Bought my car from Audi a year ago and the salesman was fantastic and got me a really good deal etc but ever since they have been shocking. The aftercare from Audi has been absolutely terrible, I was told when I bought the car I had 1 years Audi warranty and I also paid for the body and alloy care too. Months after I paid for the service and MOT care plan. Used my first one in December and they gave me my car back in a worse condition then when I took it to them with damage to the bumper and rear wheel arch of the car. They tried to deny at first but I had evidence then as a “good will” they put it right, I then forgot about this issue. My warranty was supposed to cover me until march 28th and I had an issue with my aircon button on the car on the 23rd so I made a call to Audi and they said they can check it out but it will not be until may 22nd to which I said that’s not my problem you can’t make the appointment and they agreed and were happy to take a look at 9am on 22/05/2026, they then decide to call me on the 21/05/2026 at 16:14 to tell me that they can’t look at my car as it’s under RAC warranty and not Audi, when I bought my car I was told it was Audi warranty, the lady on the phone then admitted it was a “sales issue” so there for they should put it right I was told no. I am totally disappointed with the after care of Teesside audi to the point I will never use them again in the future for the purchase or the service of a car and I certainly would not recommend. My sales man told me at the time of buying my car they had problems in the past and were now committed to making there customers happy and stay there for life. This does not look to me as if they are heading in the right direction.

Tom was fantastic-friendly, straight to the point and without the fluff of an annoying car sales person

Dreadful utter waste of my timeSalesman tried to sell me lots of additional products before we even spoke about your car and my part exchangeThen offered me £2k less in part exchange when I kept asking him for the figureWould not recommend you to anyone

Dear Audi,I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding the handling of my vehicle registration and taxation following the purchase of my Audi, as well as the overall experience I have had with the vehicle and dealership since collection.Vehicle registration: **NV25 KVF**At the point of sale, I was informed that the dealership would arrange the vehicle tax and process the V5C registration documentation on my behalf. Steven Burn, who sold me the vehicle, specifically committed to me that the road tax would be set up using the same bank details as my car payment.However, it is now just over 3 and a half months later, and I still have not received the V5C logbook.On Saturday morning, my vehicle was clamped due to the vehicle apparently not being taxed correctly. As I did not have the V5C, I was unable to resolve or arrange the road tax myself. Following this incident, I spoke to Adil, the covering Sales Manager, who assisted in setting up the road tax and advised that the matter had then been handled accordingly.As a direct result of this issue, I was required to pay £100 to have the clamp removed. I will attach the receipt as evidence.Unfortunately, this is only the latest issue in what has been an extremely poor experience since purchasing the vehicle.When I first received the car, it arrived with damaged alloys and a damaged tyre. I was provided with a courtesy car whilst the repairs were being carried out. However, after being informed that my vehicle was ready for collection, I travelled from Sunderland to Middlesbrough only to arrive and find that the car was in fact not ready. This resulted in me being left without my vehicle for an additional week and caused further inconvenience and frustration.In addition, the service and communication from Steven Burn throughout this process has been extremely poor. Given the commitments made to me regarding the taxation of the vehicle, I am extremely disappointed that this situation has occurred at all.Overall, my experience with Audi and the dealership has been terrible from start to finish. The repeated issues, poor communication, and lack of proper handling have caused significant stress, inconvenience, wasted time, and additional expense. If I had the option to hand the car back, I genuinely would.I request that the dealership urgently:1. Resolves the missing V5C issue immediately2. Reimburses the £100 clamp removal fee and any other costs incurred as a direct result of this failure3. Provides a formal explanation as to why this matter has remained unresolved for just over 3 and a half months4. Reviews the overall handling of my case and provides an appropriate resolution in light of the ongoing issues I have experienced since purchasing the vehiclePlease treat this as a formal complaint. If this matter is not resolved promptly, I will escalate it to Audi UK and The Motor Ombudsman.I would appreciate a response within 7 days.Kind Regards,Sophie AndrewsVehicle Registration: **NV25 KVF**07401621051

They offered me a ridiculously low figure for my 8 month old carI test drove an A3 which was fine & Bilall the salesman was excellent but such a low figure for trade in means I will definitely be going elsewhere for my next car.

