I purchased my Range Rover Evoque in 2023. The vehicle was a 2022 ‘Approved Used’ model with low mileage. As this was my first hybrid vehicle, I was initially unfamiliar with its specific operational requirements, assuming that regular annual servicing at a main dealership would suffice to keep it in good condition.While the car was still within its three-year manufacturer warranty, I reported several concerns to Range Rover Colchester. At the time, I was informed that no faults could be diagnosed and that the vehicle was performing as expected; I was told that this is how it is and I have to accept it. Unfortunately, I was not offered an extended warranty after having asked for it directly after missing the application to do so.Since 2024, I have experienced recurring issues with the 'Auto Hold' feature. Despite raising this desperately during servicing, I was repeatedly told the brakes were fine and my concerns were ignored. I insisted on a deeper investigation during my most recent visit, which finally revealed a major fault requiring an urgent £3,400 repair.Management has offered a 30% goodwill gesture, but I find this unacceptable. This fault was reported relentlessly while the vehicle was under warranty, yet it was misdiagnosed by your technicians. Had the issue been identified correctly when first raised, it would have been covered in full. Therefore, I am requesting that this repair be completed free of charge.I dont mind paying for the extended warantee if the car is going to be fixed free of charge.Thanks

since buying the vehicle in March 2025 day 1 experienced noise in the vehicle.. Been in about 6 time and now the cust is fed up with the car .Cust states it is difficult to try and record the problem. Cust would like to reject the vehicle.

We purchased a new Land Rover Discovery Sport p300e R Dynamic from Lookers Colchester in January 2023. The purchase was necessary as our Land Rover Freelander 2 was getting older and we were concerned about its future reliability.The Senior Sales Executive advising us at Lookers Colchester, was Matt Chilvers, who we understand no longer works for Lookers Colchester.The p300e was the option presented by Matt as the best combination to provide off road capability, good load carrying capacity and an excellent fusion of "eco" credentials given our mix of many short range journeys which could be undertaken on battery power only, together with less frequent long journeys where petrol could remove "range anxiety" inherent with "electric" only vehicles. Matt was aware that the off-road capability was necessary but not arduous and that the vehicle would be required to drive across meadow land delivering sheep food to a small flock of sheep and pulling a log trailer (a detachable tow bar was fitted as an additional purchase).Email correspondence with Matt confirms that he was aware of the sheep. Matt was also aware that we had considered other "off road" vehicles, including Jaguar and the Toyota Rav 4, the later of which we had driven around our field as part of our test drive as we were sceptical of its off-road capability.We were reassured that such an off-road test was not required as "it was a Land Rover" with permanent AWD and terrain settings similar (but we were advised more sophisticated) to our previous Freelander.Having become hopelessly stuck on a near flat, but wet field, in December 2025 we attempted to ascertain the cause of our inability to drive our AWD p300e off the field. Our first communication was with Land Rover online chat which having communicated with them over the issue advised that they could not provide advice as they were not technically qualified to do so and that I should take the vehicle to the nearest dealership so that it could be diagnosed. As it was stuck on a field that was not a practical nor realistic option. We arranged to have the vehicle towed off the field by a friend with an old Land Rover defender.Given that it was coming up to Xmas and we were not planning on going off road we sent email correspondence to both the Service Manager and Sales Manager at Lookers Colchester asking if we were using the incorrect off-road setting. That communication dated 22nd December 2025 elicited no response whatsoever from Lookers. Given the potential hiatus of communication over the Christmas break we followed up the communication with a second email on 9th January 2026, again to the Sales and Service Managers. This again elicited no response. Being unable to identify whether we were using the wrong all terrain setting and not being able to get a response from either Land Rover or Lookers Colchester a quick trawl of online forums revealed a range of conflicting views about the p300e.On 6th February 2026 I visited Lookers Colchester and having spoken to a very helpful Sales Executive (George Campling) about the issue and questioning whether we had possibly purchased the wrong vehicle as it didn’t seem to be able to drive off road, he helpfully sought advice from the Service team.Siobhan Ashworth, in the service team was very helpful explaining that the p300e had permanent AWD and that when the high voltage battery was discharged a quasi-electronic differential directed electrical power generated by the engine to the high voltage battery and so the rear wheels would still be driven. On that basis it was clear that the vehicle had a fault and it was booked in for a full diagnosis on 24th February 2026 to establish the fault.On arrival at Lookers on 24th February and booking into the service dept., we were advised that a member of the maintenance team would like to speak to us. Richard (Senior Technician) explained that whilst