Unfortunately, I might be at brick wall here then. I'm not earning enough to cover food and bills at present and have no credit remaining. In the meantime, I have continued to follow up the complaint to BMW/Mini directly have finally found and sent the V5C which will hopefully expedite their response, received a further response from the main dealer problem garage who are refusing to accept the evidence I've provided (as the other garage is not an authorised Mini aftersales centre - ridiculous), they have offered a further 2 hour diagnostic (as a 'goodwill' gesture). I am yet to book it in, as I don't trust that they will diagnose, repair nor accept any problem given their attitude up until now.

Part of the problem in resolving this is that the garage who have confirmed the problems with the car cannot confirm the precise problem. It seems the only conclusive way of proving the problems were caused by the chain work is for them to redo the entire job, which I can't afford (it's c. 2 days of labour, at a cost of around £2k). I'm very surprised that a huge national dealership such as Sytner have reacted in this way. The garage where the car currently is is a mere 5 miles away, and is the top recommended garage in the region for my brand of car (so they have a very good reputation), so I'm also a bit disappointed that they haven't confirmed the exact problem. As Sytner have offered 2 hours of 'goodwill' labour to diagnose a problem, even if they did discover what they did wrong, I can't say I trust their mechanics to rectify it. I've seen photos of the state of the car when the cam cover wasn't replaced properly, and I cannot see how they failed to spot this on the previous returns to them. So, where I am now - they can't provide evidence of diagnostics carried out (staff leaving the company/jobcards not being compulsory); they're saying I haven't provided evidence of poor work on their part (untrue, even if I haven't supposedly given proof of their work causing the poor performance of the car, I've certainly provided proof of the work not being carried out with due care); they're saying my only options are to return the car to them for 2 hours of diagnostics or use the National Conciliation service. On a side note, I'm still waiting for them to address the data protection/SAR response issues separately (that's gone to their UK offices). That team asked me to provide a photocopy of pages 2 and 3 of my V5C. When I asked why they needed this at this point when I've not been asked to provide ID at any point previously, I had this response: "BMW UK have a legitimate interest in obtaining information from your V5C to ensure we’re speaking to the correct person – it forms part of our Data Protection (GDPR) checks. In requesting a copy of your V5C your data will be kept on your file, which isn’t accessible to anyone outside of the company. We have strict policies in place when it comes to Data Protection, to ensure all customer information is stored in a secure environment. Without being presented with the document, we’re restricted on the information we’re able to provide our customers. Once we’ve received this, I’ll be in a better position to help you."

I didn't expect it to get to this stage. I've received another reply from Sytner saying that they don't raise jobcards for all visits, so have no data on some of the work done on the car as some people have left the business. They have no record of when it was first returned as they don't store data on diagnostic visits (again, employees have left the business), and despite me having audio recordings (SAR) of the phonecalls I made to Sytner, as this is a centralised call centre the information wasn't necessarily passed to Sytner. I attached evidence of a major oil leak definitely caused by Sytner's failure, and the managed studiously failed to address this in the email, but instead stated that I had not provided any evidence of poor workmanship. Does this belligerence suggest that Sytner believes they have no case to answer? Or are they just bullishly trying to deter me from further action. The manager has informed me that I have two choices at this point: that I return it to Sytner where they will offer 2 hours of free diagnosis time ('goodwill'), and if they find any problems caused by them they will repair free of charge, otherwise they will quote for repairs. Or apparently I can refer the case to the National Conciliation Service, despite the managed not being able to see "any evidence provided that Sytner have completed work at an unacceptable standard" Do I now need to return it to them as they've offered to examine the car (again) before proceeding with any claim? Also, as I paid partially with credit card, should I raise a Section 75 claim? I'm losing a lot of work due to lack of transport and can't afford to buy another vehicle, so I'm trapped in a spiral.

