Please see email below sent to BMW and Edinburgh's Peter Vardy BMW dealership. This dispute primarily relates receiving my car back with an unaccounted 17miles and shuddering when driven at certain speeds. From what I can determine Peter Vardy keep changing their position, some may say they are feeding me a pack of lies. The bottom line being they now say that the shudder is due to buckled wheels. They weren't buckled when they got the car. It is apparent to me that Peter Vardy are looking for me to pay for the damaged wheels. That is not going to happen. This the second time Peter Vardy has damaged my car in two months. The first time being when they dented my roof. Is it too much to ask to have your car delivered in no worse a condition than you give it to Peter Vardy? In my experience yes - I have two examples. I have had donate a huge amount of time to resolving Peter Vardy mistakes the last involving me waiting for my car for 5.5hrs. This being because their service department had not followed up my booking and rather than tell me they had screwed up they had me wait until 7pm on a Friday night whilst they tried to locate a fault from their earlier works. Shockingly poor service. Now I am faced with a wall of deceit that has forced me to take legal advice. My legal advice being to now raise a court action against BMW and Peter Vardy. All I wanted was my car repaired. Clearly I was asking for too much. Ellena, Let me cut to the chase with this. THE CAR WAS RETURNED TO ME WITH AN ADDITIONAL 17 MILES AND SHUDDERED. IF PETER VARDY NOW CLAIMS OTHERWISE THEN THEY ARE NOT BEING HONEST WITH YOU. I HAVE ALREDAY EXPLAINED THAT I TOOK NOTE OF MY DELIVERY MILEAGE AND THE MILEAGE UPON COLLECTION. YOU SHOULD NOTE THAT PETER VARDY HAS GIVEN ME THREE DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS OF WHY I INCURRED ADDITIONAL MILEAGE: 1. ON 14TH MARCH RORY ADVISED THAT THE CAR HAD TWO ROAD TESTS. ONE FOR THE REPLACEMENT COIL SPRINGS AND THE OTHER FOR A QUALITY CHECK. REGARDING THE LAST ROAD TEST HE DISTINCTLY STATED 'I CAN SEE WE DID A QUALITY ROAD CHECK TOO'. RORY NOW 930TH MARCH) REPORTS THAT HIS COMMENTS WERE ON BASIS OF HIS 'ASSUMPTIONS'. IN OTHER WORDS IT APPERAS THAT AT THAT TIME RORY WANTED ME TO BELIEVE THAT MY CAR HAD TWO ROAD TESTS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ADDITIONAL MILEAGE. NOW WHEN THAT DOESNT SUIT HE THEN WANTS ME TO BELIEVE THAT IT DIDNT. YOU WILL APPRECIATE WHY I AM UNCLEAR WHICH ELEMENT OF CONFLICTING INFORMATION I AM TO IGNORE? 2. ON 18TH MARCH JESSICA ADVISED ME MY CAR HAD ONE ROAD TEST. SHE ADVISED 'WE WOULD ALWAYS DO A ROAD TEST WHEN WE REPLACED COIL SPRINGS'. YOUR EMAIL IMPLIES THAT JESSICA WAS LYING WHEN SHE GAVE ME THIS ADVICE? WHY WOULD SHE LIE? 3. ON 29TH MARCH JOHNNY ADVISED ME THAT THE CAR HAD NO ROAD TESTS. WHY WOULD JOHNNY REPORT SOMETHING THAT WAS COMPLETELY AT ODDS WITH WHAT TWO OF HIS COLLEAGUES HAD RECENTLY REPORTED? ON 18TH MARCH I ASKED JESSICA WHAT MILEAGE DOES HER RECORDS SHOW THE CAR LEFT HER GARAGE AND SHE SAID 'I DO NOT KNOW THAT MILEAGE AS WE DO NOT LOG MILEAGE OF CARS LEAVING ONLY THE MILEAGE OF CARS WHEN THEY ARRIVE'. NOW, YOU ARE REPORTING THE VERY OPPOSITE AND THEREFORE ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE ADVISING THAT JESSICA LIED TO ME. CLEARLY SOMEONE IS LYING HERE AND LET ME BE VERY CLEAR WITH YOU IT IS NOT ME. I AM SICK OF THIS NONSENSE AND BELIEVE THAT BETWEEN YOURSELVES AND PETER VARDY THERE IS AN INCREASING AMOUNT OF MISINFORMATION BEING PASSED AROUND INTENDED TO CONFUSE MATTERS TO THE AFORESAID PARTIES BENEFIT. I WILL NOT ACCEPT SUCH NONSENSE. PLEASE DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND, I WILL NOT PUT UP WITH ANYMORE OF THIS NONSENSE AND I WILL PURSUE THIS MATTER AS LONG AS NEEDS BE. WHAT YOU WRITE CLEARLY IMPLIES THAT I AM LYING. HOW DARE YOU AND HOW DARE PETER VARDY.. ON 18TH MARCH JESSICA ADVISED THAT ONE OF MY COIL SPRING NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF 'CORROSION' . NOW YOU ARE REPORTING IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE MY CAR HAD BEEN IN A 'COLLISION'. WHO IS TELLING THE TRUTH? I HAVE NO IDEA WHY MY COIL SPRING NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. I AM SURPRISED THAT IT NEEDED REPLACING AS THE CAR SHOWED NO SIGNS OF A 'FRACTURED' COIL SPRING. IF THE CAR HAS INDEED BEEN IN A COLLISION THEN LET ME CRYSTAL CLEAR, ANY SUCH COLLISION OCCURRED WHEN THE CAR WAS WITH PETER VARDY. THE CAR HAS NEVER BEEN IN ANY COLLISION WITH ME. I TRUST MY POINT IS SUFFICIENTLY CLEAR TO YOU? I TRUST YOU RECOGNISE THAT YOUR ACCOUNT IS COMPLETELY AT ODDS WITH WHAT PETER VARDY HAS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED. FURTHER, THE VIBRATION IS TO BOTH FRONT AND REAR WHEELS. HOWEVER, ONLY THE FRONT COIL SPRINGS WERE REPLACED? THERE WAS NO VIBRATION WHEN I HANDED THE CAR TO PETER VARDY THERE WAS HOWEVER VIBRATION WHEN I COLLECTED THE CAR. LOOK THIS HAS GONE ON FAR TOO LONG ALREADY AND WHILST I AM PREPARED TO HAND MY CAR IN ONE LAST TIME TO HAVE PETER VARDY LOOK FOR SOMETHING YOUR EMAIL ADVISES THEY HAVE ALREADY CONCLUDED - NOT SURE WHAT VALUE THEREFORE ANOTHER VISIT PROVIDES??? YOUR EMAIL CONTAINS FAR TOO MANY ISSUES THAT I CONSIDER TO BE LIES DESIGNED TO GET BMW/PETER VARDY OFF THE HOOK. I CAN SEE THEREFORE THAT THIS MATTER IS ONLY GOING TO BE RESOLVED BY MEANS OF LEGAL ACTION AND I THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST TO WHOM AT BMW I HAVE ASSOCIATED LEGAL PAPERS SERVED ON? PLEASE FORWARD THE INFORMATION THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO THAT STATES THAT REPLACEMENT OF FRONT COIL SPRINGS TO MY CAR DOES NOT REQUIRE A ROAD TEST NOTING THAT PREVIOUSLY TWO BMW SERVICE ADVISORS AT PETER VARDY STATED THE OPPOSITE. I LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING YOUR REPLY.