Just bought a brand new cla 250 electric premium plus from Brighton MERCEDESservice fine when choosing a car.After sales poor. New car wasn't delivered on due date so had to pay extra for Insurance road tax on old vehicle. Was agreed by manager that these would be refunded. Even made me send an invoice in 4 weeks agoStill waiting even after several emails for payment.. Took my initial deposit within a day from my account. But can't payback refund within a monthBack to issue of delivery of car. Very stressful. No one new where the car was on due date. 3 days after it was due to be delivered informed that it was fault of logistic teamDelivered to wrong showroomWas eventually handed over to us a week laterNo sense of any compensation as a good will gesture . Quite flippant attitude by manager.See now from reading reviews after sales service not greatWe have had 15 Mercedes benz cars over the years and Tbh worst service we have ever had.Ps Michael was the only staff member who tried to help.That said the new car is great . And we hope that after this poor after care service we will still stick to the Mercedes brand

Customer Comments:Dear Mr Fisher, I am submitting a formal complaint regarding the rejection of my Lookers Motor Group Platinum Plus warranty claim, administered by RAC/Assurant, for my vehicle: Vehicle details: • Make & Model: Mercedes-Benz C200 (2016, W205, petrol) • Registration: KS16 OPO • Mileage at time of fault: under 59,000 miles • Warranty: Lookers Motor Group Platinum Plus (administered by RAC / Assurant) Nature of the fault: The vehicle developed an airbag warning light and the dashboard message: “Front left malfunction – consult workshop.” A Mercedes-Benz main dealer diagnosed the fault as a failure of the weight sensing system pad and control unit for the front passenger seat. The quoted cost of repair is £1,902. Claim outcome: The warranty claim was declined by RAC/Assurant, citing the exclusion: “seats (including all internal electrical/mechanical components)” Grounds for complaint: 1. Incorrect classification of a safety-critical component The failed part is part of the occupant detection system, directly affecting airbag deployment. While physically in the seat, its function is clearly related to vehicle safety systems rather than seat comfort or trim. 2. Conflict with primary policy cover The policy states that all mechanical and electrical parts are included unless specifically excluded. The failed part is an electrical sensor and control unit. No clear exclusion exists for safety-related SRS electronics. 3. Ambiguity and unreasonable interpretation The policy separately excludes “air bag” and “seats (including all internal electrical/mechanical components)” but does not exclude airbag sensors, control units, or occupant detection systems. RAC’s rejection relies solely on the component’s location, not its function, which is an unreasonable interpretation. 4. Eligibility and nature of the failure The vehicle is under 80,000 miles, satisfying the policy criteria. There is no indication that the failure is due to wear and tear or end-of-life. This is an unexpected electrical failure within the scope of warranty cover. Resolution sought: I request that Lookers Motor Group honour the warranty and cover the full cost of repair (£1,902). Attachments: • Complaint document RAC • RAC/Assurant rejection letter • Warranty document • Mercedes-Benz diagnosis • Repair quote Please confirm receipt of this complaint and provide a timeline for resolution. Yours sincerely, Marjan Lazov

Ticket 86348175I made a complaint regarding money that was owed to me in February. I have since had to contact you a further three times. Someone from Mercedes rang me and assured me he would call me back with a resolution by 10 March. I have heard nothing since. As I am abroad, I cannot ring anyone to further escalate this complaint. PLEASE DO SOMETH8NG TO GET BACK THE MONEY I HAD TO SOEND WHICH SHOULD HEVE BEEN CLAIMED BACK FROM MY EXTENDED WARRANTY.

My car was in did repairs last year for several months on and off it never got sorted as they kept saying there was nothing wrong I’ve now come to sell my car and guess what everyone else can see gear the issue so I’m now stuckWith a car damage by Mercedes yet they wouldn’t take responsibility

I am writing to formally raise a concern regarding my recent telephone interaction with Brandon at the Brighton Mercedes dealership. I found his attitude to be dismissive and unhelpful throughout the conversation, which was particularly disappointing given the seriousness of the issue I am dealing with. There was a clear lack of openness and transparency in the information provided, and I felt that my questions were not addressed in a constructive or informative manner. Additionally, his tone came across as abrupt and unprofessional, which made the situation more frustrating than it needed to be. As a customer of a premium brand, I expect a much higher standard of communication, including clear guidance, empathy, and a willingness to assist. Unfortunately, this experience fell well below those expectations.

