[Pauloxxi]

Originally Posted by PK2348

I think your reply was addressed to someone else, but regardless unless your N20 actually gave up, you would be filing a fraudulent claim and committing libel. You need to at least suffer damages first

I agree partially, because we are all suffering damages on our car resale value. Would you buy a BMW with N20 engine? I'm going through this now, selling my 2009 and would replace by 2017 (minimum), because I want to be less exposed to N20 issues. My wife has a 2014, and next year I want to get rid of that because don't want to have this engine beyond 7 years extended warranty, so I'll probably loose money when selling that. In fact... I wonder if this is the time to go apart from this brand after this fiasco.

[wilbur_the_goose]

@pauloxxi - I'm "fighting" a similar mfg fiasco with Honda. My other car is a '16 Civic Coupe. The engine has serious oil dilution issues and the only thing Honda has done is change the thermostat settings so that the engine heats up more quickly and hopefully burns off fuel.

I'm coming to the conclusion that all car manufacturers don't seem to care about quality engineering these days. Lay off the engineers and make more profit.

Reminds me of GM/Ford/Chrysler in the 1970's when they began planned obsolescence as a core corporate value.

[PK2348]

Originally Posted by pauloxxi

I agree partially, because we are all suffering damages on our car resale value. Would you buy a BMW with N20 engine? I'm going through this now, selling my 2009 and would replace by 2017 (minimum), because I want to be less exposed to N20 issues. My wife has a 2014, and next year I want to get rid of that because don't want to have this engine beyond 7 years extended warranty, so I'll probably loose money when selling that. In fact... I wonder if this is the time to go apart from this brand after this fiasco.

The thing is, at the current stage this issue is “alleged”, therefore reduced market value argument can’t really stick. Not until it’s proven.

[PK2348]

Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose

@pauloxxi - I'm "fighting" a similar mfg fiasco with Honda. My other car is a '16 Civic Coupe. The engine has serious oil dilution issues and the only thing Honda has done is change the thermostat settings so that the engine heats up more quickly and hopefully burns off fuel.

I'm coming to the conclusion that all car manufacturers don't seem to care about quality engineering these days. Lay off the engineers and make more profit.

Reminds me of GM/Ford/Chrysler in the 1970's when they began planned obsolescence as a core corporate value.

Unfortunately planned obsolescence is at the core of every manufacturer these days, not just cars. Some will argue that it drives our economy

[Pauloxxi]

I agree, it is crap everywhere. I work in the automotive industry and I feel the pressure for cost savings all the time. Considering the volumes of these cars, every cent translates revenue and bonuses by the end of the year. In the particular case of BMW it annoys me that:
1- With the time chain issue your whole engine is trashed... it is a huge bill that you are exposed after 70,000 miles.
2- This plastic time chain issue is only result of "cost savings" for BMW.
3- Oil and thermoplastic compatibility test is a basic thing, and they are aware how this is important.
4- We pay too much for these cars, and we deserve better quality and attention

[Pauloxxi]

Originally Posted by PK2348

The thing is, at the current stage this issue is “alleged”, therefore reduced market value argument can’t really stick. Not until it’s proven.

What other proof is necessary when BMW assumed they have a problem, by these three factors:
1- Extended the warranty to 7 year / 70,000 miles
2- Created a "counter measure or changed something" implemented on 2016 vehicles
3- Implemented B48 full force in 2017, before G20 launch

Isn't that enough evidence there is a problem there?

And, alleged or proved, who knows will not take this risk... by consequence we already lost a great amount of possible buyers.

[PK2348]

Originally Posted by pauloxxi

What other proof is necessary when BMW assumed they have a problem, by these three factors:
1- Extended the warranty to 7 year / 70,000 miles
2- Created a "counter measure or changed something" implemented on 2016 vehicles
3- Implemented B48 full force in 2017, before G20 launch

Isn't that enough evidence there is a problem there?