What would I include in my letter of claim? Is this the claim that BankFodder mentioned in post #27? At this point I'm still in a position whereby the main dealer does not acknowledge that there is anything wrong with the vehicle, I imagine they would dispute any claim. I'm happy to follow any advice at this point though. The dealership have partially responded to my email sent last week. The dealership manager stated that they require 14 days (specifically that they will respond by 25th December) to my specific complaints regarding work carried out on the vehicle. I had suggested that they contact the second garage for further evidence/information on the poor work (the garage suggested this) if needed, but as far as I'm aware they've yet to do this. Today I've also received a response From the UK complaints department of this dealership regarding my SAR complaint. They're trying to claim that my original SAR (sent using the template from this site) requested information on the vehicle, which is why they didn't response. This is patently untrue of course, I've replied to them stating this. They also state that the GDPR breach in the email (the other customers' details sent to me) was redacted, so presented no risk. It was however me who redacted the information when I sent it to them as evidence (and I stated this in the initial email), so I've clarified that point to. Is it usual for huge international companies such as this to be so inept? (BMW Customer Services is overseeing this complaint it seems, as they own Mini).

I've sent a final email to the garage now saying I'll be involving the ICO and Motor Ombudsman if I don't receive a response. I've yet again outlined the timeframe, the evidence that they've failed to repair the car correctly, the garage it's currently at have agreed to confirm all of this if requested by the main dealer, and enclosed info from the SAR that prove they've sent me someone else's details (I've redacted the details though to avoid further GDPR breach risk). They've asked for 14 days to response. Meanwhile, I'm still without a car, still paying for insurance, have lost several hundred pounds in work the past few weeks that I've been unable to do with no car, and have no finances to buy a replacement car. Things aren't looking good.

Just bumping this thread once more in case there's any further advice. I'm losing work now due to being self-employed (I'd usually be very busy over the Christmas season) and living in an area where public transport isn't always available, so the situation is deteriorating fast.

I finally received a response to the SAR on 9th November (I received an automated email from Sytner's online portal). The response refers to my SAR "received on 20th October", which is after I emailed the dealership manager to complain that my SAR hadn't been fulfilled. @BankFodder you mentioned 'cascading rules' previously, suggesting that my template SAR should have been forwarded, whereas Sytner MINI maintained that as they directed me to complete a request via their online portal, that was an adequate response. What are these cascading rules? And are they right to claim that my SAR letter wasn't a valid request? I've received all voice recordings and emails communications between myself and Sytner. In amongst the email data was a rogue email referring to another customer (with a similar name), which includes their email, mobile number, details about the car they wanted to part-exchange and the car they were interested in purchasing from email. I'm assuming this is a GDPR breach (and further proof of their incompetence). What should I do about this? With regards to my car, the garage it's currently at are still yet to discover what's caused the problem and can only recommend replacing component parts until the car responds. I'm now at a situation where I'd have to spend another £1500 (on top of the c.£5k already spent, on a car with a book price of under £3k) and even then not be guaranteed that the car would work. Also, bearing in mind that this is a car that passed an MOT with no advisories and was working perfectly (aside from needing chains replacing) until it was taken to Sytner Mini. As this is affecting my health now, I'm almost at the end of road. If I knew that this fight would at least compensate me for money spent it would feel more hopeful, but as the car has still not been definitely diagnosed I don't know what to do.

No reply from Sytner still, and no SAR response so I’ll be filing a complaint separately with the ICO regarding this. It has been suggested in conversation with someone I know that the independent report on the car must be carried out by a court-approved specialist/expert (there are links on the Motor Ombudsman website for these). The remedial work on the vehicle is booked in on Monday, and as the engine needs to be effectively dismantled to show conclusive proof that this work was carried out incorrectly, I don’t see how one of these independent assessors (there are only 3 in the whole of Wales according to the Institute of Automative Engineering Assessors) is able to carry out this inspection? If I have to proceed to the small claims court to get my costs reimbursed for this, will it really invalidate my case if I don’t get this very specific inspection?

I only have written comms with Sytner since Sep 15th now - it was in an email reply that the service manager said that they didn’t deal with SARs. I have this from the garage (the invoice containing detail of the work) in addition to many other pages of supporting evidence (detailed test results etc). Would this suffice as a report?Inspection invoice.pdf

I’ll email the garage this evening to request a more cohesive report. They’ve been extremely helpful so far so I hope they’ll be amenable to this. I sent the SAR request (it’s in the timeline) but the service manager replied saying I should send it via the main Sytner website, whereas the Sytner website says to send it to the dealer. I suspect I should add to the end of the letter that the date I submitted the SAR to them stands, and that I expect a response in the allowed time? I could arrange use of my partner’s car tomorrow (if I take him to work, which of course is resulting in additional miles on his car so I’ll make a note of this and add it to the list), so would be able to hand-deliver a letter to the manager

