We wish to raise our concerns about service frequency for our Smart #3 and request confirmation IN WRITING that warranties will be honoured if the car is only serviced every 24 months.We purchased our Smart #3 from Lookers of Maidstone as a used demonstrator on 27th November 2025. It was initially registered on 21st March 2025A few weeks ago, when starting the #3 an alert on the screen advised us that a service needed to be booked. This alert also appeared in the Smart phone app. On 18th February, we also received an email from Lookers inviting us to book a service “in line with Manufacturer’s recommendations”. When we rang on 2nd March and scheduled it for 11 AM on 17th March we were asked the milage, which we confirmed was about 2300 miles.We arrived at the garage just before 11AM on 17th March. After about 45 minutes we were told that the #3 did not need a service, because Lookers only service Battery-EVs every 24 months and since we are low-milage drivers we would not exceed the distance limit within that period. We showed the staff the Smart App alert as well as the 18th February email from Lookers. The email was explained because of changes to some software at the garage which automatically contacts buyers about servicing every twelve months regardless of vehicle type. When we asked why the car and app had also been programmed to alerted us, we did not receive a clear answer as to who had configured the car this way and why.When we asked what we should do about the car’s on-screen and app alerts, the staff offered to reset them. This was subsequently referred to as a “customer requested reset”, which is not right – we did not request a reset, it was offered as a solution to the screen and app alerts.Following the reset and whilst still at the garage, we checked the phone app which now showed the service alert would not appear for a further 720 days. We pointed out that this was wrong and should be about 360 days, since the two-year anniversary of the vehicle’s registration would be 21st March 2027, not 2028. We were told that it doesn’t matter and just to book a service ahead of 21st March 2027.We asked if the car is serviced every two years would this affect the vehicle’s warranties and were told it would not. But we remain concerned, because someone has clearly configured the Smart #3 to request a service after 12 months. The warranty document makes it clear that: “A prerequisite for a benefit under this smart warranty is that all service intervals have been carried out in accordance with smart's specifications.” We have checked the owner’s manual, but it does not state approved service intervals.WE ARE REQUESTING A RESPONSE IN WRITING confirming that a service every two years, starting two years after the initial registration, is the OFFICIAL Smart #3 policy and that all the vehicle WARRANTIES will be fully HONOURED if we comply with this policy.We had an unnecessary journey of 45 minutes both ways as well as the associated cost in electricity. We felt like we were being treated as if this was our fault, but it wasn’t: Lookers had sent us an email telling us to book a service; the Smart #3 alerted us that a service was due. We didn’t receive a suitable explanation of who programmed the car to demand a service at 12 months, and why. Nor did we receive an apology for our wasted time and costs.

I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding the ongoing delay and lack of communication concerning my mother’s Smart car repair.Following my previous complaint, Mazda Ashford confirmed that payment for the required part was received by your garage on 13 February 2026. At that time, we were informed that there were four of these parts available in the country, and that you would contact us to book the car in once the part had arrived.However, no further updates were provided. I called on 18 February 2026 to follow this up, only to be told the part had still not arrived but that we would be kept updated. Again, we heard nothing.I called once more on 2 March 2026, when I spoke with Matt, who assured me he would get back to us. As of today, I still have not received any update.Given that the part was paid for upfront and was reportedly available within the UK, I find it very difficult to understand why this delay has continued for weeks with no explanation. Even if the part was being sourced from abroad, such a prolonged delay—combined with no proactive communication—seems unreasonable.The lack of contact and clarity throughout this process has been extremely disappointing. We have repeatedly had to chase for information that should have been provided without prompting.I would appreciate an urgent update regarding:1.Whether the part has now been received2.If not, where it currently is and why there is such a delay3.A firm timescale for when the vehicle can be booked in and repairedI look forward to your prompt response so we can finally resolve this matter.

After having my vehicle serviced and mot I was not informed that it needed a front n/s brake caliper as the bleed nipple was broken. As the car is serviced by this dealership under a service contract and the fluid was replaced by you team I assume you're technicians broke this item as it was not mentioned in the previous service last year.Subsequently I have to pay for a new caliper as this is a factory order from Germany. Today I attended the dealership to have this part fitted at 8.am and at 11 am your service department tell me a rear caliper has been delivered. You have had this part in your dealership for 5 days and I have just wasted another day off work and now have to wait until the correct part arrives. Not only do you damage my vehicle and refuse to explain how this happened but you can't even check the correct part arrives. It seems that you don't care about your customers and after sales service is seriously lacking. Yet again another visit to sort out a problem.

I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding the recent handling of my mother’s Smart car, which was booked into your garage on 3rd February for investigation and repair.This booking was arranged through Mazda Ashford, as they were unable to undertake the work themselves and advised us that the diagnostic and repair would need to be carried out by your team. At no point during the booking process—either when Mazda liaised with you or when we delivered the car—were we informed that you would not accept the warranty supplied with the vehicle, nor that you were unable to invoice Mazda directly for any warranty-related work.Following your inspection, we were advised that the car required a radar sensor replacement and calibration. It was only after the vehicle had been with you for a full week that we were suddenly informed that the repair could be undertaken under the warranty, and that the full cost would need to be paid by us personally. This was entirely unexpected and contradicts what was agreed and confirmed in writing by Mazda, who advised us that the work is covered under the vehicle’s warranty and that they would pay for it directly.Throughout this process, we dealt with Jay on the service desk, who did not explain at the time of accepting the car that Mercedes/Smart has a strict policy preventing you from invoicing Mazda. We were only made aware of this policy today, when collecting the car, despite having repeatedly tried to clarify the warranty position over the past week. This lack of transparency has caused significant inconvenience, confusion, and delay.Furthermore, during today’s collection, the attitude and manner in which this information was delivered by Jay was rude, dismissive, and unprofessional, particularly given the circumstances and the amount of time the car had been with you without progress.We have now collected the vehicle, as the repair plan could not be agreed, and we are left no further forward with resolving the issue. This is deeply frustrating, particularly as my mother relies heavily on her car.I request that this complaint be formally acknowledged and escalated appropriately.I would also appreciate:An explanation as to why the warranty and invoicing policy was not communicated at the point of booking or vehicle handover.Confirmation of why Mazda were also not informed of this policy during their direct communication with you prior to the booking.An explanation for the unprofessional conduct experienced at the service desk today.I look forward to your prompt response and a clear explanation of how this situation will be addressed to prevent this from happening to other customers.

During a service and mot I received the video footage of the car health check and fluid change. At no time was I informed of the issue with the parking brake not functioning properly until it failed in the mot. I feel the service contract that I have with you should have picked up the issues before you sent the vehicle out for an mot , this used to be done in house with a viewing area seems that you are trying to find ways to fleece your customers .This was 8.30 am appointment and did not get any updates until the vehicle had failed its mot. Extremely poor excuse and service practice as the customer should be kept in informed of all and any issues

Polite, prompt and excellent customer service

The service team were excellent. Good communication, regular updates, and information and advice as required. Exceptional service from Jay, who made a difficult situation workable and maintained regular and inclusive communication.The loss of one star was as the result of an extremely unhelpful receptionist, who refused to listen or accept the needs of a customer. I think this would put me off using Maidstone again.

My wife was actually buying the car, albeit my name is on the paperwork, and she was happy throughout the process, and did not feel talked down to when asking her many question.

I was very impressed that a puncture with a slow leak was detected and repaired gratis. A little sad sad that the rear was not vacuumed but under the circumstances you still get a five 😊

Service was excellent from pick up to drop off