I was very happy with the service I received from Andy and thought I got a good deal when trading in my car, he went through everything with me and explained some of the issues I had with the new car, all in all I would recommend Teeside Audi to anyone.

I am formally complaining about Audi Teesside’s handling of an unresolved fault with my Audi Q5, purchased new in May 2025 on a PCP agreement.The vehicle developed significant faults around November 2025, including a defective fuel gauge and intermittent heating fault. I first contacted Audi in January 2026 and the vehicle was inspected on 13 February 2026. I was subsequently advised the issue could not currently be repaired because the required software fix does not yet exist. I am left with an unsafe vehicle.Since then, despite months of delay and repeated chasing from me:no repair has been completed,no courtesy car has been provided,no settlement figures have been issued,and no clear resolution has been communicated.I commute approximately 500 miles per week and repeatedly explained I do not feel comfortable driving a vehicle with a known unresolved fault. Despite this, Audi has left me continuing to drive the car with no meaningful support offered.I requested termination of the PCP agreement due to the unresolved faults and total loss of confidence in the vehicle. Audi then advised further diagnostics were needed before progressing matters, however no arrangements or next steps have subsequently been actioned.I consider this a breach of my rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The vehicle is not of satisfactory quality, not fit for purpose and Audi has failed to resolve the matter within a reasonable timeframe.I require urgent Head Office intervention to bring this matter to a fair conclusion.I do not want multiple contact points as I have a very demanding job meaning I have limited availability to respond to phone calls during office hours. Audi Teesside are well aware of my complaint. I want progress and resolution.

Vehicles I looked at were in a poor state of cleanliness and generally did not give us confidence to purchase

I sent a autotrader message. No reply for ages. I rang and never got a call back, rang again about 10 times nobody even answered the phone

