ComplaintsforAudi Beverly Hills /Fletcher Jones Company

• Initial Complaint

  04/14/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Unresolved

  More info

  Our 2016 Audi with ****** miles needs a new engine. We purchased this car in 2019 from Audi Beverly Hills. It was a used car with ****** miles. We have had this car serviced regularly at *************** Sport in *************. We took the car there for servicing because this a local mechanic with outstanding reviews (5.0 rating on yelp) and is close to where we live.Recently, we had some problems with the engine and were told by both ********* in ************* and Audi Beverly Hills that we needed a new engine. This surprised **, and my research showed that Audi engines are usually good for ******* miles. So, it seems that this is a defect of some sort and not a result of poor or irregular servicing. We have only driven this car about ****** miles in almost 4 years. We have also owned two other Audi's as well and have always been pleased.We were quoted a price of $20,000 to put in a new engine by Audi Beverly Hills. We have also spent over $1000 so far on rental car fees as well as towing charges and we were charged $295 just have a diagnosis of the problem and price quote by the dealership. So, overall, we will be paying a great sum of money to have the car run correctly due to what seems like a defect in the engine and not caused by anything we did wrong. Of course, it will take two weeks to fix this car, and we will have to rent a car during that time. (Also, we quoted a significantly lower price of $11,000 by ********* in *************. This Audi mechanic has 5.0 rating on yelp, so is very credible).We have spoken to both Beverly Hills Audi as well as Audi Of *******, but there seems to be no willingness to take some responsibility for the engine failure. I think Audi should take responsibility for their engine which went way too early. As it turns out, a used 2016 Audi with about ****** miles is worth about the price of this repair.

  Business response

  04/25/2023

  Thank you for the opportunity to review and reply to the complaint of the customer.As the customer acknowledges the vehicle was a 2016 model year. The manufacturer warranty on the vehicle has expired since the purchase. We respectfully decline to replace the engine. 

  Customer response

  05/21/2023

   
  Complaint: 19884119
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I believe that Audi should take responsibility for the engine on our car needing replacement after ****** miles. *** car had been serviced regularly by ** and engines are supposed to last 150,000-300,000 miles  according to research I did online. Although the warranty was up, it seems to me the manufacturer (Audi) should take responsibility for the engine failure under these circumstances. My impression is maybe less than 1% of engines like this would need replacing after so few miles. *** once again, I want Audi to replace our engine without ** paying close to $20,000 which is maybe the value of the car. I hope I can have nice things to say when Audi takes responsibility for this. Otherwise, I will make it know to others about how this was handeled.

  Thanks for your consideration.

   

  *******************************
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *******************************

• Initial Complaint

  11/18/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Please see FULL problem explanation in attached "*** - Audi Problem" pdf attachment. Due to size limits, a limited explanation is below. I am writing to file a formal complaint against Audi Beverly Hills Service Center regarding the service of my ************ vehicle, and to request reimbursement for damage caused by Audi Beverly Hills Service Center. On October 27, 2022 I brought my vehicle to Audi Beverly Hills Service Center for an oil change and repair of the right rear door. Upon my arrival, a service advisor completed vehicle intake videos and documentation reflecting the current condition of my vehicle. It was then noted that only the right rear door was not functioning as intended, and thus required repair. The remaining doors were not reflected as damaged. I released my vehicle into the care of Audi Beverly Hills Service Center with a fully operational front passenger door. On the evening of November 1, 2022, I was notified by a service advisor that my vehicle was ready for pickup. I proceeded to pick up my vehicle that same evening. Immediately upon use of my vehicle, I quickly noted my front passenger door was no longer operating properly (locking/unlocking) as it previously had been before I released my vehicle to the care of Audi Beverly Hills Service Center. I then immediately returned (on November 2, 2022) my vehicle to the service center reporting the damage to my front passenger door. The damage was acknowledged by the service advisor and a lead service technician. I was then told the damage to my front passenger door would be diagnosed, and I would be given an update the next day, November 3, 2022. (More information to be included....) Please see FULL problem explanation in attached "*** - Audi Problem" pdf attachment. Due to size limits, this a limited explanation above.

  Business response

  12/23/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/11/24) */ Thank you for the opportunity to review and reply to complaint of our customer. Our customer came in October 29th for a concern with right rear door that would not open from outside our service department diagnosed the issue and replaced the door latch and the customer took delivery of her vehicle on November 1, 2022. At the time our service department performed this repair it ran a diagnostic test and there was no finding of any fault code or problem with the right front passenger door. The customer returned on November 2, 2022 stating that the front passenger door is not locking. Our service department verified the complaint regarding the right front door lock issue and explained to the customer that there was no finding of a fault code or problem on November 1, 2022. As a customer good will accommodation, we offered the customer a 50% discount at a reduced labor rate. However, the customer refused the offer and claimed the dealership was at fault for the failure of the right front door lock. We stand by our original offer of a discount. Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/11/29) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I do not accept the response from the business. Audi Beverly Hills Service Center should be held FULLY RESPONSIBLE for the damage it caused to my vehicle's front passenger door while it was in its possession. As previously stated, I returned my vehicle to the business ASAP after its 10/27/22 service completion pick-up date (November 1, 2022) to report the damage that was caused to my vehicle's front passenger door. The damage was then verified by the business itself, and should have been repaired at that time at no additional fee to me. Instead, Audi Beverly Hills Service Center retook possession of my vehicle for an additional 6+ days, and then unfairly and unethically refused to fully repair the damage at no additional fee to me. A "customer good will accommodation" is not appropriate, acceptable, or fair and Audi Beverly Hills Service Center should be held FULLY RESPONSIBLE for the damage it caused to my vehicle. I released my vehicle into the care of Audi Beverly Hills Service Center at the start of the 10/27/22 service visit with a fully operational front passenger door, and my vehicle should have been returned to me in the same condition. However, it was not. The damage caused to my vehicle was blatantly obvious by the fact of Audi Beverly Hills Service Center diagnosing the damage itself upon my vehicle's return on November 2, 2022, and the door physically not operating properly. The business' response of not finding a fault code or problem with the front passenger door is fictitious and very deceptive because the damage the service center caused was PHYSICALLY PRESENT AND WAS EVEN DIAGNOSED/VERIFIED BY AUDI BEVERLY HILLS SERVICE CENTER ITSELF after the 10/27/22 service visit. Also, for Audi Beverly Hills Service Center to indirectly/passive aggressively try to imply that the damage to my vehicle's front passenger door occurred within the few non-business overnight hours between my vehicle's pick-up time and return time to the service center is unethical and untrue. It is not a coincidence that my vehicle's front passenger door becomes damaged soon after being in Audi Beverly Hills Service Center's possession, and other adjacent door related repairs being completed. Audi Beverly Hills Service Center should be held FULLY RESPONSIBLE for the damage it caused to my vehicle's front passenger door while it was in its possession. I am continuing to request to be reimbursed for the repair cost ($693.88) of the damage to my vehicle's front passenger door that was caused by Audi Beverly Hills Service Center. Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2022/12/09) */ please refer to our previous explanation and response. We stand by that previous reply and our offer as explained in that reply. Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2022/12/14) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I do not accept the response from the business. Audi Beverly Hills Service Center should be held FULLY RESPONSIBLE for the damage it caused to my vehicle's front passenger **** while it was in its possession. Please refer to my previous response. I am continuing to request to be reimbursed for the repair cost ********* of the damage to my vehicle's front passenger **** that was caused by Audi Beverly Hills Service Center.

• Initial Complaint

  10/12/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I purchased this*** along with the 5-year service package, from the Beverly Hills Audi. So I would only go to this dealer for maintenance and service. That turned out to be a huge mistake. The initial visit for repairs took place at the end of June, 2022, due to the coolant leakage. The Service Advisor at that time told me the problem was already addressed by the manufacturer, and the repairs were going to be under the re-call program (free of charge). However, the tech report also stated there was an excessive vibration due to collapsed motor mounts. The proposed charge to fix it was about $2,500. The issue with the motor mounts was shocking as the car had less than 20K miles on it, and was being driven in the city exclusively. We decided not to replace the mounts at that time, but instead to address this issue to Audi USA. So the car was left at the shop to fix the coolant leak only. Some two weeks later I got my car back. Then we contacted the Audi USA in regards to the motor mounts, and were pleased with the outcome. As the loyal customers (this is our second Audi), and after some uneasy prolonged negotiations, the collapsed mounts were replaced under the, so called, good will program. By that time, the coolant needed to be topped many times already. I was told it's because of the heavy usage of the A/C. Over the following 2 months, the coolant had to be topped more and more frequently. I was driving back and forth to the shop a couple of times a week... until one day, on my way there, the smog started coming from under the hood(!!!). I barely made it there. There was almost NO coolant left. I was told that even though the issue 'looked the same as the first time' - it was not the same, and thus I would have to pay for the repairs. BUT WHY?! Doesn't it mean that either the initial repairs were performed very poorly, or the first diagnostic was incorrect? I did pay, but feel cheated. This is NOT the service anyone would have expected from Audi Beverly Hills.

