BMW Warranty Changes

PPP/PPPP cheers for your efforts. Had downloaded the text from BM3W and intend to send it shortly.

"I acknowledge your request that I should respond to your email personally." Pull the other one!!! That reply is exactly the same reply as I received from a customer services manager. Perhaps they're so in tune with themselves that their replies are identical without even knowing it.

Robstar wrote :- If only it were that easy. For an E39 M5 the vast majority of companies won't cover the VANOS, for instance. You need a tailor made policy which people are trying to organise, but progress is very slow. Most 3rd party warranties aren't worth the paper they're written on.

I didnt say it was easy did i, i simply said that you can get your own warranty to suit what you want covering, obviously it is going to take time to find the right one and they are out there, as for third party warranties i wouldnt say all off them are not worth the paper they are written on, as one i had quite a few years ago coverd my engine replacement and ecu on a Peugeout 406, like i said you have to shop around, but as i dont deal with stealers and finance as they are the biggest rip off going, then it dont apply to me anyhow.

That explanation is, quite frankly, a load of old ----. Of course M cars cost more to repair, of course older cars are more likely to require repair, of course higher mileage cars are more likely to go wrong. Then again cars with additional optional equipment are more likely to need repair, convertibles have complex power roof mechanisms, 6 cylinder engines cost more to repair than 4 cylinder engines. How much further do you go? There are not that many M cars compared to others and, as such, the level of 'subsidy' from owners of non M cars will be relatively very low. Not all M cars need expensive repairs. I do more than average annual mileage (app 20K), I have had both M and non M BMW's over the last 8 years or so and generally reckon that the cost/benefit of the extended warranty has been about cost neutral to both parties. I am in the minority, by definition most vehicels cover average mileage, thus tipping the cost/benefit equation in favour of the warranty provider. The whole point of the warranty is to provide customers with an overall evening out of the costs of ownership. Both parties take a risk. Owners risk that their vehicles may cost significantly less than the cost of the warranty (generally the case), but are willing to take that risk as catastrophic failures tend to be expensive. Warranty company risks that occasional individual vehicles cost significantly more than the cost of the warranty to repair, but most don't hence the potential for profit. Also, the more vehicles in the warranty scheme, the less exposed the warranty company is to individual high costs. Oh well.

Edited by rvbush