And, alleged or proved, who knows will not take this risk... by consequence we already lost a great amount of possible buyers.

I will agree with #1, #2 could be attributed to variety of different factors, true or not, would be tough to prove, #3 can be totally unrelated, n55 got upgraded to b58 in 2016, n20 went into service few years before it was introduced to US market.

Just to recap, there was a contact entered into by bmw and a buyer. The contract had expressed warranty stated at 4 years/ 50k miles. That contact in most cases is fulfilled. I am not a legal expert but I assume that plaintiffs argue either implied warranty in their claim or that bmw had knowledge of the defect and committed fraud by not disclosing this to potential buyers. These might not be easy to prove allegations
As far as going to court I imagine a jury watching a bunch of lawyers sue bmw on behalf of a bunch of bmw drivers, we might not end up not getting much sympathy

[sjbender]

Originally Posted by PK2348

The thing is, at the current stage this issue is “alleged”, therefore reduced market value argument can’t really stick. Not until it’s proven.

I had almost traded the car in before my chain went. I had gone to a Subaru dealer and had the car appraised for trade in. The funny thing is they sent me to Car Sense to have them appraise it and would add $500 to their value. So I did, since it was down the street. Car Sense offered me $1200 for the car. The reason it was so low was because of a 'known engine defect'.

[PK2348]

Originally Posted by sjbender

I had almost traded the car in before my chain went. I had gone to a Subaru dealer and had the car appraised for trade in. The funny thing is they sent me to Car Sense to have them appraise it and would add $500 to their value. So I did, since it was down the street. Car Sense offered me $1200 for the car. The reason it was so low was because of a 'known engine defect'.

This in itself is not a proof of an engine defect, it's a proof that market value is affected by these allegations.
To play the devil's advocate, BMW turns around and sues everyone who posted these stories for libel since the defect is not proven, but BMW suffered damages when selling off their traded in / off lease N20 vehicles

[sjbender]

Originally Posted by PK2348

This in itself is not a proof of an engine defect, it's a proof that market value is affected by these allegations.
To play the devil's advocate, BMW turns around and sues everyone who posted these stories for libel since the defect is not proven, but BMW suffered damages when selling off their traded in / off lease N20 vehicles

Oh I get it... I try to post just facts. In this case, Car Sense told me that there was a known engine defect which is why they were offering such a low number. Hell, BMW themselves only offered me 1300 for it as a trade in!

BMW has lots of money to beat people into submission in a court system. I am just hopeful that the 'system' will work fairly in this case. They need to bare some responsibility. If these chains were failing after a maintenance schedule time frame then I would say that there would be no case here if it was not performed by a genuine BMW service center and even then it likely wouldn't hold up much.

We shall see, hopefully sooner than later. I'll be out of my 528 for a year in April and still have two years worth of payments to make.

[Supedagod]

Originally Posted by sjbender

Oh I get it... I try to post just facts. In this case, Car Sense told me that there was a known engine defect which is why they were offering such a low number. Hell, BMW themselves only offered me 1300 for it as a trade in!

BMW has lots of money to beat people into submission in a court system. I am just hopeful that the 'system' will work fairly in this case. They need to bare some responsibility. If these chains were failing after a maintenance schedule time frame then I would say that there would be no case here if it was not performed by a genuine BMW service center and even then it likely wouldn't hold up much.

We shall see, hopefully sooner than later. I'll be out of my 528 for a year in April and still have two years worth of payments to make.

This scenario is what I'm afraid of happenening to me right now as I sit at 66k ,luv my car I just don't want to spend money to fix something that isn't broken or may never break ,but if it does break I'm out a motor too ...I don't need the court or a judge to tell me that's bullshit on BMW's part

[wilbur_the_goose]

Originally Posted by sjbender

I had almost traded the car in before my chain went. I had gone to a Subaru dealer and had the car appraised for trade in. The funny thing is they sent me to Car Sense to have them appraise it and would add $500 to their value. So I did, since it was down the street. Car Sense offered me $1200 for the car. The reason it was so low was because of a 'known engine defect'.