Lookers would be willing to undertake a full diagnosis, it was unlikely that a fault would be identified as the vehicle was behaving exactly as designed in that only the high voltage battery drives the rear wheels and so when it is discharged the rear wheels would not be driven under any setting. The engine's alternator (generator) would not be capable of producing sufficient charge to drive the rear wheels. The vehicle is not a self-charging hybrid, and only regenerative braking would produce sufficient charge to recharge the high voltage battery and that would be very limited. This effectively means that the p300e is only AWD whilst it has charge in the high voltage battery. When the high voltage battery is discharged it is a front drive only vehicle and so would have very limited all terrain capability. The service team were surprised that we had not been contacted after our initial email as material had been pulled together by them to address our questions. Had this been explained on 6th February, or indeed following our two emails, we could have avoided a completely unnecessary trip to Lookers Colchester on 24th February.At no time during purchase discussions were we advised that the p300e does not have permanent AWD nor that the all-terrain settings were to all extent redundant if the high voltage battery was discharged or near discharged. There is nothing in any of the technical or sales literature which advises a potential purchaser of a p300e that this limitation exists. On the basis that no sales material advised of such a limitation, it would be reasonable to assume that the Sales Executive would advise of this limitation. However, this was not communicated by Matt and having now spoken to several Sales Executives at Lookers it is apparent that not one of the current Sales Executives who we have spoken too are aware of or not communicating this limitation with current models. We understand that the limitation extends to the equivalent Evoque model.Having been presented with this unresolvable diagnosis we discussed options for alternative vehicles which could meet our needs as we were now extremely fearful of taking our vehicle off road and certainly couldn't contemplate taking it on a long journey with the possibility that at end of it we may require off road capability - whilst we accept that we could permanently drive the vehicle in "SAVE" mode that somewhat removes that "eco" type credentials which the vehicle carries and would not allow for any unforeseen off road capability. As we discussed with Richard, estimating the potential range where AWD capability could be used would be extremely difficult even if SAVE mode was used. It would certainly mean that driving anywhere, other than extremely short journeys, in snow (which we frequently did in the Freelander) would be unthinkable. As will be evident from our records, we fully intended to complete the purchase of the vehicle at the end of the PCP agreement as we have a Service Plan with the second service at the end of the plan – this is now redundant as it is clear that the vehicle will not meet our needs and we will need to purchase an alternative vehicle which is capable of off road driving whenever we require it.At the conclusion of our discussion over potential alternative vehicles with George, we promised to forward copies of the unanswered correspondence with Lookers to George, which we did, and George advised that he would discuss it with your Head of Business, as Lookers were keen to ensure that we were looked after given our experience with Lookers so far. We also mentioned that we were aware that the previous correspondence had been received and considered by Lookers as we had been advised that material had been gathered to respond but the response did not appear to have been sent.George emailed us on 24th February to advise he had discussed the matter with his manager and that the Head of Business would be in contact on Wednesday 25th February. No contact was made and so on 4th March we again emailed George who responded by email on 6th March, apologising for the delay in responding to our email of the 4th but explained that he had been unwell and the Head of Business had been at a conference but that he would speak to the Head of Business on his return to the business on the following Monday, 9th March 2026.On Tuesday 17th March we spoke by telephone to Darryl Fernandez, Lookers Market Renewals Manager who had made contact to check if we needed any advice regarding the end of the Finance agreement on our vehicle and to discuss possible options. We explained to Darryl that we were currently discussing options with Lookers Colchester as we may need to replace the current vehicle sooner than had anticipated but were awaiting a call from the Head of Business. Darryl confirmed that he understood the position and would remind the Head of Business at Colchester that we were expecting his call. No contact has been made.It is now around 12 weeks since the initial email to the Sales Manager and Service Manager, with several chase ups, two abortive visits to Lookers Colchester, promises made by Lookers Colchester to respond and to date, we have had no communication from any “Manager” at Lookers Colchester. We are sure that Lookers have well defined customer service standards, and we cannot believe that Lookers Colchester has met these standards in this instance. To not have even received an apology for lack of responses and wasted trips to Lookers Colchester, let alone for the failure to explain the limitations of the p300e is quite staggering and does not reflect well on the Lookers brand.We look forward to hearing from you.

