dealer (Toyota) but was always serviced by BMW. I had a warranty and brought the vehicle multiple times for the same issue I described, made it as detailed as possible (that indicated exactly what it had) so it could be fix. My descriptions where always documented and communicated to Toyota for than Toyota to communicate to BMW. It had to be done this way due to where I bought my warranty from. After time the issue got worst brought it back to BMW after warranty had expired and in fact diagnosed it with the 'time chain" issue that it always had. BMW told me over the phone and in person that they were sorry but all the times the vehicle was brought it, it was misdiagnosed. Now it was to late for me to get fixed and that it would cost me over $9000.00 to get a new time chain. I have documentation that provides my description of issue indicated a time chain issue. BMW had a lawsuit regarding the time chain for my year make and model of vehicle. If they would had diagnosed it correctly from day one it could of been fixed but now it passed even the law suit 100,000 mile mark and cant even qualify for that. My car has been broken down and no longer works. I been going back and forth with BMW and Toyota and they both blame each other for the miss diagnosis. My car now is in the process of getting this fix but will cost me over $9000.00 to pay out my pocket for an issue that clearly was there and was confessed from BMW that it was misdiagnosed over the phone (recorded lines I'm guessing) and in person. Besides Documentation I can provide an email with picture that includes date and time from the vehicles dashboard letting them know it was my time chain (way before mileage expiration). During the process of getting it serviced with BMW there was other small issues where I felt discriminated and not taken serious due to my age. But also based on looks and race.

  Business response

  12/06/2021

  Dear BBB,

  We have attached the only repair orders associated with this complaint that were completed at our dealership. As the customer stated the first visits were initiated by her selling dealer. These occurred over a period of time dating from 06/01/2016 to 03/30/2017. The odometer reading was 51907 on the first visit and 64327 on the final one invoiced to that dealer. Peoria Toyota communicated to us their concerns and we repaired the issue as shown on the attached invoices. All work was billed and invoiced to Peoria Toyota.

  The last time we worked on the unit was on 01/19/2018 with 74938 miles. That invoice is attached and was initiated by the complainant. We advised on a muffler and brake sensor need and the service manager went over the history of the service work we completed on past visits. 

  The statement over a misdiagnosis is hearsay and could not be substantiated. BMW of Peoria would counter that there is no chance the vehicle would have continued to operate from the initial visit date to some time in 2021 (5 years +) and as stated over 100000 miles (48000 miles+). Based on this information we believe the proper diagnosis and repairs were completed based on the information given to us by Toyota and the complainant. No further considerations are due from the delaership.

   

  Sincerely,

  BMW of Peoria

  Customer response

  12/09/2021

   I am rejecting this response because:
  
  As a YOUNG MEXICAN FEMALE I felt discriminated any time I would have to deal with this issue of repair. There was not one time that my service or interactions with the employees were ever friendly. I felt ignored and my explanation of every sound or specific explanation that my vehicle was making  was never understood or heard because I constantly brought it in for the same exact issue. Besides the point of everything. last year I was suggested to bring in the vehicle with BMW to get it diagnosed that is when the issue was discovered that in fact it was my "TIMING CHAIN" and was told over the phone (every business has recording phones) and explained that my vehicle was miss diagnosed and that they were sorry. If like BMW says they did what they were asked to do and went based on what my explanation was to TOYOTA than why is it that there was an apology for the miss diagnosis. That is once again where I knew I was been discriminated once more due to my age, race and gender. 

  I will attach the email to whom I sent this image of where it indicated that there was an issue with my time chain. it will show date and time of when it was sent as well as that it was sent to BMW as I was asked because if I remember correctly I spoke with the gentlemen that was taking care of my repair. Because at the time the response that was given to me was not making sense since there has been multiple times that I brought in the vehicle for the same issue. When contacting Toyota about this same issue they blame BMW and suggested to proceed with BMW when I call BMW its the same thing. I am in the middle of all, I had to repair my car and all because of a misdiagnosis when in my part I did all that need to be done. 

  Business response

  12/17/2021

  Dear BBB,

  I am unsure we can add much to our original response. The new attachment is a communication between ******* ******** and Peoria Toyota. 

  As we explained, all but one of the visits involved communication between BMW of Peoria and Peoria Toyota who represented the repair under their company name.

  We proceeded with repairs as directed by Peoria Toyota.

  We did not have discussions directly with the customer and as such any claim of bias or race is unfounded.

  The one visit directly was between **** ******** and BMW of Peoria as detailed in the earlier attachment. 

  This visit was dated January 19, 2018. As already stated their was no misdiagnosis. It would not be possible for a bad timing chain to last from 1/19/2018 with @75k to sometime this year with in excess of 100k.

  We stand by our original repairs as explained to us by Peoria Toyota. The vehicle left on those dates working as designed. The final visit as noted involved no repairs. We simply diagnosed their concerns.

  Sincerely,

  BMW of Peoria

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