I am writing to make a formal complaint regarding my recent experience with Lookers Mercedes-Benz Stourbridge.On 29 June 2026, I booked my Mercedes E-Class in for an air conditioning regas appointment on 3 July 2026. Before confirming the booking, I specifically asked whether the dealership had the correct R744 refrigerant required for my vehicle. The service advisor checked the system and confirmed that they did. I was told that the booking was suitable for Mercedes S-Class air conditioning systems, which use the same type of refrigerant, and therefore my vehicle could be serviced without issue.Based on that assurance, I arranged to take a day off work and attended my appointment at 10:45am on 3 July.Nearly two hours later, at approximately 12:36pm, I received a phone call informing me that the dealership did not, in fact, have the correct refrigerant required for my vehicle. This was extremely frustrating, as the issue could and should have been identified before my appointment was confirmed.I remained at the dealership until around 2:00pm while a health check and car wash were completed. Whilst I appreciate those services, they were not the reason for my visit and do not compensate for the inconvenience caused by the original booking error.Following this, I contacted Lookers Mercedes-Benz Wolverhampton myself after being advised they may have the correct equipment. They have now booked my vehicle in for 10 July 2026. However, I have been informed that I cannot wait while the work is carried out, and if I require a courtesy car, the earliest availability is 27 July and there is an additional charge of £30.As a result of this error, I have already lost one day’s annual leave from work and will now need to take a second day off next Friday because the original appointment was incorrectly accepted. This inconvenience was entirely avoidable had the correct checks been carried out before my booking was confirmed.I would also like to recognise the excellent customer service provided by Daisy at Lookers Mercedes-Benz Stourbridge. Throughout my time at the dealership, she was professional, courteous, understanding and did everything she could to assist me. My complaint is not about her service, but about the failure of the booking process and the inaccurate information I was given before attending my appointment.I would appreciate a response addressing:* Why my booking was accepted and confirmed when the dealership did not have the required R744 refrigerant.* What steps will be taken to prevent other customers experiencing the same issue.* What goodwill gesture or compensation Lookers considers appropriate in light of the unnecessary loss of two days’ annual leave, the wasted journey, and the significant inconvenience caused.I look forward to your response.

PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENTS FOR THE COMPLAINT

We have not been paid for a job we did in March, six mots on funeral vehicles. they could not mot themsleves as the vehicles were too big for their mor rampPayment urgently needed £329.10 I have tried the accounts many, many times.

customer has advised that vehicle had been in with yourselves for servicing and wheel alignment and following collection he has noticed damage and looking to determine when this occurred. received notifications while the car was in regarding doors and boot opening & closing and certain he received one for the sunroof which he thought was odd. collected the vehicle and then was on holiday for a week, has since then used the car and noticed shattered glass. reported it to site and still awaiting a response regarding it.

visited dealership and after viewing vehicle on the ramp had agreed on purchasing for £18000. numerous cosmetic issues were highlighted and agreed to be carried out before receiving it. was advised to come up to dealership to sort private plate transfer, has received log book and details were recorded incorrectly. called the dealership to advise of this and was then told alloys would only be painted not diamond cut, seat repair would only be carried out to best they can. has since received a call from the sales executive he had been dealing with today to advise that they are refunding his deposit back to him due to him not being happy with the vehicle. he has advised he has never stated this and would not have paid the retention cost for the private plate and drove back and forth several times if he was not interested in going ahead with it.