Thank you. I’ll remove the mention of the Ombudsman based on what you’ve said, as it does sound as if it won’t help at all. The report I have is in the form of screengrabs of scope readings, written comments, photos and in a ‘work needed’ web link. Should I ask the garage to give it to me in a more concise version or will it do as is? Should I send this letter by post/hand delivered with receipt or would email suffice? I have the email of the service manager (unless this one has left too like the previous one), and could try to call them to see if they would provide the dealership manager’s email. Is it also worth reinforcing to them that the longer I wait to book the car in for repair work, the more the hire car chargers (which they will be reimbursing)?

Sytner Mini Letter.pdf First draft of letter here (not yet sent). Is this too long/correct? I haven't yet instructed my garage to start work on the repairs as I just wanted to confirm here that I should be doing this, and as I'm not actually able to pay for this work at the moment need to seek help from my parents (to further complicate issues, one of my parents is currently undergoing cancer treatment and has today gone into hospital for heart problem diagnoses, so the stress of this situation is seriously affecting not just me). I'm also not able to afford to pay for a hire car, largely due to the cost of the initial repair taking up my credit card balance.

The inspection work today to confirm the faults came to around £300, and I’m awaiting confirmation of the cost of remedial work (but it’s estimated to be around the £1k mark at least). I shall inform the inspection garage not to contact Sytner tomorrow. I’m likely to need to hire a car in order to get to work given that mine is not really drivable now the error has been identified. Should I give the inspection garage to go-ahead to proceed with repairs at this point? The oil leak would be resolved at the same time as the timing correction.

Today I had the results of the tests carried out on my car, and there is now conclusive proof that the chain was installed incorrectly. It also appears that there is a very obvious oil leak caused by this work which would be very apparent (suggesting that the car wasn’t properly inspected at least on the last occasion it was returned to the dealer). I’m not sure what steps to take now? The garage has offered to contact the dealership on my behalf to forward the report and discuss options but is this the best way forward?

Just to clarify - you mean an additional inspection (aside from the one I've booked in early October?). I experienced problems in finding a mechanic willing to carry out the chain work initially as it's a huge job, requires special tools (hence being very limited with local options). I have excellent paperwork from my usual garage typifying the kind of report I'd expect - usually when taking it in I receive a link to view either photos of problematic parts, or a video of the inspection with commentary, and also a link to detailed report on what parts of the engine were checked, whether visually, electronically or mechanically etc, name of mechanic etc., along with estimated cost of repair. Luckily I have the full service history for my vehicle (with receipts, garage printouts), hence being surprised at only having received an invoice and a cursory visual checklist from Sytner.

I've sent the SAR today, I've booked the car in at the local Mini specialist (my usual garage), but the earliest date they had wasn't until early October. From information gleaned from the usual garage (and also from my brother who is a mechanic but doesn't live locally so is unable to see the car), it's suspected that Sytner have made an error somewhere when replacing the chain/clutch. I've also been told that the only way to check the timing was done correctly is by removing the engine cylinder head (which in itself is 3+ hours of labour). My issue, in a nutshell, is that when my car arrived at Sytner it was driving as a Mini Cooper 1.6D (110bhp) should, with consumer average mpg, and the only 'problem' was the timing chain needing replacing. Since collecting the car, it is significantly under-powered and over-mpg'd and Sytner have failed to even recognise this let alone rectify it. I am now left with a car which I effectively cannot afford to drive (the chain/clutch work cost £3,300), nor can I sell it when it's driving as it is. I'm also concerned about driving it for the next couple of weeks until the garage appointment. I cannot work without a car, so have no option but to do so.

TIMELINE Friday 21st July - Annual service and MOT carried out at usual garage (Mini specialists). Car passed with no advisories, garage noticed engine rattle and advised the timing chain was likely needing replacing. I asked if I could leave the car with them until I had arranged an appointment to get this work done. Monday 31st July - collected car from garage, drove directly to Sytner Mini (c.5 miles away) where I had booked it in for a timing chain inspection. I noticed no difference in the car's driving during this short journey. Sytner confirmed the chain had stretched, and said they could start the work on Wednesday of that week, with the car being ready for collection at the end of the week. I therefore left the car with them. Friday 11th August - collected car from Sytner, after they had replaced all 3 chains and clutch, was told there were no issues and the car was 'running beautifully'. On driving, immediately noticed lack of power/acceleration capabilities, and low MPG. After c.20-mile drive home (mostly 60mph+ roads), mpg was 37mpg (car would previously have returned at least 57mpg on a similar journey). Also noticed gear shifting was different (now needed at lower speeds), car struggled to move off on inclines and lacks acceleration especially from stationary. Saturday 12th August - phoned Sytner to discuss problems, told that the service desk was busy and they'd call back. No-one called back. Monday 14th August - took car into Sytner who kept it for the day. Was told that there were no problems when I collected it, advised that the car 'needed to learn my driving style' again after major engine work and was told to bring it back if the issues still presented after a month. (I was given no paperwork confirming checks/diagnostics carried out, just informed it was 'checked and test-driven') Tuesday 12th September (PM) - returned car to Sytner after finding no improvement after c.1000 miles driven (with an average mpg of 40). They agreed to run tests again. Thursday 14th September (AM) - collected car from Sytner who said they'd discovered a blocked sensor which was preventing the 'turbo from spooling'. They had replaced this free of charge 'as a goodwill gesture'. Informed that the branch manager insisted he had never known a car like mine to reach over 50mpg (despite Mini's published top mpg being between 65mpg and 72mpg, and 'Honest John' website listing user average as a reported 54mpg). Told that it had been taken on a 25-mile test-drive that day and was now returning 50mpg. I was given no paperwork again, so requested that full details of checks and diagnostics be emailed to me. Friday 15th September (AM) - contacted Sytner via website to request diagnostic data. At 6pm I received an attachment via email on headed paper stating: Saturday 16th September - replied to email from Sytner requesting further information regarding diagnostics (giving examples such as codes read, component parts checked, any other readings etc., and names of testers). Wednesday 20th September - emailed SAR to Sytner (using email address of advisor who'd previously sent information, and CC'ing generic Sytner email as listed on garage's complaints page).

Thank you for your reply. I asked for the full breakdown of work when collecting the car last after being surprised when they offered me nothing bar a sheet of paper with a standard list of visual checks carried out. I was assured this would be emailed that day, but when it didn't arrive I contacted them the following day to remind them. I eventually received an email containing no detail (as previously mentioned) that afternoon - last Friday. I replied requested more detail and specifying examples (eg code-reading, what component parts were checked, who carried out the checks etc), and still await a reply. I haven't yet informed them that the car is still not restored as they insisted it was fine when I collected. The only other main dealers nearby (as in within 1.5 hours travelling) are also Sytner, so I don't trust that they would be independent. The garage I've booked it in with is a Mini specialist (they only do Minis) and are generally considered the go-to garage for repairs within a 50-mile radius. However, I see that Sytner will likely not consider them as 'independent', so what should I do? My plan initially was to wait for their detailed report before contacting them. It has been suggested by others who know this engine that the only way they could check the timing was done correctly is by removing the cylinder head cover, so if this wasn't done, they haven't checked their work. On the last occasion I took it in, the manager apparently had told the service desk that he had never heard of my model having returned over 50mpg, which is laughable and concerning. I'm sure you can see why I have no faith in Sytner on this. If my regular garage carried out the inspection (and if they video'd it too for evidence), would this really not be considered as independent enough?