6 May 2026The Complaints ManagerLookers Motor Group LimitedLookers House, 1st FloorLookers Stoke, Bede RoadST4 4GUFor the attention of: The Group Customer Relations / Complaints TeamYour Reference: GBR00468A / Teesside Audi / KN67 NKDVehicle Registration: KN67 NKDVIN: WAUZZZF86JN005879Initial Complaint Date: 22 April 2026 (to Lookers Group customer services)Follow-up Reminder: 28 April 2026 — no response received to either communicationVehicle Off Road Since: March 2026 — now exceeding 6 weeksRe: Second and Escalated Formal Complaint — Teesside Audi (GBR00468A) — Systemic Vehicle Defect, Misdiagnosis, Withheld Diagnostic Data, and Active Notice of Section 75 Claims — Demand for Resolution by 14 May 2026Dear Sir or Madam,I write to submit a second and formally escalated group-level complaint against Teesside Audi (Brooklime Avenue, Stockton-on-Tees, TS18 3UR — dealer reference GBR00468A), a trading subsidiary of Lookers Motor Group Limited, in respect of a series of serious failures relating to the diagnosis, repair, and data handling of my vehicle — an Audi A8 Saloon L 55 TFSI Quattro, registration KN67 NKD, VIN WAUZZZF86JN005879.This escalation is driven by two distinct failures, which I address in turn.1. Lookers Motor Group Has Not Responded to Formal Complaints of 22 April and 28 April 2026On 22 April 2026, I submitted a comprehensive formal complaint directly to Lookers Motor Group's customer services email address (customerservices@lookers.co.uk). That complaint set out in full the systemic defect history, the misdiagnosis in October 2024, the pattern of three acute failures, the withheld diagnostic data, and the absence of a courtesy vehicle. It was accompanied by a detailed Technical Reference Document and a four-part evidential appendix bundle.On 28 April 2026, I sent a written follow-up reminder to vehiclecomplaints@lookers.co.uk, reiterating the complaint and noting that the vehicle remained off the road with no resolution in sight.As of the date of this letter — 5 May 2026 — Lookers Motor Group has provided no response of any kind to either communication. No acknowledgement of receipt, no interim holding reply, and no indication of when a substantive response will follow.Lookers Motor Group has not responded to a formal complaint submitted on 22 April 2026.A written reminder on 28 April 2026 has also received no response.Thirteen days of complete silence from the group on a matter involving a vehicle that has been off the road for over six weeks is not acceptable.This group-level failure to engage is the primary driver of this escalation.2. Teesside Audi Has Engaged Patchily But Is Not Progressing the MatterIn contrast to the complete absence of any response from Lookers Group itself, Teesside Audi has provided some responses — but these have been inadequate, incomplete, and have not resulted in any meaningful progress. Specifically:• Teesside Audi has communicated with Audi UK regarding the current proposed repair (BSG replacement at 50% customer cost). However, the basis for this recommendation has not been provided to me in writing, and the required diagnostic documentation has not been disclosed.• Teesside Audi has not provided the ODIS diagnostic report from the October 18, 2024 sessions — despite this covering 10 hours of charged diagnostic labour and being formally requested on multiple occasions since 30 March 2026. This is a subject of a DSAR request to your GDPR team.• Teesside Audi has not provided the May 2023 BSG replacement invoice, which would confirm the part number actually fitted.• Teesside Audi has not provided a written root cause analysis explaining why the vehicle has stalled on three separate occasions following prolonged motorway drives.• Teesside Audi has not provided a confirmed repair timeline or a courtesy vehicle, despite the vehicle having been off the road for over six weeks.• Teesside Audi did not provide a complaints policy despite more than one request to the after-sales manager.The withholding of the October 18, 2024 diagnostic report is the central bottleneck. Rather than releasing this data directly — as it should have done the moment I first requested it — Teesside Audi allowed the matter to escalate to the point where a formal Subject Access Request under UK GDPR was required. That SAR has now been passed to the Lookers Group's own data protection team, who have requested a further 7-day extension to produce the data.The withheld October 18, 2024 ODIS diagnostic report is the specific reason I cannot authorise the proposed repair.I cannot agree to contribute 50% of a repair cost without understanding what the full diagnosis shows across all sessions — including the sessions for which 10 hours of labour was charged.The current deadlock over repair authorisation is a direct consequence of Teesside Audi's failure to provide information that belongs to me. It is not a failure of engagement on my part.Lookers Group, as the responsible corporate parent, must now intervene to unblock this.3. Background — The Systemic Defect and Three FailuresMy vehicle is fitted with a 48V Mild Hybrid Electrical System incorporating a Belt Starter Generator (BSG), part number 4N0-903-028. Audi has formally acknowledged — through Technical Service Bulletins, Service Campaign 27BQ (April 2024), a 7-year extended warranty, and