  Business response

  11/03/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/10/17) */ Thank you for the opportunity to review and reply to the**** complaint of our customer. Respectfully the customer has misstated the events. The last coolant repair event he described in his**** complaint was repaired without any out-of-pocket cost to the customer. Contrary to his statement that: "...I paid for the repair..." The repair was provided to the customer entirely as a goodwill repair by our dealership and it was also listed as such on his repair order. Additionally, the customer was informed and the repair order includes this information as well, that the recent coolant issue was not related to the initial manufacturer coolant related recall repair he referred to in his**** complaint. Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/10/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I NEVER stated I was charged twice. I was charged for the second repairs of the very SAME problem. 1. Goodwill DOES NOT mean bad service!!! 2. The shop is conveniently IGNORING THE FACT THAT AFTER THE FIRST, SO CALLED, REPAIRS I HAD TO TOP THE COOLANT MANY TIMES DURING THE LESS THAN 2 MONTHS PERIOD! 3. Perhaps the judge will pay more attention to these details. Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2022/10/28) */ Respectfully, the latest response from the customer ignores the previous reply we provided as well as the essential fact that was explained to the customer namely: that the recent coolant issue was not related to the initial manufacturer coolant related recall repair he referred to in his**** complaint. The customer has ignored the fact that he was told the most recent repair he is referring to was the result of a mechanical component that failed. That failure had nothing whatsoever to do with the previous coolant recall repair. The customer is certainly entitled to refuse to accept that reality however we have the documentation to establish that fact and as such do not believe that any further goodwill accommodation or additional free work is required at this time. Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2022/10/31) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) "...it was the result of a mechanical component that failed..."?! REALLY? In my opinion, it was a result of the wrong initial diagnostics. The coolant needed to be added many times right from the get go after the first repairs. WHY? Nevertheless, if the professionals at the Beverly Hills shop keep insisting that the problem lays in an extremely poor quality of the brand (this is my ********* with only 20,000 miles on it; the first one was having lots of issues as well; both times I was the original owner) - I should NOT argue that, but instead address the issue to the MANUFACTURER *********** Perhaps, this is the time for some amicable chat between these two- the **** Audi and the manufacturer. P.S. To whoever reads this: make a note of the above!

• Initial Complaint

  05/03/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Bought my **** ** certified pre-owned vehicle from Audi of Beverly Hills. Previously satisfied with the service center. Car overheating ("coolant system error") and was unsafe to drive. I now live near ******************************, but had an emailed coupon for discounted service from Audi of BH, so had my vehicle towed there for the savings. (Coupons attached: **** off Audi Service, Parts and Accessories; another for ****** Synthetic Oil and Filter Change Special + Multi-Point Inspection) The service rep indicated the vehicle was due for a *** mile service (which primarily involved an oil change) costing ***** With the comfort of the coupon, and anticipating further high cost repairs, I said I would consider it. The inspection cost for the coolant system error was ***** which would be applied to authorized repairs. I showed the coupon to the rep, as is required by the coupon's terms and conditions. Repair estimates were over ****** I didn't authorize any work and said I'd pick up the car in the morning. Rep texted me a link to my invoice, I couldn't open it, and requested the invoice be emailed. It never was, so I couldn't review the charges in advance. Picked up vehicle expecting **** in charges; was ******** I was surprised. Cashier informed me the 65K mile service was performed. Being in a hurry, I paid and left. Realized immediately that they failed to apply the coupon. Contacted my rep within an hour of leaving and asked for a **** credit to my card; was rejected (she claimed the attached "service" coupon is for "parts" - if that is their position, the coupon is DECEPTIVE ). Told her she could choose between the **** "service" discount or the ****** oil change coupon, and issue a credit - they needed to honor a coupon. I gave her an hour to issue the credit, or I would dispute the charge with my bank and contact ***. I disputed **** of the charge with my card issuer. They can't issue "service" coupons and limit redemption to purchase of parts.

  Business response

  06/13/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2022/06/13) */ Thank you for the opportunity to review and respond to this customer issue. The discount coupon at issue specifically states that it must be presented to the dealership service advisor at the time the vehicle is written up for service. In this case the customer did not mention or present the coupon at the time of write up. Additionally, the customer did not present or discuss the coupon with our personnel when the vehicle was picked up. Only after the customer drove off with the vehicle following the completion of all service did he call our dealership and advise us that he wanted to use the coupon. Although by the terms of the coupon this customer is not entitled to the discount as a one-time goodwill gesture the dealership will provide him the discount he belatedly requested. Consumer Response /* (3000, 15, 2022/07/19) */ The business response is partially inaccurate, as I did present the coupon to my advisor when I initially dropped the car off. The business called last month and indcated that they would send a $200 refund check. Nothing has been received as of July 19, 2022. Business Response /* (4000, 17, 2022/07/29) */ Thank you for forwarding our customer's reply regarding this matter. Respectfully the customer is incorrect on both of the claims he has raised in his reply. No coupon was ever provided to the advisor. Additionally, our business office has confirmed that the customer's credit card company already charged back our dealership the $200.00 that we agreed to waive, a copy of that chargeback is attached to our reply and therefore we consider this matter closed.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