Dear Customer Services,I am writing to make a formal complaint regarding the Ford Puma Registration: NA70 KFU that I purchased from Lookers Ford on 17 January 2026.The vehicle is currently with Ford awaiting repair. Following the breakdown, Ford has completed its diagnosis, replaced the alternator under the RAC warranty, and advised that the next stage of the repair requires replacement of the 48V battery assembly. As the vehicle has now been off the road for a considerable period and further diagnosis cannot be completed until this repair is carried out, I would be grateful if this complaint could be treated as a matter of urgency.I am requesting that Lookers review this matter and confirm that it will either authorise the repair directly with Ford or reimburse me for the reasonable cost of the repair should I need to authorise the work before this complaint is resolved.I believe the repair currently recommended by Ford, namely replacement of the 48V battery assembly, has arisen from the same underlying charging system fault that I first reported to Lookers within the first few months of ownership and which was unfortunately not identified at that time.For clarity, the chronology of events is as follows:• 17 January 2026 – I purchased the vehicle from Lookers Ford.• On driving the vehicle away, a TPMS warning light appeared. I returned the vehicle immediately and the TPMS sensors were replaced.• 19 January 2026 – The vehicle's 12V battery failed completely. I contacted the RAC, who attended and replaced the battery. Lookers subsequently reimbursed me for the cost of the replacement.• During the weeks following the replacement of the 12V battery, the vehicle began displaying an intermittent battery warning message. After seeing the warning, I arranged for the vehicle to be inspected by Lookers, with the appointment taking place on 17 March 2026.• During that inspection, Lookers recorded the battery voltage at 12.27V and advised that the battery should be recharged and retested. I was subsequently informed that this had been carried out. As the warning was not present during the inspection and no underlying fault was identified, I accepted Lookers' assessment and believed the issue had been investigated appropriately.• Unfortunately, the intermittent battery warning continued to recur after the inspection. As the issue persisted, I arranged for the vehicle to be inspected by Ford. The appointment was booked on 12 May 2026; however, the earliest available appointment was 26 June 2026. Due to my concerns regarding the recurring warning, we did not use the vehicle while awaiting the appointment.• On 26 June 2026, whilst driving the vehicle to Ford for its booked appointment, the vehicle broke down and required recovery by the RAC.• Ford subsequently diagnosed a faulty alternator, which was replaced under the RAC warranty.• Following replacement of the alternator, the fault remained. Ford has now advised that the integrated DC Converter within the 48V battery assembly has failed and, because it cannot be replaced separately, the complete 48V battery assembly requires replacement.Ford has provided the following technical assessment:"Our suspicion is that when the alternator failed, it may have caused a voltage spike within the 48V system which subsequently damaged the DC Converter. At this stage, we cannot conclusively prove that the alternator caused the damage to the DC Converter. However, based on the faults present, this is our current technical assessment."Ford has also supplied the diagnostic fault log confirming Diagnostic Trouble Codes relating to the DC Converter, with all manufacturer test plans leading to replacement of the 48V battery assembly.Whilst I understand that the RAC warranty has covered the alternator replacement but declined the battery assembly on the basis that it considers it consequential damage, my complaint is not about the warranty. My complaint concerns my statutory rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in relation to a fault that I reported to the supplying dealer shortly after purchase.My contract is with Lookers as the supplying dealer.The charging system fault was reported to Lookers within the first few months of ownership. Lookers had the opportunity to investigate the recurring battery warning but were unable to identify the underlying fault. Ford has since diagnosed a faulty alternator and has provided its current technical assessment that the alternator failure likely caused the damage to the integrated DC Converter requiring replacement of the 48V battery assembly.Given that:• the vehicle experienced electrical issues almost immediately after purchase;• the 12V battery failed within two days of purchase and Lookers reimbursed the replacement cost;• I reported the recurring battery warning to Lookers well within the first six months of ownership;• Lookers inspected the vehicle but were unable to identify the underlying fault;• the warning continued despite that inspection;• Ford has subsequently diagnosed the faulty alternator and provided its technical assessment regarding the likely cause of the damage to the integrated DC Converter;I consider that, on the balance of probabilities, the repair now required arises from the same underlying charging system fault that I first reported to Lookers during the early months of ownership.I therefore ask that Lookers confirm that it will either authorise the repair directly with Ford or reimburse me for the reasonable cost of replacing the 48V battery assembly, together with the associated labour and any further repairs that Ford reasonably identifies as being required as a consequence of the same underlying charging system fault.If, due to the urgency of the situation, I do not receive confirmation from Lookers within a reasonable timeframe and I have no practical alternative but to authorise the repair in order to mitigate my losses and allow Ford to complete its diagnosis, I will do so without prejudice to my position. I will then seek reimbursement from Lookers for the reasonable cost of those repairs should this complaint be upheld.I would also ask that the removed 48V battery assembly is retained by Ford, where possible and subject to Ford's procedures, until Lookers has had an opportunity to consider whether any inspection is required.For ease of reference, I have attached the key documents supporting the chronology outlined above.Attachments1. Purchase Invoice (17 January 2026)2. RAC Attendance / 12V Battery Replacement Invoice (19 January 2026)3. Evidence of reimbursement by Lookers for the battery replacement4. Lookers Vehicle Health Check Report (17 March 2026)5. Vehicle Health Check Video - Will be Sent in a second Email due to size6. Ford Technical Assessment Email with Repair Qoutation of 48V Battery Assembly7. Ford Technical Assessment Email Further DetailI hope this matter can be resolved promptly and amicably. I would appreciate a written response within 14 days.I look forward to your response.Yours faithfully,Michaela Caswell