a US class action settlement covering 169,000 vehicles (Steinhardt v. Volkswagen Group of America, final court approval October 8, 2024) — that this component is defective by design. The revised replacement part is 4N1-903-028.The vehicle has suffered three acute electrical failures, all following prolonged motorway drives and all producing the same pattern of fault codes:Date Event Key IssueMay 2023 First stall — Looe, Cornwall BSG replaced with defective part 4N0-903-028. Invoice withheld. Paid by Barclaycard Visa.October 3, 2024 Child lock visit — electrical fault discovered BSG/converter codes (P0A9400, P0E5600) recorded. Dealership recommends 12V battery.October 18, 2024 Second stall — A66/A19 dual carriageway 10 hrs diagnostic labour charged. Report withheld — now with Lookers Group DPO. Recommendation changed to 48V battery. Paid by Capital One Mastercard.November 2024 48V battery replaced BSG — the root cause — NOT replaced. Vehicle off road 3+ weeks. No courtesy vehicle.March 2026 Third stall — A66 dual carriageway Police attended and escorted. Identical fault codes return in replacement battery. Vehicle off road 6+ weeks.22 April 2026 Formal complaint to Lookers Group No response received.28 April 2026 Follow-up reminder to Lookers Group No response received.5 May 2026 This letter Second escalation — firm deadline imposed. Section 75 notice given.4. Substantive Complaints Against Teesside Audi4.1 Incorrect Repair — October 2024The October 3, 2024 diagnostic report — produced before the October 18 stall — already recorded fault codes P0A9400 and P0E5600. These are upstream codes generated at the BSG output stage. They cannot be caused by a failing battery. They indicate the BSG was failing to deliver adequate voltage. Replacing the 48V battery while leaving the defective BSG in place addressed the symptom and left the root cause unresolved. This is precisely why the March 2026 failure reproduced identical fault codes in the replacement battery.Additionally, Audi TSB 2067906 states the 48V battery must only be replaced if its State of Charge is below 5% or if the ODIS GFF test plan specifically directs it. No evidence of compliance with either condition has been provided.4.2 Missed Warranty EntitlementThe BSG replaced in May 2023 carried a two-year parts and labour warranty valid until at least May 2025. The October 18, 2024 stall fell within that warranty period. A correct diagnosis at that visit — identifying the BSG as the failing component — would have resulted in a free BSG replacement. The misdiagnosis directly removed this entitlement and caused a direct financial loss.4.3 Campaign 27BQ Not AppliedService Campaign 27BQ, launched by Audi in April 2024, mandated proactive replacement of the defective BSG part (4N0-903-028) with the revised design (4N1-903-028). This campaign was available six months before the October 18 stall. Vehicle KN67 NKD was not contacted, assessed, or offered BSG replacement under this campaign. Had it been, the October 2024 and March 2026 failures would not have occurred.4.4 Defective Part Used in May 2023 RepairThe BSG replacement in May 2023 almost certainly used the same defective design (4N0-903-028) that Audi subsequently declared defective under Campaign 27BQ. The revised part was not available until April 2024. The May 2023 invoice — which would confirm the part number fitted — has been withheld.4.5 Withholding of Diagnostic Data and Its ConsequencesTeesside Audi has failed to provide the October 18, 2024 ODIS diagnostic report despite: my initial request on 30 March 2026; at least five follow-up reminders; and a formal Subject Access Request submitted under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. The matter has been passed to the Lookers Group DPO, who has requested a further extension. The May 2023 repair invoice has also not been provided.This is not a minor administrative delay. The withheld October 18, 2024 report covers 10 hours of charged diagnostic labour and is the specific document that would confirm whether the BSG was properly assessed before the battery replacement was approved. Without it, I cannot verify whether the current proposed repair is correct or whether the 50% contribution being sought is justified. The withholding of this data has directly caused the current repair deadlock.4.6 No Courtesy VehicleNo courtesy vehicle has been provided during the current repair period, despite the vehicle having been off the road for over six weeks and despite this being specifically requested in my complaint of 22 April 2026. This request has received no substantive response.5. Active Notice of Section 75 Claims — Consumer Credit Act 1974I hereby give formal notice that Section 75 claims under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 are being actively prepared in respect of two repair transactions paid by credit card at Teesside Audi. As a trading subsidiary of Lookers Motor Group Limited, Teesside Audi's acts and omissions engage the corporate responsibility of Lookers Group. Lookers Motor Group will be named as the responsible supplier in both claims.5.1 May 2023 — Barclaycard VisaCreditor: Barclaycard Visa. Supplier: Teesside Audi / Lookers Motor Group Limited.The May 2023 BSG replacement was paid by Barclaycard Visa. The claim is founded on misrepresentation — the