My thinking was the same, if MB refused my second request I would hire a lawyer.

My first request was in Nov 2012, my second was two weeks later on a Wed when MB refused my first request.

Less than 24 hours later my GM called to tell me that MB was working out the numbers to buy the ML back. I had the new ML on the following Monday.

This was after two years of problems but the first time I demanded a buyback was Nov 2012. In retrospect I should have went harder on MBUSA a lot sooner, you live and you learn.

 

For whatever reason MB treats some people very well and others just get ignored. I demanded a replacement vehicle after it was in the shop the 4th time. They, MB USA, said I was not entitled to a replacement vehicle. I disagreed and won my case in court.

 

Sad to have found this thread. I got a 2011 GL350 thats been great as my road car from Tahoe to the bay area for 20k miles and last week died on me and lost all power like an electrical reset then taking my wife to pick up her G550 from service the car hesitated when I backed out of the driveway and went to accelerate and with it floor'd it would not get over 2k RPM NO Turbo at all and no faster than mid 30's all 5 miles to the dealer. Service Manager hops in with me and cranks it up. It of course runs like a kitten. They still have it as I told them it's not safe i wont drive it and dont want it back till they find something definitive. Seems like that's going to be my issue also no fault codes other than the first time it died they got a MAF sensor code but that was it.

 

Ouch, that sounds like problem on my ML! Gotta start documenting this on videos and photos ASAP. There will never be error code at least that was what I experienced. Good luck!

 

Here is what I was told. If there is no code MBUSA won’t reimburse the dealer for any work they do.

One example. The shop foreman road tested my previous 2011 ML and duplicated the trans hesitation several times with me and my wife present. He told us that he will need to adjust the shift adaptions.

The problem was since there were no fault codes MBUSA wouldn’t approve any work the dealer wanted to perform on the ML. Since I got to know the dealer very well he did it anyway and it corrected the problem for the time being.

I know there are some good and some bad dealers, but keep in mind that although it may seem like the dealer is not being helpful, it could very well be that MBUSA is giving them a hard time and tying their hands.

Since you were sad to find this thread, here is another thread with some more “feel good” reading for you. LOL
https://mbworld.org/forums/m-class-w...ml#post5485534

 

It seems to me that any MB under warranty (which would be the case with a 2011 model) must be repaired if they find something wrong, acknowledge it is not the driver's fault and tell you that they know how to fix it - code or no code. How the work is paid for and what internal protocol is followed should not be the concern of the owner. Reimbursement issues should also not be the concern of the owner. How can they get out of the repair or simply refuse to fix the problem they themselves acknowledge exists? How can they refuse to provide the remedy they know will cure the problem? There is no loophole in the warranty for that kind of refusal as long as abuse by owner is not an issue and the car has been maintained per the manual.

If the shop manager told me MB said they would not pay for the repair I would tell them that is not my problem and if the repair is not made under warranty I will see them in court. I think too many of us play footsie with these dealers and we need to take a tough position right away or they will walk all over us.

 

Last year my wiper motor was acting weird it was running very slow and sometimes stop. It was raining very hard and I couldn't see the road so I took a video of the wiper the switch and everything. Next day I took the car to the dealer and no code was found so they can't do anything. I show them the video and ask them what if I get into accident and who is going to responsible. Next thing they changed the whole wiper unit.

 

Until you’re in the situation (and I hope you will never be) it’s very difficult to understand. You can talk to MBUSA until you’re blue in the face, they are emotionless puppets. You can scream and carry on all you want, it will only serve to frustrate you more and **** your dealer off which will cause you more problems.

On the other hand, in my case anyway, it worked out better that I kept my cool and got the GM on my side. I honestly feel that if I didn’t I would still be fighting and going the legal route

I agree with everything you said especially with taking a harder position right away, that is the one area that if I had to do it all over again I would change. I initially contacted MBUSA when the ML was 3 months old, but I didn’t demand a buyback at that time. They got my GM involved and after the vehicle was repaired MBUSA did reimburse me 3 payments for down time but I never brought up a buyback.

A year or so later as the problems kept mounting I called my GM first and told him I was calling MBUSA and requesting a buyback. He told me he would back me up and do whatever he could to help me out.

My first request to MBUSA for a buyback was late Nov.2012. My second request (after they refused the first) was two weeks later on a Wed. The next day my GM called to tell me that MB was going to do a Substitution of Collateral and get me out of the 2011. I picked up the 2012 ML 4 days later.

So yes in retrospect I should have “put my foot down” a lot sooner.

