We purchased the vehicle 15 months ago from the dealership and as part of the deal, we paid for the 3 year extended warranty on the car for peace of mind. 3 weeks ago a warning light appeared on the vehicle advising of a battery management warning light. We dropped the car off yesterday and have been advised it is the Hybrid Battery that is at fault. This has been rejected by the warranty company and now we have been left with a bill of £1900 to repair the vehicle.As you can tell we are upset about this as the car is 4 years old and only has 33000 miles on it. This car also has a FSH. This is the 2nd car we have bought from lookers and i would of expected better. I feel that the 3 year warranty we purchased isnt worth the paper it is written on and that yourselves are more interested in profit than customer service. I got a telephone call from the service manager which to fair was straight to the point but again i believe there was no trying to get this resolved. Just a diagnostic and then quotation. Rejected by warranty company and thats it. No challanging etc. This will be the last time we will be buying a car from lookers and nissan

I am writing to formally raise a complaint regarding my recent and extremely disappointing experience with Lookers Gatehead Nissan following the reservation and attempted purchase of a Mercedes-Benz CLA 180, registration DX70 OPS.Background and Initial VisitAfter reserving the vehicle, I travelled over two hours from Bradford to Newcastle within 24 hours, expecting the car to be fully prepared for viewing and potential same-day collection. The AutoTrader advertisement gave no indication that the vehicle was unprepared, and extensive images suggested it was ready for sale.Upon arrival, I discovered the vehicle in an unacceptable state. It was dirty inside and out, had missing paint on the front bumper and sill, defects on two alloys, and visible undercarriage damage. During the test drive, I also noted an interior rattling noise. I raised all of these issues with the salesman, David, who consulted with his manager. I was assured that all identified work—including paint repairs and investigation of the noise—would be completed. I allowed a full week for the remedial work and agreed to collect the vehicle the following Saturday morning.Issues Prior to Scheduled CollectionOn Friday 14th November, less than 24 hours before the agreed collection time, I received a call from David informing me that the noise issue was still being investigated. By this point, I had already arranged travel, organised the sale of my existing vehicle, and declined work shifts for Saturday to facilitate the collection. Being notified so late caused unnecessary stress—particularly during an already demanding workday as a practising pharmacist handling multiple urgent medication requests before the weekend closure.Later that evening, I was told the issue had been resolved and the car was ready. I paid the remaining balance of the vehicle, including tax and fuel, as I was informed the accounts team would not be available on Saturday.Second Visit – Continued FailuresOn Saturday 15th November, I woke at 5 a.m., travelled again to Newcastle—involving an Uber and delayed trains—and arrived for the scheduled 9 a.m. collection. To my shock and disappointment, several issues had still not been rectified:A mark on the rear bumper remained untouched.The front bumper still had multiple chips and areas of missing paint.The interior rattling noise was still present despite assurances that technicians had resolved it.I was informed that the paint technician had “forgotten” to complete the bumpers. This explanation was unacceptable given the time provided and the assurances repeatedly made. A manager offered £200 towards repainting and for the rear bumper mark to be rectified via invoice.I then had to test drive the vehicle again, with both the salesman and a technician, to demonstrate the noise that supposedly had already been rectified. In the end, I left without the car I had fully paid for and was given a courtesy vehicle instead, resulting in yet another 2-hour drive home.ImpactThis experience has caused significant inconvenience, emotional distress, and financial loss. I had planned to use the car for my sister’s graduation on the 20th November and at my workplace’s annual dinner on the 21st—plans which were disrupted due to your team’s failings.My expectations were straightforward: a car advertised as ready for sale should be prepared to the agreed standard, and commitments made by your staff should be honoured. Instead, I experienced misleading information, unfulfilled promises, and poor coordination between the sales, bodyshop, and technical teams.While the salesman, David, has been professional throughout, the failures of the bodyshop and technicians—along with the lack of accurate communication—has severely damaged my trust in Lookers.Concerns Regarding TreatmentI cannot ignore the possibility that I may have been treated differently due to my age or ethnicity. As a young professional, I expected to be treated with the same professionalism and respect afforded to any other customer. The contrast between the assurances given and the actual experience raises understandable concerns.Requested ResolutionI request the following:A full investigation into the vehicle’s preparation failures and the inaccurate assurances provided.Confirmation of when the vehicle will be completed to the agreed standard, including all bodywork and mechanical issues. The vehicle is still rattling from the interior despite being told it has been fixed.Appropriate compensation for:Wasted travel costs (two round trips between Bradford and Newcastle)Loss of time, including missed work shiftsThe significant inconvenience and emotional distress causedA written apology acknowledging the failures that occurred.If this matter is not resolved promptly and satisfactorily, I will have no choice but to escalate my complaint to the Motor Ombudsman, Watchdog, and relevant social media channels. I take no pleasure in doing this, but my experience has been wholly unacceptable for a dealership of your size and reputation.I expect a written response within 7 working days.

Dear Sir/Madam,I am writing to formally raise a complaint regarding my recent and extremely disappointing experience with Lookers Gatehead Nissan following the reservation and attempted purchase of a Mercedes-Benz CLA 180, registration DX70 OPS.Background and Initial VisitAfter reserving the vehicle, I travelled over two hours from Bradford to Newcastle within 24 hours, expecting the car to be fully prepared for viewing and potential same-day collection. The AutoTrader advertisement gave no indication that the vehicle was unprepared, and extensive images suggested it was ready for sale.Upon arrival, I discovered the vehicle in an unacceptable state. It was dirty inside and out, had missing paint on the front bumper and sill, defects on two alloys, and visible undercarriage damage. During the test drive, I also noted an interior rattling noise. I raised all of these issues with the salesman, David, who consulted with his manager. I was assured that all identified work—including paint repairs and investigation of the noise—would be completed. I allowed a full week for the remedial work and agreed to collect the vehicle the following Saturday morning.Issues Prior to Scheduled CollectionOn Friday 14th November, less than 24 hours before the agreed collection time, I received a call from David informing me that the noise issue was still being investigated. By this point, I had already arranged travel, organised the sale of my existing vehicle, and declined work shifts for Saturday to facilitate the collection. Being notified so late caused unnecessary stress—particularly during an already demanding workday as a practising pharmacist handling multiple urgent medication requests before the weekend closure.Later that evening, I was told the issue had been resolved and the car was ready. I paid the remaining balance of the vehicle, including tax and fuel, as I was informed the accounts team would not be available on Saturday.Second Visit – Continued FailuresOn Saturday 15th November, I woke at 5 a.m., travelled again to Newcastle—involving an Uber and delayed trains—and arrived for the scheduled 9 a.m. collection. To my shock and disappointment, several issues had still not been rectified:A mark on the rear bumper remained untouched.The front bumper still had multiple chips and areas of missing paint.The interior rattling noise was still present despite assurances that technicians had resolved it.I was informed that the paint technician had “forgotten” to complete the bumpers. This explanation was unacceptable given the time provided and the assurances repeatedly made. A manager offered £200 towards repainting and for the rear bumper mark to be rectified via invoice.I then had to test drive the vehicle again, with both the salesman and a technician, to demonstrate the noise that supposedly had already been rectified. In the end, I left without the car I had fully paid for and was given a courtesy vehicle instead, resulting in yet another 2-hour drive home.ImpactThis experience has caused significant inconvenience, emotional distress, and financial loss. I had planned to use the car for my sister’s graduation on the 20th November and at my workplace’s annual dinner on the 21st—plans which were disrupted due to your team’s failings.My expectations were straightforward: a car advertised as ready for sale should be prepared to the agreed standard, and commitments made by your staff should be honoured. Instead, I experienced misleading information, unfulfilled promises, and poor coordination between the sales, bodyshop, and technical teams.While the salesman, David, has been professional throughout, the failures of the bodyshop and technicians—along with the lack of accurate communication—has severely damaged my trust in Lookers.Concerns Regarding TreatmentI cannot ignore the possibility that I may have been treated differently due to my age or ethnicity. As a young professional, I expected to be treated with the same professionalism and respect afforded to any other customer. The contrast between the assurances given and the actual experience raises understandable concerns.Requested ResolutionI request the following:A full investigation into the vehicle’s preparation failures and the inaccurate assurances provided.Confirmation of when the vehicle will be completed to the agreed standard, including all bodywork and mechanical issues. The vehicle is still rattling from the interior despite being told it has been fixed.Appropriate compensation for:Wasted travel costs (two round trips between Bradford and Newcastle)Loss of time, including missed work shiftsThe significant inconvenience and emotional distress causedA written apology acknowledging the failures that occurred.If this matter is not resolved promptly and satisfactorily, I will have no choice but to escalate my complaint to the Motor Ombudsman, Watchdog, and relevant social media channels. I take no pleasure in doing this, but my experience has been wholly unacceptable for a dealership of your size and reputation.I expect a written response within 7 working days.Yours faithfully,[Zeeshan Hussain][07727 121045][Mercedes CLA DX70 OPS]

Dear Customer Service Team,I hope this email finds you well. I am one of your customers who financed a vehicle through your company during the period between 2017 and 2021.I recently learned that the Financial Conduct Authority is investigating certain car finance agreements and that customers like myself may be eligible for compensation.For your reference, here are my details to help you locate my account:Full Name: Hamed SabbahVehicle Registration Number: NG71 MWLI would appreciate your guidance on how to proceed with a compensation claim. Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your response.Best regards,Hamed

Please see attachment for the full complaint.