repair was presented as appropriate and durable — and breach of contract under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (services not carried out with reasonable care and skill; goods not of satisfactory quality). The part fitted (4N0-903-028) was the defective design subsequently declared defective by Audi. The repair was not durable — the vehicle failed again from the same root cause. The invoice confirming the part number has been withheld, and its disclosure is itself a requirement of this complaint.5.2 October/November 2024 — Capital One Platinum MastercardCreditor: Capital One Platinum Mastercard. Supplier: Teesside Audi / Lookers Motor Group Limited.The October/November 2024 48V battery replacement was paid by Capital One Platinum Mastercard. The claim is founded on misrepresentation — the battery replacement was presented as the correct repair — and breach of contract (services not carried out with reasonable care and skill). The October 3 diagnostic codes already pointed upstream at the BSG. The battery was replaced when, on the available evidence, the BSG was the failing component. The Mastercard chargeback scheme is also available as a parallel route.Resolution of this complaint by Lookers Motor Group remains Dr. Jesuraj's strongly preferred outcome.However, both Section 75 claims will be formally submitted to Barclaycard and Capital One unless and until a satisfactory resolution is achieved.Both card issuers will receive a copy of this letter and the accompanying Dealer Accountability and Diagnostic Failure Report as supporting evidence.Lookers Motor Group, as the corporate parent of Teesside Audi, will be named as the responsible supplier in both claims.6. What I Require from Lookers Motor GroupI require Lookers Motor Group to address the following by no later than 14 May 2026:1. Provide a formal written acknowledgement of this group-level complaint within 3 working days, explaining why my communications of 22 April and 28 April 2026 received no response.2. Direct the Lookers Group DPO to release without further delay: (a) the October 18, 2024 ODIS diagnostic report and all associated diagnostic session data; and (b) the May 2023 BSG replacement invoice including the part number fitted.3. Provide a written root cause analysis confirming the BSG as the cause of all three failure events, based on the full diagnostic record.4. Confirm in writing whether the 50% customer contribution towards the current BSG replacement is being waived, and on what warranty basis the repair will be carried out.5. Confirm whether vehicle KN67 NKD was assessed under Service Campaign 27BQ, and if not, provide the reason.6. Arrange a confirmed repair completion date and provide a suitable courtesy vehicle for the remainder of the repair period.7. Confirm Lookers Group's position on the two Section 75 claims described in Section 5, and whether Lookers Group intends to resolve these matters without involvement of the respective card issuers.7. Formal Deadline and Consequences of Non-ResponseMy vehicle has been off the road for over six weeks. I am a Consultant Urological Surgeon, and the absence of a reliable vehicle during a period of intensive professional clinical activity has caused me significant inconvenience and disruption. My complaint to Lookers Group has gone entirely unanswered. Teesside Audi's patchy and incomplete engagement has produced no resolution.If a satisfactory written response is not received by 14 May 2026, I will without further notice:(1) Submit Section 75 claims to Barclaycard Visa and Capital One Platinum Mastercard, naming Teesside Audi / Lookers Motor Group as the supplier;(2) Refer this matter to the Motor Ombudsman;(3) Submit a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner's Office regarding the prolonged withholding of diagnostic data;(4) Pursue all available remedies under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, including price reduction and/or rejection;(5) Escalate this matter as a formal vehicle safety complaint to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA).8. Schedule of Remedies Sought• Reimbursement of the May 2023 BSG replacement cost — the part fitted was the defective 4N0-903-028 design. Invoice withheld and to be fully particularised upon disclosure.• Reimbursement of the October 2024 48V battery replacement cost — this was an incorrect repair. The BSG was the failing component. The BSG was within its two-year warranty and should have been replaced at no cost.• Reimbursement of the missed warranty entitlement — the October 18, 2024 stall fell within the May 2023 BSG's two-year warranty. Correct diagnosis would have resulted in a free repair. This entitlement was lost due to misdiagnosis.• Full coverage of the current BSG replacement cost — the 10-year BSG warranty (Steinhardt v. VWGoA, October 2024) applies to this vehicle to 5 February 2028. No 50% customer contribution is appropriate.• Compensation for consequential losses — vehicle downtime, alternative transport, and professional disruption across all three failure events.• Formal written confirmation that the 10-year BSG warranty is applied to vehicle KN67 NKD.I trust that Lookers Motor Group will now engage with this matter at group level with the seriousness and urgency it warrants.Yours faithfully,Dr. Manohar Jesuraj