Baby BMW Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Updated: M140i - Gearbox whine/leaks and a roof rattle - Ombudsman rule in my favour!

87K views 740 replies 122 participants last post by  Lambster 
#1 ·
Hello All,

I have a suspect gearbox issue with my M140i. September 2016 Build with approx 4,000 miles - The cars been doing this for a few thousand miles now. Any drive mode, any gearbox mode - Gets worse as the car gets warmer... Is this normal?



This video is shot with an iPhone so the Mic isn't the best at picking the sound up, in the car it sounds like a supercharger (or a cake mixer as my Mrs puts it).

Need your input please!
 
#452 ·
Locoblade said:
Well on the face of that report it does look like someone has taken that pipe off at some point doesn't it, unless you believe they're planting evidence? I've read this thread on and off over the months so can't remember the whole saga but am I right in saying that when that report was written the car had already been into at least one if not two dealers to try and find the leak and fix it? If that's the case then it doesn't seem unreasonable that a hose like that would be detached, checked and then put back on by a tech if it looked like it could be the culprit so not sure how much weight they can put on the fact there's small marks on the pipe etc to prove you tampered with it.

As to the "observations" about coding additions, like that has any relevance whatsoever to a leaking gearbox!
I absolutely agree.

By the time this report was written the car had been inspected by Sytner Sheffield numerous times over the course of months, BMW Assist once and Stratstone Chesterfield once. The pipe in question had been removed for a week before this report was written. It's absolutely possible the pipe was scuffed during one of the may inspections or even upon it's final removal. A superficially scuffed pipe doesn't mean or prove anything in my opinion.

Interestingly, there is no evidence anywhere of the pipe being scuffed prior to its final removal, even the photo's showing the pipe fitted in that report don't show any scratches, the only evidence is photo's once it's been removed. Additionally, if you look at the part number sticker - the sticker is immaculate on the photo's with the pipe fitted and roughed up once it's been removed, which would suggest man handling by BMW once the pipe had been removed.

And the coding holds no relevance and what they've mentioned aren't coded anyway. At the time I mentioned its their 'get out of jail free card' and they'll use it to wrangle out of their responsibility. They've now confirmed this. Such a low move by BMW.

Paul CS said:
So how do they know it was not leaking from new for sure? It's a bit of a crazy suggestion that you pulled off that pipe and slashed the O ring.

Regarding the oil loss, are they saying that you can run with 4 litres low and the gearbox will be fine? That's a lot of over capacity if so. Ideally you need ZF to comment me thinks. Failing that, try and find a maintenance manual stating minimum an maximum oil levels.

Look at this ... and the warning next to step 6.

FWIW and speaking as a Chartered Mechanical Engineer in the maintenance world, loosing 4 litres of oil compromises the gearbox. I'd now be looking for an independent expert opinion.

Hope that helps.

Good luck buddy.

Paul

PS the coding that has been done is a red herring.
The car leaked within 2 weeks of ownership and it threw up a iDrive drivetrain error, it then a leaked further two times over the course of the next 8 months. It's a massive jump by BMW to ignore the fact it's been leaking and whining then suggest it's been tampered with on the final leak!

I have already sent that ZF document to BMW UK, Sytner and BMW FS - They all ignored it. I mean, fully blanked my correspondence. ZF themselves refuse to comment due to contractual obligations with BMW. The FOS asked ZF and failed to receive a response and BMW FS also failed to receive a response from ZF - any alarm bells ringing yet?

An independent has inspected the car and agrees that the gearbox is compromised. BMW refuse to acknowledge the independent report. BMW have openly stated they will only recognise a report from BMW. Simply speaking, the independent comprehensively stated the responsibilities of the gearbox oil and essentially stated with the breakdown I had, brass components or the clutch packs will have likely burnt out. BMW state that after a 8 mile test drive the car performs normal so it's fine. :lol2:

And yes, the coding is a red herring. I believe a shill tactic by BMW to persuade me to stop this complaint.
 
#453 ·
Cant beleive they are dragging this out, terrible, but I would say you have got them by the balls. The photgraphic evidence supports your claim and theor failure to diagnose. This is david vs goliath and were all rooting for david

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk
 
#456 ·
Do you have the O ring?

Reason I ask is because toroid shaped mouldings often have an inherent weakness in the form of a 'weld line'. A split on the weld line could look like a clean 'cut' to a casual examination by a non expert. An advanced examination would reveal whether the o ring was really cut as they suggest vs a poorly fitted or badly formed o ring.

