Which Main Dealer for Inspection II
 

Hi

I need to get my CSL booked in for an Inspection II in a couple of months. The last service was done at Elms Cambridge who were great. However they are not local to me (I'm in Surrey) and with Gareth moved on to pastures new, is this still the best option for me or are there other Main Dealers in the South East who members would recommend?

Appreciate any feedback.

Thanks

Phil

ybh phil if you are under warranty id travel to elms

Can't comment on the south east but Gareth has only moved a few minutes away. Great friendly sevice from Bartletts.

My CSL has a BMW warranty so needs to be a main dealer service as I want to keep the warranty running.

Cheers

Phil

Round here (Thames valley) , the Sytner dealers seem to be the cheapest. I just had an Insp I done for around £700. Couple of other dealers I tried wanted £1100 or so. I think a big factor is whether they apply the reduced 4+ labour rates to M cars or not.

Would have gone to Elms but needed it done quickly and couldn't wait for a week's loan car to be available.

Unless someone corrects me does not need to be main dealer for your BMW warranty just as long as all genuine BMW Parts are used.

So if you are in Surrey I would recommend Munich Legends I get mine done there and if there is any Warranty work which does require Main Dealer they work with Vines of Gatwick ( or they did when I used them :) ).

and two other good points they will be cheaper than the stealer especially for a Insp2 (I just paid around 770) for mine and usually some very nice cars in the showroom to have a look at :supz:

Just for peace of mind

http://www.munichlegends.co.uk/bmw-servicing-south-east

3 of my last 5 services by BMW have been free

not any more,you can use an independent garage,I checked with BMW warranty just to make sure 😉

Are you sure?

I've just checked the T&Cs in the Insured Warranty Handbook. The wording in the warranty taken out in late 2012 said:

Attachment 10538

But in my current warranty (commenced late 2013) this has now changed to:
Attachment 10539

Thanks Bounce and Chris for pointing that out! That'll teach me for not reading the small print!
:beer: