Thanks for advising me today… as requested here are the details:9th Dec - received letter re problem with fuel pipe 12th Dec - rang local branch (Gateshead) to book car in. Was told it would be £40 collection fee. When I explained my husband was disabled, I was informed there would be no charge. Car booked in for 29th Dec collection 8:30 - 11:30 29th Dec -waited all morning; no show. Rang and was told the appointment was for 30th. Collection fee would be £25. Again after explaining disability/motability- no charge. Branch rang back later in the day and said car would be collected between 8:30 and 9:30.30th Dec. No show again. Rang again. Was told the branch emailed me on 22nd/left a voice mail to say they wouldn’t collect but had a waiting appointment from 10:00 a.m. on 30th. I haven’t received an email (also checked junk folder), no text either. Had a missed call on 22nd which I’ve checked and is your number. I don’t have voicemails on.So the nature of my complaint is1) expecting a disabled person to wait around for a fault to be fixed. My husband has MS, is in remission from throat cancer and I am his carer. No family live near by.2) no email or text sent3) confirming another collection on Monday 29th then not showing again (30th)4) causing unnecessary stress and impacting negatively on our emotional health and well-being5) quoting different charges for collection fees then withdrawing any sort of collection, paid or otherwisePlease confirm receipt of this email and let me know if you require any further information… I look forward to your reply.

Replacement of vehicle but the new one has a fault usb port so can't even connect to Apple CarPlay or Android Auto which I use daily for driving and for music.

I am writing to formally raise my concerns regarding a used vehicle I purchased from yourselves in September for £12,980, paid in full by cash.At the time of purchase, I noted several minor issues, including marks on the glass and scratches, which were resolved. However, I also raised two further concerns:• a persistent whining noise while driving• the driver’s seat repeatedly lowering on its ownIn October, I returned the vehicle to you for inspection. I was advised that the seat had been tightened and that an engineer had driven the car and addressed what he believed to be the cause of the noise. Unfortunately, after testing the car on the motorway, the whining noise was still present and the seat continued to drop.I therefore rebooked the vehicle in on 21/11/25. On this occasion, I went out in the car with the engineer, who himself identified both the whining noise and a crunching sound when changing gears. I was later informed that a new gearbox and clutch were required and that I would be contacted once repairs were completed.On 5th December, I was notified that the vehicle was ready for collection. The report stated that the gearbox had been sent away for repair; however, it also suggested that the seat lowering issue was caused by the driver knocking it, which I strongly dispute and was very unhappy to see recorded.Approximately one week later, I again tested the vehicle on the motorway and can confirm that the whining noise is still present. I have since contacted servicing to rebook the vehicle, and it is now scheduled to return on 31/12/25.Given the repeated attempts to resolve these issues and the length of time they have persisted since purchase, I am extremely disappointed and concerned about the condition of the vehicle. I feel if the vehicle is not fully repaired with the whining noise and the seat I will be exercising my final right to reject" the vehicle because the repair attempts for the persistent fault have been unsuccessful. Honesty hope it does not come to this as I have purchased cars from yourself for over 5 years and always happy with the service

I purchased a car in good faith in January 2025. I have recently put the car through an MOT (December 2025) and it failed on a faulty driver's side headlight. The tester suspected the car was in an accident. I took it to a bodyshop who further provided evidence to this effect. I have had no known 'accident'.

To all concernedI have drafted this email on behalf of our client concerning the ongoing dispute regarding a potential warranty claim for a failed traction EV battery in his Nissan ZE1 model vehicle.This letter serves as a formal demand for immediate and decisive action. Our client has already escalated this matter to the Motoring Ombudsman and has received an exploration meeting phone call for mediation.1. Factual Summary of Battery Degradation and Diagnostic FailureThe following points establish the grounds for demanding action:• Documented State of Health (SOH) Decline: The latest test conducted by Mr. Owen at Lookers confirms the battery SOH is (91%. This follows a previous reading of (93\%) (SOH) recorded at Holdcroft on 2509/2025. This constitutes a (2\%) loss in under (200) miles.• Breach of Testing Protocol: Both Lookers and Holdcroft conducted diagnostic tests only after charging the vehicle to (>70\%) State of Charge ((SOC)), despite the vehicle being provided with (<15\%) (SOC). Furthermore, Lookers previously agreed that a reliable (SOH) reading requires testing at both (<10\%) and (>30\%) (SOC), a procedure confirmed by the attached Nissan service manual. This failure to follow the manufacturers and the dealership’s own agreed-upon protocol renders the tests unreliable and is an attempt to evade a valid warranty claim.• Warranty Failure Threshold Confirmed: Our client has confirmed with the Swindon Service Centre (Fish Brothers) that Nissan’s Consult software reports a battery as failed for ZE1 models at (71-74\%) (SOH). Despite this clear threshold, Owen/Lookers has repeatedly refused to confirm what percentage (SOH) they would accept as triggering a warrantied repair, which our client views as deliberate obstructive conduct.2. Service and Transportation FailuresWe must also formally register the serious issues regarding service conduct and logistical failures:• Refusal to Arrange Transport: Owen refused to contact the (RAC) for transportation. The (RAC) confirmed that under a Select/Manufacturer's plan, the dealer network is responsible for arranging transportation via the (ARMS) system, a fact previously confirmed by your representative, Riyad.• Vehicle Tampering/Damage: Upon the vehicle’s arrival the parking brake was disconnected, a fault the (RAC) explicitly disputes causing, supported by their inspection report. This highlights a serious lapse in security or service integrity while the vehicle was in the dealer network's custody.• Internal Confirmation of Poor Conduct: Our client retains documentation, including voice call confirmations from your own staff (including Riyad, Siobhan, and Jon), acknowledging the "obstinate," "unhelpful," and "shonky" conduct of the dealer network and their deviation from established Nissan procedures.3. Demand for Immediate Action and DeadlineGiven the clear evidence of the SOH decline, the confirmation of the warranty failure threshold ((71-74\%)), and the documented service failures, we now demand the following specific actions be completed within seven (7) business days of the date of this letter:1. Confirmation of Transportation: You must formally arrange and confirm the date and time for the immediate and proper transport of the vehicle for the required diagnostic testing ((<10\%) (SOC) test) via the (ARMS) system.2. Payment Link: You must email our client a secure link for the payment of the outstanding diagnostic fee. Our client will pay this fee immediately upon receiving confirmation of the transportation arrangements.3. Confirmation of Warranty Criteria: Owen/Lookers must provide, in writing, confirmation of the exact (SOH) percentage they will accept as meeting the battery failure warranty criteria for the ZE1 model.Please note that this matter is now formally subject to mediation by the (Motoring) (Ombudsman) and any further obstruction or delay will be presented to them as evidence of continued bad faith.We trust that, to mitigate further action and reputational damage (given our client's background in Journalism and contact with media outlets), you will comply with these demands immediately.

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.