Good afternoon,I am writing to you to advise that we have received a complaint for the below customer. As the customer has contacted us outside of 6 months since purchasing the goods we have asked that they provided us with evidence to aid the investigation.Customer Name: Mr Raymond G WilkinsRegistration: AV74GAAInception Date: 30th September 2024Date Of Complaint: 24th March 2026Goods Details: LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER EVOQNew/Used: NewMileage At POS/POI: 0Current Mileage: 8000Agreement Number: 578575214The customer has advised us of the following fault/s ;• seating covers leather ripplingAt this time we do not need any further information from you. If we require information we will contact you again. The customer may contact you to obtain information, please endeavour to provide this to them where possible.Please note, should the customer provide us with evidence this will be assessed to determine our responsibility.Has a CEC case been raised for this customer via an AVC or Goodwill, if so please provide the reference, the date it was opened and any further details of any compensation/goodwill that has been paid to the customer to date.Many Thanks

Good afternoon,We have received a new Satisfactory Quality Dispute complaint from Cathryn Dickens, AY26NLG.Please provide a comprehensive response to this complaint, even if you believe this is now resolved, including supporting correspondence and evidence within the next 10 working days.Important: You are required to support customer complaints around the quality of goods provided as provisioned within the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and under the terms and conditions of the agreement with Black Horse Ltd, to support an appropriate solution.If we do not receive a response or sufficient information from you within 10 working days, we will decision the complaint based on the information we hold and may seek redress from you for any reasonable costs incurred.Vehicle/Finance InformationInception date: 06/03/2026Date of complaint: 20/03/2026Goods details: Land Rover Discovery Diesel Sw 3.0 DRegistration number: AY26NLGNew/Used: NewMileage at POS/POI: 0Current mileage: 510Agreement number: 103345749 Price of goods (at sale): 74,822.00Advance amount: 70322Deposit amount: 4500Term: 49 months.PCP/HP: PCPPCP mileage: 24500Dealer name: Lookers Land Rover ColchesterDealer number: 57826210The following information outlines what the customer has told us and may not be the opinion of Land Rover Financial Services.Complaint Detail Customer’s Preferred ResolutionFaults –- Marks on the body work- Ill-fitting bonnet- Fuel fitting faultComplaint –- 06/03/2026 — Vehicle Purchase & Collection• Vehicle purchased brand new (Land Rover Discovery)• Vehicle delivered with visible marks despite being new- Post collection Issues Identified• Bonnet alignment incorrect — uneven fit across sides• Fuel filler issue:– Fuel spits back when attempting to refuel– Indicates potential defect with filler neck or ventilation system• Issues identified almost immediately after purchase None given on complaintWe require the following information from you, where applicable1. Evidence/confirmation of any pre-sale vehicle checks that were completed.2. Please provide a copy of the vehicle advert3. Was there any negative equity included in the finance amount? Please also provide a copy of your sales invoice.4. Was there any external contribution towards the deposit e.g., manufacturer contribution / government contribution / scheme/ allowance?5. What was specifically discussed at point of sale regarding the mis-sale/mis-rep allegation, if applicable6. A full timeline of events from POS until now of when vehicle has been seen, outlining reasons why, what work was carried out, when and why and to include discussions/conversations had with the customer, cause of any issues/concerns raised i.e. wear & tear, lack of maintenance etc.7. Evidence/confirmation of any diagnostics/repairs completed, this to include specific dates, mileages, specifically what was carried out and why?8. Confirmation of service history9. Are you aware of any modifications made to the vehicle either before, during or after the sales process? These will include any enhancements to the vehicle’s engine (remapping), the fitting of a Ghost Immobiliser or any accessories put on the goods. If you are aware of any of these, could you please give us more detail of how these were added i.e. were they included within the Finance Agreement?10. Any other comments/evidence you feel are relevant.11. What will you do to resolve the complaint?We look forward to your response within the next 10 working days. Please respond to this email attaching all relevant evidence.