Even in the case of weld line less forming process, a microscope examination will be able to tell the difference between a cut vs a propagated tear.

Im sure a judge would find it far fetched that someone would deliberately sabotage their own car in such a manner.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#457 ·
NISFAN said:
Do you have the O ring?

Reason I ask is because toroid shaped mouldings often have an inherent weakness in the form of a 'weld line'. A split on the weld line could look like a clean 'cut' to a casual examination by a non expert. An advanced examination would reveal whether the o ring was really cut as they suggest vs a poorly fitted or badly formed o ring.

Even in the case of weld line less forming process, a microscope examination will be able to tell the difference between a cut vs a propagated tear.

Im sure a judge would find it far fetched that someone would deliberately sabotage their own car in such a manner.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well said... Beat me to it[emoji16]

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk
 
#458 ·
Those coding options are nothing to do with the gearbox failure, but I guess BMW are just trying to imply that if you've made those mods then you could have made mechanical mods also - a very low trick to pull by BMW. :(

Why do they think somebody would deliberately cut an o ring and damage their own car! 🙁
 
#459 ·
Seems pretty clear to me... car leaked after 2 weeks of ownership. Running a brand new gearbox on low oil is going to damage it (well, any gearbox for that matter imo) and BMW's failure to spot the root cause in the first instance has over time carried on and damaged the box. Even if its ever so slightly.

Cant believe they are fighting you over it :(

That noise in your original post sounds just like my last car after it lost gearbox oil after a pipe burst, i didnt notice and carried on driving the car till eventually a warning came up. Ever since having it fixed there is now always a massive whine in 4th and 5th gear. I dont have that car anymore though and it was a Ford.
 
#460 ·
sawda said:
Cant beleive they are dragging this out, terrible, but I would say you have got them by the balls. The photgraphic evidence supports your claim and theor failure to diagnose. This is david vs goliath and were all rooting for david

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk
That's what it feels like and looks like to me. The Independent suggested that it was BMW's failure to diagnose which caused the final failure. If it had been caught earlier none of this would have happened.

Kerr said:
Not a good situation at all.

When BMW accuse you of modifying the car, they aren't suggesting a JB4(Or similar) just the things listed?

Sounds like all your hopes are with the financial ombudsmen with the way BMW and BMW finance are digging their heels in.
The first accusation was via a phone call where a BMW Representative mentioned coding and engine parameters and kept talking about the stop-start system. I thought she meant re-map. She wasn't very technical so I don't think she actually understood herself.

Then I received that report which listed the four specific items.

This is literally all the information I have, BMW have ignored my request for clarification.

BMW for some reason have really faought this complaint.

NISFAN said:
Do you have the O ring?

Reason I ask is because toroid shaped mouldings often have an inherent weakness in the form of a 'weld line'. A split on the weld line could look like a clean 'cut' to a casual examination by a non expert. An advanced examination would reveal whether the o ring was really cut as they suggest vs a poorly fitted or badly formed o ring.

Even in the case of weld line less forming process, a microscope examination will be able to tell the difference between a cut vs a propagated tear.

Im sure a judge would find it far fetched that someone would deliberately sabotage their own car in such a manner.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't have the o-ring and I've never seen it, only via that report which was originally a PDF and quality wasn't great anyway.

But, if you look really really closely at the cross-section, it's not actually a clean cut at all. about 1/3 from the left there is a clear 'ridge' vertically through the section. And the whole cross section looks curved. It appears to me it was a tear which partway through changes direction. This matches with a slow leak which got worse until it drastically failed. I.e. a small tear, got worse and became a full split.

However, BMW and the Independent both said that with this failure the oil loss and subsequent breakdown would have been instantaneous. I was a good 10-15 miles away from home, in a poor lit country road.

Do BMW imply that the pipe was tampered with, at dusk, with no tools; at the side of the road?

OneTwenty said:
Those coding options are nothing to do with the gearbox failure, but I guess BMW are just trying to imply that if you've made those mods then you could have made mechanical mods also - a very low trick to pull by BMW. :(

Why do they think somebody would deliberately cut an o ring and damage their own car! 🙁
Within the Finance Agreement there is a clause, which clearly states that if the vehicle is modified, BMW can submit a Default Notice which ends the contract. I.e BMW take the car back, prep it, sell it and charge the difference between the sale price and balance owed (plus costs). I believe BMW are threatening this.