It’s Sytner Mini https://www.sytner.co.uk/mini

Hi After an annual service on my car (2010 plate, lower than average mileage, full service history, regularly maintained and with no advisories on it's recent MOT) at my regular garage (non-dealership, but a specialist for my brand of car), I was informed that they suspected the timing chain was stretched. As I have the infamous N47 BMW engine, this is an expensive job, so I had to seek financial assistance from my parents. My parents agreed to loan half of the money, on condition I took it to a main dealer to get the work done as they felt this was the best course of action for the work to be done properly (and for increasing resale value of the car if needed). I drove my car from my usual garage to the nearby main dealer (c.5 miles), and it was driving perfectly well (the only symptoms of chain failure are a 'rattle', which is only really noticeable when standing near the open bonnet on starting). As the chains can only be accessed by effectively removing the whole engine, labour costs are especially high, so the bill was in excess of £3k (clutch was also replaced at the time). On collecting the car, I immediately noticed a drastic reduction in mpg - down to 37mpg from the 55+mpg I was getting previously. Also a distinct lack of power, especially noticeable on pulling off from stationary. The gear shifting is also now required at lower speeds, and it struggles badly with hill starts, and can barely accelerate at all on inclines (especially from stationary). It's a 1.6D engine with (previously) 110bhp. Car was collected on the Friday, I called the garage on the Saturday explaining the issue and was told someone would call me back. As no-one did, I returned the car first thing on Monday morning. At the end of the day, I collected the vehicle and was told there was 'nothing wrong' with it - they'd inspected it and driven it, and it was fine, but apparently the car 'takes time to relearn' how to drive as it previously had? I was advised to drive it normally for a month and return again if I felt the issue was still present. 1 month (and 1k miles) later, I returned it explaining the same issues were present. Again, they kept it in for over a day this time, and on collecting said they'd discovered a 'clogged sensor' which was preventing the turbo from spooling. They replaced this as a 'goodwill gesture' and insisted the car was now returning 50mpg after a 25-mile test-drive that morning. After driving it away, and now having spent a week with it, it's still only returning 40mpg, and all other issues regarding power/gearing/hill-starts are still present. I also asked the garage for a full breakdown of work carried out on the 2 days they had the car, and am still waiting (I have been sent a short paragraph on headed paper which just says they 'inspected' the vehicle, changed the sensor, and then found no issue). I have now contacted my regular garage and sought their assistance. They've said the only way they can check the work done by the dealer has been carried out correctly is by removing some engine parts, which means a bill of around £300. I've booked it in with them, and asked them to run a full diagnostic on what could be the issue with this car. I haven't yet told the dealership that I've booked it in, as I'm still waiting for them to send me a breakdown of the work they've done on supposedly identifying and rectifying the issue. I paid half of the £3k bill on my own credit card, the other half from my debit card. Is there anything I should've done differently? How is best to proceed from this point? Of course there's no guarantee that my regular garage will discover poor work, but given that they had literally just completed a service on the car and no issues presented themself until after collecting the car from the main dealer post-chain-work, it's one heck of a coincidence. Many thanks for your assistance.

RESOLVED We returned the car yesterday evening, and had a full refund via BACS. The dealer wasn't thrilled, naturally, and tried hard to get us to keep the car, saying that it was 'just a sensor' to fix the engine (he didn't inspect it, and seasoned Mini mechanics have said it's definitely not just a sensor) and also that he'd ordered a replacement windscreen that would fix the heated windscreen, automatic lights and rain-sensing wipers (possible). We refused this of course. Despite my having quoted the relevant consumer legistlation, the dealer insisted that he had no obligation whatsoever to refund, and that the legislation I quoted only covered distance-selling/delivered cars (again, very odd for him to try this). So, he was 'providing a full refund as a goodwill gesture'. We bit our tongues. I've suspended my insurance for the moment (with an aim to transfer it to the replacement vehicle if one is found before the end of the fee-free 14-day cancellation period), and cancelled the tax. So, I guess the only financial 'hit' I've taken is one month of VED (c.£11). The return trip to Bristol also included shopping/eating out so it wasn't a total waste of time I'm viewing a replacement car tomorrow and will be paying the deposit using a credit card! I realise that we could have fought for them to deliver/compensation for tax etc, but as I'm also going through an employment tribunal at the moment, I'm trying to keep stress to a minimum. Thank you all for your assistance, it was invaluable.

As stated earlier, the original method of payment was part-cash, part-BACS and the seller now says he's 'lost the code to the safe' so can only give us the BACS refund today and we would have to return tomorrow for the cash part of the refund. The seller suggested that he was obliged to refund via the original method of payment (despite being happy in principle to refund in full via BACS), but the legislation I quoted above suggests that the buyer can agree to a different method.

Ah, I thought the Consumer Contracts legislation would be regarding online purchases, or contracts involving payments over a period of months, and the CRA was on purchases made in one go. If I'm wrong, great, as that clause quoted above is exactly what I need!

Just realised that that probably isn't the correct legistlation, as this wasn't a 'contract'.

Think I've found it: The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013