I complained through this route previously in the absence of an email address to complain to, however, you simply passed my complaint back to the Colchester branch (who I have zero trust in following my dealings with them). On receiving their latest unsatisfactory response, I sent a further email on 12/3/26 asking them to pass back my complaint to head office as it was yourselves who I wanted a response back from. Sadly, rather unsurprisingly, I have had no acknowledgement back from them and no response from yourselves. I am copying my latest email to Colchester to you below and will await YOUR response please. If I don't hear anything in the next 14 days, I will make my complaint to the Motor Ombudsman, and place some 1* reviews on the relevant websites. Here is the email...Morning CharlieFirstly, from a complaints process perspective, I find it very strange that your head office simply pass my complaint back to you (the site being complained about) for you to respond. I wrote to them as I wanted their view on my concerns. So, rather than me go through the website form again, I'd like this response forwarded back to them please so that I can have a response directly from them.As for the technician's comments, there is a big difference between 2mm and 5mm, and it's very convenient to suggest that the wear is on the inner side (& therefore not visible from the outside). However, my local garage did a thorough check of the pads before stating that they just simply did not need replacing at this time or even in the near future. Your company's recommendation of this costly work was therefore simply unnecessary.This is a clear example of your company "upselling" other jobs whilst the car is on site. At best for you, this might have been an "advisory" and a suggestion that it was work that needs to be done in the future, but to have it listed as a red "urgent" item at a cost of £424 is simply misleading at best. Furthermore, the "upselling" of this item makes me as a customer question whether there was a need for some of the other items raised in the VHC, which is a sad place to be in terms of the trust between a customer & the dealer. In short, due to your company's actions, I now have no trust in your dealership and will never bring my vehicle to you again. At this stage, it has honestly made me not want to buy Land Rover again.As for the warranty aspect, again I would have thought that the Land Rover experience would have been more seamless, so that once a car is purchased at distance from another dealer, the customer then only has to deal with his or her local Range Rover site after the sale, so it's very disappointing to just be fobbed off back to them. Besides which I have no desire to chase them as it is not about getting recompense, it's more about wanting to be able to trust the information provided in a VHC, and also wanting a better customer experience all round (as per my previous emails to you).I will await a response from Lookers Head Office before I decide whether to push this further with the Motor Ombudsman.Mal Wilde

Good morning Charlie,Following yet another thoroughly unsatisfactory experience at Lookers I am writing to get some clarity.June 2024 - Lookers sold me a car with a faulty coolant system. After being told a couple of times that the falling coolant levels were due to "the hot weather", you finally took the car in for inspection in October 2024.January 2025, three months later, the car was finally returned with the coolant issue fixed, however the rear parking sensors and camera were not working. Initially Lookers tried to deny any responsibility, citing rodent damage. After pointing out that this was not an issue before it lay dormant in your enclosure for three months, you did rectify.September 2025 I booked the car in with a faulty headlight, I am told that there is fault within the unit and it will have to be replaced (£2,500), which is not covered under my Platinum Plus extended warranty Lookers sold me. It is of course and after pointing this out to your staff they sorted it out under the warranty. You have already explained that is falls outside of the remit of your Customer Care team, still a very poor customer experience nevertheless.January 2026 we book on for the 63k service. I have a service plan covering this service, yet you cite additional costs of c.£1,300 (a policy which you are yet to be able document/evidence and emac cannot explain).It has to be noted that you have apologised that your team falsified invoices to try and explain these additional costs, however this did little to lessen the impact of yet another poor customer experience.On the return of the car, there were 3 of the 5 lug nuts missing from the front driver's side wheel. Fortunately this was noticed before an accident was caused which could easily have resulted in fatality. You have now supplied replacement lug nuts (which I had to fit myself) but have provided no explanation how this could be allowed to happen.The 'after care' provided can only be described as terrible at best, bordering on negligence.There is a lot here that is still to be addressed and remains unanswered. Perhaps you feel the persistent empty apologies are sufficient, in which case we can escalate via the ombudsman.Regards,Fraser WilkieSent from Outlook for Android________________________________________From: Charlie GirlingSent: Tuesday, March 10, 2026 8:50:21 amTo: Fraser WilkieSubject: RE: January ServicePerfect, see you thenCharlie Girling Service ManagerLookers Land Rover ColchesterT: 01206 216 900E: CharlieGirling@lookers.co.ukjaguar.