I am disappointed, not by the technical skills of the staff and their professionalism, but by the overall experience of having my car repaired at Lookers Brighton. A couple of points - when I collected my car on Thursday 19th March it was full of dust and with white paint splashed on the side. We are talking about Lookers, not a garage on the back of the road. I thought that was lack of respect for yourselves, firstly, and for me, secondly. I have photos, if you want to see the white paint splash; meantime I have succeeded removing it, but it doesn’t make me feel any better.The second item- the hybrid battery covered 64miles when fully charged prior to repairs; now it covers 47miles , a 25% degradation. Why? And how can you tell me that my car under warranty was repaired to the same quality as it was prior to breaking down? That’s why there is warranty , to ensure the car is brought back to the same condition even if a component fails.With all due respect,Dan Capatina-Iancu

Hi I hope you are well. I am writing to raise my concerns regarding a vehicle Irecently purchased from the Portslade Mercedes branch. I purchased an EQC 400 on 30th October2025, on 30th January 2026 a battery fault light appeared on the dashboard,I reported this on 31st January 2026, and the car was assessed at myhome and then later recovered back to Mercedes on 2nd February 2026.At this point I had owned the car for 3 months exactly before the first faultbecame apparent. During this time the contact and updates have beensporadic, I have often had to chase for updates on my car or have been toldthat someone will call be and no one does. I raised this concern verbally onthe phone and the contact has improved slightly but I am still really disappointedwith the overall experience and situation. I purchased a premium car from a main dealer as Iwanted some security that the car I would be purchasing would be safe, reliableand the service I receive would be of a high standard.From the point of my cargoing back to Mercedes, I have been transparent about the stress this iscausing, I purchased the car in October 2025 after finding out that I would beexpecting my first baby in May 2026, as I realised that I needed a larger family car.Numerous times I have contacted the garage asking for reassurance that I wouldhave my car back before my due date in mid-May. I only found out 2 weeks ago that the work would becovered under the warranty, which as you can imagine had caused me undue stressfor the weeks leading up to this, purchasing a new car and having no idea whether thework would be covered is not what you expect to hear, I of course was relieved whenI found out the work would be covered under warranty.Prior to finding this outI was told that the fault had been found at that a part would could be sourced fromMilton Keynes on next day delivery, but they hadn’t had confirmation of the warrantycovering the work so I would need to wait to hear this. The next contact I received was that the work would becovered under the warranty but that the part was actually on back order with noconfirmed delivery date, at this point I again reminded the advisor that mybaby is due in May and I would really like to have this resolved before then. Last Thursday I received a call with the bad news thatthe part is not expected to arrive until early May, obviously this is extremelydisappointing. At this point the car will have been back in the garage for over3 months and for longer than I have actually owned it, on top of this, its alsogoing to be extremely close to my due date and is now worrying me as to how/whenI will collect the vehicle particularly if my baby has just arrived. I am not one to normally complain and I know that thisis not the fault of anyone at the Portslade branch, but I am equally strugglingto see how any of this should be my problem. I have never experienced an issuelike this with other dealerships, and this was my first experience purchasing aMercedes vehicle and as you can imagine, its not left a great feeling or givenme confidence in the quality of the product I have purchased. I understand that problems can’t be predicted within avehicle but having to wait for potentially over 3 months for this to be repairedand returned is not reasonable, particularly when the time spent in the garagewill be longer than the time I had the vehicle. It’s really disappointing asbuying a new car should be an exciting experience, particularly when we purchasedthis as our first family car, to now know that its not even likely to be backfor the arrival of our baby and will actually just be an even bigger conveniencetrying to arrange collection of the car when the baby has arrived. I have been given a courtesy vehicle, but to be honestthis is the bare minimum I would expect and the car I have been given is not alike for like I purchased a c class and have been given an A class. I am requesting that a good will gesture is offered forthe ongoing disappointment and inconvenience caused by this matter, again Iwould like to reiterate that I know that this is not through the fault of anyof the employees at the Portslade site, but regardless of that I do not feelthat the service has been of a standard that I would expect when purchasing apremium car. I am also requesting that both the battery and new vehiclewarranty are extended to mirror the time my car has not been with me, I ofcourse have lost confidence in the reliability of the car and do not feel thatit is fair that I miss out on the warranty protection when I have not had thevehicle. I did raise these concerns when I spoke with theservice advisor last Thursday, he said he would pass this onto the sales teamand that I would be contacted. However, a week has now passed and I haven’tbeen contacted so felt that it may be easier to put my concerns in writing. Thanks, I look forward to hearing from you.Zooie