$1200? Did you mean $12000? (I just ran KBB on my '14 with 54K miles, in Chester County, PA - I live 2 miles from Car Sense - who offered me $11.5K online using my VIN)

[natesi]

Originally Posted by PK2348

This in itself is not a proof of an engine defect, it's a proof that market value is affected by these allegations.
To play the devil's advocate, BMW turns around and sues everyone who posted these stories for libel since the defect is not proven, but BMW suffered damages when selling off their traded in / off lease N20 vehicles

The defect is proven. And the proof is that they changed the timing chain design, updated the tensioner, and extended the warranty.

[sjbender]

Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose

$1200? Did you mean $12000? (I just ran KBB on my '14 with 54K miles, in Chester County, PA - I live 2 miles from Car Sense - who offered me $11.5K online using my VIN)

Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose

$1200? Did you mean $12000? (I just ran KBB on my '14 with 54K miles, in Chester County, PA - I live 2 miles from Car Sense - who offered me $11.5K online using my VIN)

No sir. $1,200 even. This was a 2013 528xi with 75,000 miles. I had owed $14,000 on it when they told me.

[wilbur_the_goose]

@sjbender - Wow! I just ran your car on KBB and $7.4 was the low trade-in number. The appraiser must have seen something that caused the offer to be that low. Is you car experiencing the whine?

[amancuso]

Originally Posted by sjbender

No sir. $1,200 even. This was a 2013 528xi with 75,000 miles. I had owed $14,000 on it when they told me.

I would have run a country mile. If it was a running car no way the offer should have been that low.

[sjbender]

Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose

@sjbender - Wow! I just ran your car on KBB and $7.4 was the low trade-in number. The appraiser must have seen something that caused the offer to be that low. Is you car experiencing the whine?

At the time it was not. When I asked why it was so low, they told me there was a known engine defect with that engine and they did not want the car. I'll have to see if I can find the report.

What they quote online is not what they will quote on site, lol.

[sjbender]

Ohh, I was off a little. It was actually CarMax and it was a $1,500 offer.

[F30lolz]

Originally Posted by sjbender

Ohh, I was off a little. It was actually CarMax and it was a $1,500 offer.

That’s absurd. They offer auction prices when buying cars but not surprised they low-balled you to the max. They’ll sell it for $14k all day long.

Criminals!

[AtlantaDan]

They simply did not want the car. It's not that it was actually worth $1,500 - it was worth $1,500 to CarMax. HUGE difference. CarMax figured "Hell, if he wants to get rid of it bad enough, we will get a killer deal on it...". If CarMax offers someone $2,000 for a 2019 Ferrari California, does that mean its worth $2,000?

[sjbender]

Originally Posted by AtlantaDan

They simply did not want the car. It's not that it was actually worth $1,500 - it was worth $1,500 to CarMax. HUGE difference. CarMax figured "Hell, if he wants to get rid of it bad enough, we will get a killer deal on it...". If CarMax offers someone $2,000 for a 2019 Ferrari California, does that mean its worth $2,000?

Completely agree with that. Something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay. I am sure they did not want to take the risk of having to repair the car if it fails under their warranty time period. I give kudos to the appraiser for being aware of the engine concern. I did not even know about it until he told me, however I did little due diligence when I bought the car. Shame on me.

On the other hand, I feel that this backs up the claim that the cars with this engine type have loss value more than industry standards because of the defect.

[AtlantaDan]

Originally Posted by sjbender

On the other hand, I feel that this backs up the claim that the cars with this engine type have loss value more than industry standards because of the defect.

I suspect that the cars with this particular generation of N20 engine will suffer the same fate of the M62 and N63 series cars. They'll all take a value hit in the end.