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/jaguarlandrover.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/land-roverREG OFFICE: Axial Way | Colchester | CO4 5XBCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed & may contain confidential information. Any unauthorised review;use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.From: Fraser WilkieSent: 10 March 2026 08:49To: Charlie GirlingSubject: Re: January ServiceExternal Sender: Confirm legitimacy before acting.Thank you, I can do Friday first thing.Thanks,FraserSent from Outlook for Android________________________________________From: Charlie GirlingSent: Tuesday, March 10, 2026 7:57:08 AMTo: Fraser WilkieSubject: RE: January ServiceGood MorningSorry for delayI have parts in my office ready to pop on, when suits you to come in?Charlie Girling Service ManagerLookers Land Rover ColchesterT: 01206 216 900E: CharlieGirling@lookers.co.ukjaguar.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/jaguarlandrover.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/land-roverREG OFFICE: Axial Way | Colchester | CO4 5XBCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed & may contain confidential information. Any unauthorised review;use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.From: Fraser WilkieSent: 06 March 2026 14:32To: Charlie GirlingSubject: Re: January ServiceExternal Sender: Confirm legitimacy before acting.Any update on this, it's been two weeks?Thanks,FraserSent from Outlook for Android________________________________________From: Charlie GirlingSent: Friday, February 20, 2026 2:36:26 pmTo: Fraser WilkieSubject: RE: January ServiceOk thank you for letting me know,Let me get 3 new nuts organised, then I will get you in to replace & check the car overCharlie Girling Service ManagerLookers Land Rover ColchesterT: 01206 216 900E: CharlieGirling@lookers.co.ukjaguar.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/jaguarlandrover.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/land-roverREG OFFICE: Axial Way | Colchester | CO4 5XBCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed & may contain confidential information. Any unauthorised review;use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.From: Fraser WilkieSent: 20 February 2026 14:12To: Charlie GirlingSubject: Re: January ServiceExternal Sender: Confirm legitimacy before acting.Nothing has happened. I've used the nuts from the spare wheel (which is now in the boot) so that the car can be used. There are still 3 nuts missing (standard, not locking).Sent from Outlook for Android________________________________________From: Charlie GirlingSent: Friday, February 20, 2026 2:08:01 PMTo: Fraser WilkieSubject: RE: January ServiceHi Fraser,Apologies no-one had called you back & sorry to here of the concern on the vehicleHave the nuts been replaced since or does it still need to come in? If so could you pop in with it so we can take a look?Charlie Girling Service ManagerLookers Land Rover ColchesterT: 01206 216 900E: CharlieGirling@lookers.co.ukjaguar.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/jaguarlandrover.co.uk | lookers.co.uk/land-roverREG OFFICE: Axial Way | Colchester | CO4 5XBCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed & may contain confidential information. Any unauthorised review;use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.From: Fraser WilkieSent: 20 February 2026 09:39To: Charlie GirlingSubject: January ServiceExternal Sender: Confirm legitimacy before acting.Good morning,I called last Saturday (14th) to report that recently there had been a noise when driving, which got progressively worse, to the point when we stopped using the car completely. When investigating what could be causing this we discovered 3 of the 5 lug nuts from the drivers side, front wheel missing.There was no one who could speak to me last Saturday l, so I was told I would get a call back. Obviously, being Lookers, this hasn't happened and I'm still waiting.Thanks,Fraser

Dear Customer Care,I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding the accuracy of a Vehicle Health Check carried out by Lookers Land Rover Colchester on my vehicle, registration KW70 BYP. I purchased this vehicle from Stratstone Slough in May last year, so have had the car 9 months and have completed 6000 miles.I booked the vehicle in at Lookers Colchester on 3rd Feb 2026 for them to look at a couple of small concerns I had. Firstly, the automatic gearbox was rev'ing a little high in the lower gears & occasionally sticking in a gear. They ran the diagnostics and no codes were produced, so ultimately explained that away as "normal" behaviour. Secondly, the passenger side trim on the bonnet was loose and therefore vibrating. I was informed that the trim would not be covered under the warranty, so I had stated clearly upfront that I would be happy for them to simply pad it to stop the vibration, rather than replace the part, which I understood from my research to be possible. Sadly, they simply added this as a new part needed on the VHC at my cost.The main reason for my complaint is that as part of the VHC that I subsequently received, I was advised that my rear brake pads were at 2mm and required urgent replacement at a cost of £424.90. There were other urgent items needing attention on the VHC with the overall total coming out at £1263.22 (disappointingly none of which was covered under my Used Approved