Dear Lookers Customer Service & Resolution Team,Thank you for your email.This complaint relates to Lookers Nissan Gateshead and concerns a statutory cancellation under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (CCR 2013) that has not been processed correctly.My details are as follows:• Name: Annie Watts• Address: 3 First Avenue, M11 4LU• Vehicle: Nissan Qashqai – NJ72 CTO• Collection date: 26 October 2025• Date of written cancellation: 31 October 2025• Broker: Match Me Car Finance• Lender: Advantage Finance________________________________________Background and Timeline• 23 October 2025: Finance and purchase agreed entirely by telephone and e-signature through Match Me Car Finance. I did not view the vehicle in person prior to agreement.• 26 October 2025: Vehicle collected from Lookers Gateshead.• 31 October 2025: Formal written notice of cancellation sent to Lookers within the 14-day cooling-off period under Regulation 29 of the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013.• 1–2 November 2025: Follow-up emails sent.• 3 November 2025: Jason Greaves (Lookers Gateshead) confirmed by email that I would “incur charges for use” and should return the vehicle with paperwork — this indicated acceptance in principle of the cancellation in line with Regulation 34(9).• 4 November 2025: Advantage Finance confirmed that my HP account was suspended pending refund.• 5 November onwards: I continued to respond to all parties the same day. However, the dealership, broker, and finance company began to dispute my statutory rights.________________________________________Legal PositionThe agreement constitutes a distance contract under Regulation 5(1) of the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013, as it was concluded without the simultaneous physical presence of both parties.The method of collection (me attending the site) does not remove or limit my statutory right to cancel. This has been confirmed by the Competition and Markets Authority and multiple Trading Standards authorities.Since providing written notice, I have repeatedly been told by the dealership, the broker, and the finance company that this situation is being treated as a “rejection” under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.This is incorrect and misleading.A “rejection” refers to a claim about the quality or condition of goods under the 2015 Act.My action is a statutory cancellation under the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013, which gives consumers a 14-day cooling-off right for distance contracts, for any reason or none.It is not dependent on any fault or defect, and it is separate from the 2015 Act.Despite this, I have been told by Match Me Car Finance and Advantage Finance that:• “The Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 do not apply,”• “The broker only follows the Consumer Rights Act 2015,” and• “Cancellation is not permitted because the vehicle was collected.”These statements are legally inaccurate and have caused confusion and distress.Internal company policies cannot override statutory consumer rights.I also note that Mr. Thomas Hindmarch (Business Manager, Lookers Gateshead) referred my case to the broker for advice, which has further delayed resolution and spread incorrect information.I must also make clear that no internal or third-party policy can replace or outweigh UK consumer legislation.The Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 are statutory obligations which apply to all traders, including motor dealers, finance providers, and brokers.Any continued refusal to comply with these Regulations would amount to non-compliance with UK consumer protection law.________________________________________My Position• I gave valid cancellation notice within 14 days under Regulation 29.• I have responded to all correspondence promptly.• I accept that a reasonable deduction for mileage may be applied under Regulation 34(9).This should have been a simple administrative process. I am now requesting that the matter be handled by Lookers’ central compliance or legal department, to ensure proper adherence to UK consumer law.________________________________________Requested Outcome1. Confirmation that this complaint is logged as a formal complaint with a reference number.2. Confirmation that it has been escalated to the compliance/legal department for review.3. Arrangements for the return of the vehicle and refund to Advantage Finance, with a fair mileage deduction applied.4. Confirmation that Lookers staff and associated partners are reminded of their obligations under the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 and that this case should not be treated as a “rejection” under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.________________________________________Supporting Documents (available on request)• Cancellation email dated 31 October 2025• Email correspondence with Lookers Gateshead (including from Jason Greaves)• Emails from Match Me Car Finance and Advantage Finance mis-stating the law• Proof of collection and communication timeline________________________________________I look forward to written confirmation that this complaint has been logged and referred for investigation by the appropriate department.Kind regards,Annie WattsTel: 07985 154 800Email: anniewatts22@gmail.comVehicle: Nissan Qashqai – NJ72 CTO

Ticket 82334866 (ORIGINAL COMPLAINT).This is the complaint from an email.you sent me on 2/9/25. I did speak with the service manager who said he would investigate FULLY. It's now late on 28/9/25 and I still haven't had a result of the complaint...I have since had to advise my dad tomgo.elsewjere with the family.car and the repair was done excellently, timely and without fuss.The service provided from Lookers in the first instance, it's just really compounded by not even getting back to me with a result apology nothing.

The environment is exceptionally clean and features a bright, open space.In addition to the enjoyable atmosphere and, naturally, the excellent vehicle, the primary reason we exclusively choose Nissan is due to our sales representative, John Bendelow. He has provided outstanding service since our initial purchase, and this September marks our fifth vehicle acquisition with Nissan.

Knowledgable & professional sales advisors, didnt put on too much pressure. Clean bright comfortable showroom

Pleasant facility, pleasant and helpful attitudes.