It's thier get out of jail free card I believe.

CynicalRobot said:
Seems pretty clear to me... car leaked after 2 weeks of ownership. Running a brand new gearbox on low oil is going to damage it (well, any gearbox for that matter imo) and BMW's failure to spot the root cause in the first instance has over time carried on and damaged the box. Even if its ever so slightly.

Cant believe they are fighting you over it :(

That noise in your original post sounds just like my last car after it lost gearbox oil after a pipe burst, i didnt notice and carried on driving the car till eventually a warning came up. Ever since having it fixed there is now always a massive whine in 4th and 5th gear. I dont have that car anymore though and it was a Ford.
Yep, that's my current argument.

BMW say that as the car performs fine now, there is no fault. I'm saying that the gearbox has been compromised (weakened) and it could fail at any given moment; making the car unsafe. I don't want to be on a motorway when a bush decides to **** its pants and the gearbox seizes. Yes, that's dramatic; but possible - and that responsibility is on me.

ZF state the gerabox wll have been damaged by low oil loss. The independent states the same. BMW refuses to comment and repeats the rhetoric that it performs normally (via a 8-mile test drive).

My car has a clear history of leaks from the same area, other gearbox from the same family have a history of leaking from the same area according to other owners. My gearbox whined when the oil was low and whined less when the fluid was topped up (allegedly it no longer whines). It's all obviously related. BMW's failure to identify and rectify has caused this position.
 
#461 ·
I can't believe BMW will only accept a report from BMW. Insane.

The ombudsman won't take it seriously unless it gets a lot of media attention etc. They probably don't even understand what they are looking at.

As we have said time and time again on here, the only options I believe you have at this stage are to either accept the car or take legal action. BMW don't seem to be backing down, and don't really have any incentive to either considering no legal action has been taken.
 
#462 ·
If you want to fight this out of principle then you MUST get a Solicitor. Remember if it goes to court the Judge would only listen to the technical opinion of an INDEPENDANT specialist, not yours or BMW's. Though generally the specialst would be one that both parties agree to use.

Personally I would just sell the car, take the loss and put it behind you. Enjoy a bit of BMW slating along the way if you want via social media. Life's too short.

Take some consolation that this has cost BMW a few quid to get this far.
 
#464 ·
Presumably a default notice would give 28 days to remedy the default before the demand for the full balance can be actioned.

In this case simply reversing the coding would satisfy the terms of the default notice and no further action would be required.
 
#465 ·
fufty1 said:
I can't believe BMW will only accept a report from BMW. Insane.

The ombudsman won't take it seriously unless it gets a lot of media attention etc. They probably don't even understand what they are looking at.

As we have said time and time again on here, the only options I believe you have at this stage are to either accept the car or take legal action. BMW don't seem to be backing down, and don't really have any incentive to either considering no legal action has been taken.
I can, it's BMW's way of saying or way or the highway....

The ombudsman have not taken this seriously. They appear completely incompetent. Or just massively overworked and ill-equipped.

I should have gone legal. You're right. I still have that option but the final decision is so close, I might as well let it run the course.

Compactpete said:
If you want to fight this out of principle then you MUST get a Solicitor. Remember if it goes to court the Judge would only listen to the technical opinion of an INDEPENDANT specialist, not yours or BMW's. Though generally the specialst would be one that both parties agree to use.

Personally I would just sell the car, take the loss and put it behind you. Enjoy a bit of BMW slating along the way if you want via social media. Life's too short.

Take some consolation that this has cost BMW a few quid to get this far.
BMW have refused to acknowledge an independent specialist and will not help with the selection process. It's a £6k loss, not including the ££££ i've spent not actually using the car. I'm not sure I can take that hit.

Kerr said:
When other people have been threatened with a default notice for breaking the PCP terms it's a full settlement they've been given.

If BMW deem the warranty invalid they can't exactly take it back and sell it as a car that meets their criteria for warranty.
Intersesting, I.e. BMW take the car back and write the agreement off? Any links or evidence of this?

Compactpete said:
Presumably a default notice would give 28 days to remedy the default before the demand for the full balance can be actioned.

In this case simply reversing the coding would satisfy the terms of the default notice and no further action would be required.
The vehicle isn't coded by the way. It's an empty threat by BMW.