The salesman James was easy to work with. Good communicator and responsiveUnfortunately due to circumstances outwith our collective control we were unable to deal.

Dear Mr Dennison,Please find attached two documents relating to the repair of vehicle AE71 EVM (account c06030) on 22 June 2026:1. A formal dispute of Invoice 25351300, on behalf of the account holder, The PPC Machine Ltd. In short: the repair was quoted at £221.97 inc VAT as the total, the invoice includes a £120.00 diagnostic charge that was never quoted or authorised, and I require a credit note for £121.00 reducing the invoice to the figure quoted.2. A written confirmation of the subject access request I made orally to your staff on 22 June 2026, requesting the call recordings and related records.I am also still awaiting the vehicle health check report that your advisor John Trice told me (twice) on Monday 22 June he was sending to me. I have not received it. Please forward it without further delay.I should be grateful for:• written acknowledgement of receipt of both documents;• a response to the dispute within 14 days;• compliance with the subject access request by 22 July 2026 (one calendar month from my original request of 22 June); and• the vehicle health check report John Trice undertook to send me on 22 June.Yours faithfully,David MilesDirector

Dear Lookers FordI wrote a review giving you a 5 Star rating.However to submit it I had to agree to give my email to TrustPilot and sign up to receive their messages. I am not prepared to do this.My review is below, and I'm very happy with your service.Kind regardsJan--------------------------------------------------------Carli Murphy helped solve an issue with a faulty dashboard reading prior to my MoT, in a resourceful and efficient fashion.The engineers were also helpful and timely with their communication.

HiCan you pls assess why l haven’t got my refund back. It’s been three days and I was promised it will be back in my account Monday. Please email me back asap.You took my money fast enough for a car that was already sold.Kully Chatrik

Hello Cheryl,I hope you had a great holiday.I just got to the garage and guess what, they forgot to book me a courtesy car out. John rang me previously to move the appointment to this week (from last week so a courtesy car would be available for the 3 days of work). Now I am being asked to wait until next week but I am in London. Needless to say this is just compounding the matter further with the complaint being looked into by head office.This is another example of why I question the integrity and capabilities of Lookers. They told me to wait until today for the 3 day booking so a courtesy car could be provided. After I rearrange my schedule to fit this appointment today I am told on arrival "no courtesy car is booked in for me". How on earth are these types of errors becoming the norm...I waited in the garage for 25 minutes before just leaving because they offered no alternative solution. Absolutely fuming is an understatement. I am to wait for a call from the garage to rebook the car in. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath.At this point, I would take all our money back for the car, dink and dent protection and warranty costs plus cost of extra car insurance (£300). This seems entirely reasonable given our rights under the CRA 2015 and the circumstances we have encountered and never with Lookers again.We can then go elsewhere where we will be taken more seriously and with respect. That should be a standard default position.Honestly, am I supposed to trust the warranty if this is the expected level of service Lookers provide...What should have been an exciting and joyful experience of buying a new car has been literally from a day one an absolute nightmare and made us both sick to our stomachs through the ongoing catalogue of issues, errors and mistakes.I thoroughly look forward to what the complaint handler concludes from this matter.I still haven't had any acknowledgement from Rob Clifforth.Thank you,David Stuart

last year cust complainted about his panaramic roof, the blfindd is wonky and missing a plascit panel. when they said this was fixed once i left the delarerhip the plastic bit pinged off. Cust called on his driive home and notified them. This was booked in Sept 2025 along with a shock ab sober problem. They needed to order the parts and then needed to book it back in Work related issues the customer wasnt in the county and could only get it booked in 2 weeks ago. Taken it back the shock ab sober didnt need replacing and they didnt touch the sun roof. They had invoiced the warranty company for the parts. Cust asked havent authorized the payment but they authorized the payment in September. The cust experience has not been good

Limited contact, single enquiry

I was initially contacted by one of your sales Execs within 15 mins of my enquiry. Sales exec was CC. He asked for more information about my PX and said he would get a price Saturday afternoon. I heard nothing Saturday, nothing Sunday. I chased on Monday and he said he would have a look at the info I had sent and get back to me. Finally on the Tuesday, he emailed me to say the car had sold. Maybe if he hadn’t have taken 3 days to get back to me, we may have had a deal. Now, I simply won’t bother looking at cars at Lookers. You can thank your sales exec for that.

You did fine, excellent service by professional staff as always.