Hi,I hereby give notice that I cancel my contract of sale of the Mercedes C 200, KW24XFM.Ordered on 28/02/2026 and received on 03/03/2026.Name and address of consumer(s),Oludamilola Davies1 PortersBasildonSS13 1PZThe vehicle that was delivered on 03/03/2026 had the bonnet out of place so I took it to Mercedes Southend on 05/03/2026.I purchased from Mercedes Brighton and was advised to pay Mercedes Southend to fix it and they will reimburse me. The invoice was requested and sent to Brighton branch, I haven’t received the refund.The car doesn’t drive smoothly. I also didn’t receive foot mats in the car, which I made the Brighton branch aware of.As expected, I’m being promised that all these will be fixed and it hasn’t.I am not satisfied with the car so I am cancelled this purchase and would like a full refund.Thanks,Lola

Dear Sir/Madam,I am writing to formally raise a concern regarding the service I received yesterday when collecting my leased Mercedes-Benz following its same day MOT and service.Approximately 1.5 hours before collection, I received a voicemail advising that my vehicle was ready with no mention of any issues. This gave me the clear impression that the vehicle was safe and in satisfactory condition. Did think it was strange that normally during the last 5 services, I always receive video by the technician assigned showing what has passed / failed on the car but not today.When I arrived, my assigned advisor was with another customer. I initially received my keys from a different colleague without any handover or explanation of the work carried out. They asked for my car registration and the assigned colleague said it was ready to drive away.I then chose to wait for my assigned advisor to see the report and was subsequently assisted by another member of staff, who went through the service and MOT details with me and then emailed and texted the video inspection while I was there. He explained that Mercedes have new system and the technicians no longer send the video during their car inspections. It was only during this discussion that I was informed there was a slow puncture requiring attention but had been passed during the MOT as air was not leaking but would need to be fixed/replaced sooner rather than later.He explained due to the vehicle being leased, they are not authorised to carry out tyre replacements or repairs directly due to the cost and that this needs to be handled via the lease company, which I have experienced on previous visits over the years and would never expect Mercedes to change/repair the tyre. However, this does not change the importance of clearly communicating any safety-related issues identified during the inspection.I find it particularly concerning that this issue was not proactively highlighted — either in the voicemail, or via any form of email communication. The only other communication I received on the day was an email advising that the battery level was low, which was later explained to me as part of the standard process of disconnecting and reconnecting the battery during servicing by the technician.A slow puncture is a safety-related issue, and had I not asked further questions and to see the service report / video. I could have driven away unaware of a potentially dangerous fault, putting myself and my children at risk, particularly at motorway speeds. The video sent to me shows the screw in the tyre.I want to be clear that my concern is not about cost or compensation, but about safety and the principle of clear and responsible communication. I rely on your team to highlight any issues that could affect the safe operation of the vehicle.On this occasion, the initial lack of communication and absence of a proper handover fell below the standard I normally expect.I would therefore appreciate:• A clear explanation as to why this safety-related issue was not proactively communicated• Confirmation of what steps will be taken to ensure safety-critical information is always clearly communicated to customers going forward.

am extremely disappointed with the…I am extremely disappointed with the service I received from Mercedes-Benz of Brighton.I ordered a new Mercedes vehicle 5mths ago that required specialist adaptations due to my disability. From the beginning of the process, the dealership was fully aware that the vehicle qualified for VAT zero-rating because it was being adapted for use by a disabled person. This was discussed during the purchase and at no point was it indicated that this would be a problem.However, just as the vehicle was about to be delivered, the dealership suddenly refused to apply the VAT exemption. This was after a contract had been signed and a deposit paid, and after they had been aware from the start that the vehicle was adapted and qualified under the HMRC rules for disabled customers.This situation has caused significant stress, delay, and financial uncertainty. It is extremely disappointing to see a company representing a premium brand handle a matter involving a disabled customer in such an unhelpful and inflexible way.I expected much better professionalism and understanding from a Mercedes dealership. Instead, the experience has been frustrating and deeply disappointing.I would strongly urge anyone in a similar situation to get everything in writing and verify the dealership’s position on VAT exemptions before proceeding.Steve WEdit