However, the contract is in dispute via my complaint so BMW can't legally submit a default notice until the dispute is satisfied.
 
#466 ·
I've worded that badly. I don't mean they get all their money back or hand the car back and walk away.

They don't want the car back and request the balance to be paid in full.

I've not got any of the links saved, but it has come up a few times.

How do you disable the stop/start and fold the mirrors etc without coding?
 
#467 ·
enthusiastowned said:
BMW have refused to acknowledge an independent specialist and will not help with the selection process. It's a £6k loss, not including the ££££ i've spent not actually using the car. I'm not sure I can take that hit.
That's not for BMW to decide, the court would order an independent inspection if one had not been obtained. If they refuse to agree that's a win for you.

If you can't afford the loss then GET A SOLICITOR!
 
#470 ·
enthusiastowned said:
The vehicle isn't coded by the way. It's an empty threat by BMW.
So was it never coded by you? :?

I thought you'd had those bits coded and BMW were trying to use that to wriggle out of it?
 
#471 ·
enthusiastowned said:
I don't have the o-ring and I've never seen it, only via that report which was originally a PDF and quality wasn't great anyway.

But, if you look really really closely at the cross-section, it's not actually a clean cut at all. about 1/3 from the left there is a clear 'ridge' vertically through the section. And the whole cross section looks curved. It appears to me it was a tear which partway through changes direction. This matches with a slow leak which got worse until it drastically failed. I.e. a small tear, got worse and became a full split.

However, BMW and the Independent both said that with this failure the oil loss and subsequent breakdown would have been instantaneous. I was a good 10-15 miles away from home, in a poor lit country road.

Do BMW imply that the pipe was tampered with, at dusk, with no tools; at the side of road?
In my opinion, if this does go legal, the insinuation as you have painted it, is that the gearbox whined because you tampered with the pipes and or the seal. Scuff marks and torn seal as evidence.
Whilst what you say above might seem clear cut......pardon the pun......it is vital evidence to corroborate that it wasn't ....even partially. A pivotal rebuttable on BMW's claim that you caused the damage and clear evidence that it was either an inherent fault at POD, or from the work carried out by the earlier bmw service visit. You need legal advice, but if I was you I would ensure that the o ring is made available for expert examination. Your opinion and diagnosis will mean nothing in court. Neither will BMW's unless they can produce an experts report that shows it was cut, but without you having a strong case disproving the theory, there is no reason for bmw to even contemplate a settlement.
They win by default, you modified the coding, so they have one up on you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#473 ·
enthusiastowned said:
I don't have the o-ring and I've never seen it, only via that report which was originally a PDF and quality wasn't great anyway.

But, if you look really really closely at the cross-section, it's not actually a clean cut at all. about 1/3 from the left there is a clear 'ridge' vertically through the section. And the whole cross section looks curved. It appears to me it was a tear which partway through changes direction. This matches with a slow leak which got worse until it drastically failed. I.e. a small tear, got worse and became a full split.

BMW say that as the car performs fine now, there is no fault. I'm saying that the gearbox has been compromised (weakened) and it could fail at any given moment; making the car unsafe. I don't want to be on a motorway when a bush decides to sh*t its pants and the gearbox seizes. Yes, that's dramatic; but possible - and that responsibility is on me.
When you cut an o-ring it's normal to be curved and the ridge like that when not using something very sharp. Any pressure on the rubber, scissors or knife, distorts it and gives a cut exactly as you describe. That sounds like a cut rather than a failure.

Just reading up to catch up it looks as if you've had endless niggles with this car. I had a look at some of the previous issues you've listed. Did you ever get to the bottom of why the car was crabbing due to the rear alignment being so far out? That looks to be your first main issue with the car.

It sounds as if your relationship was already strained with so many complaints.

It does basically sound as if BMW think you've sabotaged the car and you obviously feel they've stitched you up. It's certainly a unique case (that I've seen) and BMW do sound as if they are standing firm and have given a bit of thought to the situation.

I can't get my head round why they automatically assumed sabotage or won't accept liability for a box that has a history of issues.
 
#476 ·
Gone on far too long and a lesson for anyone else who thinks or believes or anything else regarding issues with a new car that has a warranty.

Not saying rollover like a puppy but a line has to be drawn and it has to be drawn very early on or this can happen resulting in more problems than are really worth it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top