Dear Sirs,This email constitutes our final, absolute, and non-negotiable Formal Notice of Rejection regarding the Mercedes-Benz GLB, registration GV71 BWK, pursuant to Section 19 and Section 24 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.This regulated finance contract is officially in a state of terminal dispute. From the receipt of this notice, no further standard customer service discussions will be entered into with Mercedes-Benz of Stourbridge. The vehicle is permanently rejected as an unsafe, non-conforming asset. The statutory resolution and financial unwinding of this contract now sit strictly between the finance provider (as the legal owner of the vehicle) and Lookers Motor Group (as the supplying dealership).1. Chronology of Material Defect & Failure of the Statutory Right to RepairUnder UK law, a supplying dealer is permitted a single statutory opportunity to repair a significant defect. Lookers Mercedes-Benz Stourbridge has been afforded five consecutive opportunities spanning seven months, and has fundamentally failed.The undisputed timeline of this specific, life-threatening transmission communication failure is as follows:• Incident 1 (December 2025): The vehicle first suffered a transmission/gearbox failure. Lookers took possession, diagnosed a potential software anomaly, and updated the control software. The finance company was explicitly formally notified of our concerns at this juncture, but we acted in good faith to allow the repair attempt.• Incident 2 (10th April 2026): The exact same fault reoccurred. Lookers retained the vehicle and issued a diagnostic reading of "No Fault Found" (NFF).• Incident 3 (27th May 2026): The vehicle suffered a catastrophic loss of drive while operating in Lane 3 of a live motorway with children on board. This resulted in an emergency highway closure by traffic authorities to facilitate recovery. The consumer incurred a direct personal out-of-pocket cost of£192.00 for this recovery (invoice retained).• Incident 4 (June 2026 - Consecutive Workshop Access): Following the motorway failure, the vehicle became temporarily operable again and was returned to Lookers. The workshop again issued a "No Fault Found" conclusion and dangerously instructed the consumer to "drive it around over the weekend to try and make the failure happen again."When it did not actively fail that weekend, it was returned the following Monday for further investigation, where a fourth "No Fault Found" was issued.• Incident 5 (15th June 2026 - Current Incident):The vehicle suffered another total loss of drive, rendering it completely un-roadworthy and stranded. The AA attended the scene (Job Number: 13219). Operating independently, the AA patrol ran diagnostics while the vehicle was in a failed state and successfully captured the root defect: Fault Code U040229 (CAN communication failure with Transmission Control system / Message from transmission not plausible).2. Repudiation of Dealer Claims Regarding "Warranty Exclusions"Following intake on 17/06/2026, Lookers Stourbridge service staff verbally confirmed that their workshop diagnostics now point to an internal wiring loom/network communication issue requiring extensive physical stripping of the asset. Staff simultaneously asserted that wiring harnesses are excluded under the Mercedes-Benz Extended Warranty policy (administered by Allianz).We formally state that this position is a legal irrelevance and cannot be used to challenge this rejection:1. Statutory Law Overrides Insurance Policies: An extended warranty is an independent insurance product. This dispute is governed strictly by theConsumer Rights Act 2015, under which the consumer’s contract is with the finance company and the supplying dealer.2. Inherent Manufacturing Defect: Internal wiring harnesses and CAN-bus networks are fixed components designed for the lifetime of the vehicle; they are not wear-and-tear items. A systemic failure of the vehicle’s communication network that actively strips the vehicle of drive constitutes a fundamental breach of the statutory implied terms of satisfactory quality, safety, and fitness for purpose.3. Explicit Admission of Prior Fault: By verbally confirming a suspected deep-seated wiring network failure yesterday, Lookers has explicitly admitted that a physical defect has existed within the car all along, proving that their previous "No Fault Found" assessments were structurally incorrect.3. Final Legal Position & Financial RemediationBecause the statutory single opportunity to repair was legally exhausted four visits ago, our Final Right to Reject is absolute. We require the finance provider to finalize the termination of this agreement and process the following mandatory remedies within the regulatory timeline:• A full refund of the initial deposit paid.• A full refund of all monthly finance instalments paid from the inception of the contract to date.• Reimbursement of the £192.00 emergency motorway recovery fee caused directly by the vehicle’s failure.• The statutory addition of 8% compensatory interest per annum on all refunded sums, calculated from the date of each payment to the date of settlement.4. Mandatory Maintenance of Continuous MobilityTo ensure compliance with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) guidelines regarding consumer vulnerability and treating customers fairly, Sarah Fones must not be penalized or left without transport for work due to the supply of this dangerous asset.A hire car has currently been provided and funded by Mercedes Stourbridge.• If Lookers attempts to prematurely withdraw or recall this hire car as a consequence of this formal rejection notice, the responsibility shifts instantly to the finance company, as the legal owner of the disputed asset, to immediately step in and fund an alternative rental vehicle on their corporate account.• The current hire vehicle (or an equivalent provision funded directly by the finance provider) will remain in Sarah Fones’ possession until this dispute is officially closed, the contract is canceled, and all settlement funds have cleared into our bank account.The vehicle keys, the asset itself, and the logistical burden of its ongoing diagnostic teardown are now entirely the property of Lookers and the finance company. We await written validation of the rejection and the final calculation of our refund figures.Please forward a reference number for this rejection notice as a matter of urgency as agreed in our phone conversation of 22/06/2026Yours faithfully,Sarah Fones

I have already logged a complaint but yet again you have failed to reply to me! Why??

purchased a used vehicle last May 2025. Cust traveled from Essex to get the car. When they got the vehicle they didnt notice the silver know on the vent was just placed on there and do'snt work. Gemma said if they took the car back they would cover the cost for the repair. If you went to the local garage and they email her they would confirm they would cover the cost. Diag was carried out as the apple play wouldnt work. information system is broken. Local dealerhship is going to replace it. Now Asif is saying that they will not cover the cost now. Dealership is now not going to cover this as they have listened to the calls.

I bought a c300 d on the 06/01/2026, i have covered 5500 miles in it driven mainly around town with the odd motor way journey. The 2 back tyres are bold the one actually through to the cords i have pictured evidence.The tyres are odd from memory as im not with the car 3 x good year’s and 1 michelin.The one was that worn it was leaking air !!!I expect a car bought from a main dealership to have more tread and not having to replace 2 tyres. I would like to see the approved used report as well please, i highly suspect that they were below what you say you provide.I have tried to reach out to the dealership but they always seem to be in a meeting!! Im wondering if they are having phone issues as they haven’t called me back, they were very keen to talk when I was purchasing a car. The tyres have been replaced at a cost of £350

sold 2 vehicle to them and purchased 1. When cust got to the garage 29.05 would expect to see the vehicle yu were going to buy. Did the paper work and got the vehicle. Cust went for a stroll and someone was working on the vehicle and they were putting a new grill on it. cust picked the vehicle up with an air filter and an oil filter and the cust would get her local dealership to do the spray job. Settled one of the finance but paid to much. the cust is out of pocket. The hole think is a shambles and feel like they have been left out of pocket. cust waiting to see if they can have some compensation for the time spent at the dealership on the day and also the difference for the spray job. cust did not expect to spend thousands of pounds and not happy they were given a damaged vehicle. cust wold prefer a phone call as not great with the internet.