Land Rover warranty).As I had concerns regarding the extent and cost of the work, I sought a second opinion from an independent VAT-registered garage. Their findings (invoice attached) confirmed:Rear brake pads measured at 5mm (not 2mm per Lookers), so not needing replacement - See Technician Comments.The wing mirror indicator fault was repaired with a new Land Rover LED strip at cost of £116.90.FYI, I had also earlier had the tyre (noted as requiring urgent replacement) fitted by a local tyre specialist at a cost of £280.So ultimately, I ended up paying £396.90 versus the £1263.22 quoted by Lookers.Rather frustratingly, I am told by the Warranty Company that had the mirror indicator fault been found at MOT, it could potentially have been picked up under the MOT warranty. However, because I took it in of my own free will for other investigations, and the fault was found as part of the "free health check" (which I didn't ask for!), it is NOT covered under the Used Approved Warranty, which makes no sense to me. The warranties have therefore been of no help to me as it stands, which is not what I expected of a Land Rover Used Approved Warranty.For your information, shortly after the VHC was sent to me, I did ask for clarification from Lookers Colchester on a few points (which should have prompted an urgent response given the fact that all of the items were "red - urgent"), but I received no response. When I complained to them, the Service Manager took no responsibility for any of my complaints, merely offering the excuse that the lack of response was due to an individual being "in and out of the office" over that period! Ultimately, I never received a response to those questions, so I just went ahead and got the work done by a trusted local VAT registered garage.Anyway, back to the unnecessary brake pad replacement recommendation made by Lookers Colchester. This is not a marginal difference in interpretation - brake pad thickness is a measurable safety-critical item. A discrepancy of this scale calls into question the accuracy of the inspection and the recommendations made.I therefore request:1) A full explanation of how the 2 mm measurement was obtained.2) Confirmation of what checks and quality controls are in place for Vehicle Health Checks3) A formal written response as to how this matter will be addressed4) Details of your internal complaints escalation procedureGiven that this concerns the reporting of safety-critical components and the recommendation of unnecessary work, please treat this as a formal complaint.If I do not receive a satisfactory response, I will refer the matter to The Motor Ombudsman, as this issue relates to service standards and misrepresentation of vehicle condition.I look forward to your prompt response.Yours sincerely,Mal WildeNOTE: I wanted to attach invoice from my VAT registered garage showing Technician comments re the brake pads, but no option to, so can supply on request by email.

The customer has advised us of the following faults ;• Water leaking into the vehicle through the windscreen area, particularly via the rear-view mirror housing.• Pool of water collecting in the front footwell after rainfall.• Water dripping onto the central console while driving.• Extremely loud noise from the front air vents, likely due to internal water ingress.• Structural issue identified with the windscreen — Land Rover Assist confirmed the windscreen was not fit for purpose and required replacement.• Severe smell of mould and damp forming in the cabin due to prolonged water ingress.• Potential electrical risks due to water entering vehicle interior.• Fault with the AdBlue system.At this time we do not need any further information from you. If we require information we will contact you again. The customer may contact you to obtain information, please endeavour to provide this to them where possible.Please note, should the customer provide us with evidence this will be assessed to determine our responsibility.Good morningI am writing to you to advise that we have received a complaint for the below customer. As the customer has contacted us outside of 6 months since purchasing the goods we have asked that they provided us with evidence to aid the investigationfrom JLR SQD

Dear Sir or MadamLate last week I visited your Colchester Land Rover dealership with the view to purchase a used vehicle. The salesperson was very helpful, and we found, and test drove, a vehicle which appeared to tick all the boxes.I wanted to finance the vehicle but was told I could not arrange my own finance and would need to use the finance arranged directly by the dealership. The finance I could access ranged from 6-8% APR, yet the finance the dealership offered was 11.9%. I requested that I arrange my own finance but was flatly told this was not possible, I could either pay outright or arrange a personal loan and pay directly. I did not want to do either of these options as I wanted a PCP deal.Even worse was the fact the disclosure showed a commission due to the dealership of nearly £3000. I believe this is an unfair business practice towards a consumer and I would like to complain about this. I understand the complaint process must be raised with the dealership directly and if not resolved then I can complain to the FCA. By restricting how I can obtain PCP or HP finance the company has unfairly increased the APR in favour of the dealer, no choice has been offered or was available and this is unfair to the retail consumer.RegardsPaul RaynerPaul Rayner FCCA