 

Yes, I feel for you and those that have had problems and have had to fight for what should be routine servicing. I purchased my ML eleven months ago and, except for a rear hatch that would not open properly and was fixed right away, I have been problem free. I hope I have no issues in the future and do not have to go through what you and others have had to endure.

But what is a warranty if not an assurance to the buyer that if anything goes wrong it will be corrected? If it is not that, then what is it? What court would see it otherwise? Does it mention that the problem has to be associated with codes? I don't think so. Here is what the warranty says:

"Our intention is to repair under warranty,
without charge to you, anything that goes
wrong with your vehicle during the warranty
period which is our fault. All we ask is
that you properly maintain and care for the
vehicle and that you have warranty repairs
performed by an authorized Mercedes-
Benz Center".

And: "You invested in Mercedes-Benz. Now Mercedes-Benz has your back.
All new Mercedes-Benz vehicles are protected by our New Vehicle Limited Warranty, covering defects in material or workmanship for 48-months or 50,000 miles, whichever comes first".

Now we all know it is easy to say something and difficult to put it in practice but where does it mention codes must be found before a repair can be made? As you said, I suppose one has to be faced with the situation to understand all this but it appears to be clear to me so I can't believe they even mention the necessity of codes when a problem surfaces - that is a non-factor for the owner in terms of the warranty agreement. The presence of codes and read outs are not (as far as I know because the warranty is 63 pages long and I have not read every word) even mentioned in the warranty as a prerequisite for repair. I just don't think it is right for MB to use this "code" thing as a cop out to fix warranty items and I would surely challenge them the instant they mentioned it.

 

I got the EXACT same response from my dealer. I wound up going to court and winning a lemon law case against MB because they would not fix the problem. As for video. I also had video of the problem but that was not good enough for them. They also experienced the problem but since there was no code there was no fix. The final fix was to get my money back via the court system.

 

I believe that repairing base on error code policy is there to prevent dealerships from abusing the system. However, the error code isn't comprehensive enough to cover everything, so MBUSA needs to accept other type of proof beside error code on the dashboard. My ML Bluetec left me blue, but I really like that car. I'm hoping the quality issue will be ironed out over time, and then I will replace the station wagon with another ML Bluetec.

 

^^BINGO!!!! I couldn't have said it better!!

One would think that if the shop manager, shop foreman and service director tell MBUSA that they all duplicated the problem, and in their professionally trained MB opinion they think “X” will correct the problem MB would give them the go ahead. Fault code or not.

But as you said and I agree, it is probably to curtail abuse. But if MBUSA suspects a dealer is abusing the system that is not the customer’s problem, that is for them to battle out with their dealer.

It should never come at the expense of the customer being taken care of.

 

I could not have agreed more!

 

Let us assume the "code" repair policy is in fact there to protect MB from dishonest dealers. First of all MB would never admit this. Second, my contention that the presence of "codes" is not a factor specified in the warranty as a prerequisite for performing the repair and therefore a non issue. If it is something internal fine, but it is not and should not be a customer issue.

The presence of a code can certainly point the service shop in the right direction and even pin point the problem and exact part at fault but that is all a code can do. The presence of this "code" can not fix the problem and that is what a warranty is for. A warranty is not there for identifying a problem or indicating where to look on the vehicle, which is the purpose of the "code". The warranty is for guaranteeing FIXING the problem. If the dealer replicates the problem, acknowledges it exists with or without the help of a code, determines it is not caused by owner abuse and has the remedy (all of which was the case with Cyber GS) they simply can not rely on an internal "code" presence to deny repair. If they say they can not find or replicate a problem and there is no code to help them then that is an entirely different matter. But that is not what they said to Cyber GS or to Katiesdad7.

If they told me no code equals no repair I would do what Katiesdad7 did. I don't think I would say more to the dealer other than see you in court, walk out and contact my attorney. I just would not spend any more time arguing with them.

 

You are putting common sense into the equation. But MB does not go by that. I felt that the dealer wanted to diagnose the problem but was shut down by MB. At least that is want they told me. The day's of a technician being highly trained are gone with MB. All they do now is do what the computer tells them and lets them.

Its probably cheaper for MB to loose a few cars to the lemon law than replace a lot of parts. I'm sure its all about the $$$$. Believe me, they wouldn't let the car be lemon lawed if it costs them a lot of $.

I'm sure they sold my car to someone else. Maybe they didn't make any $ on the deal but they didn't spend any tyring to fix it either.

 

I am with you. Any chance of posting the court judgement?
Or some of it? It would be interesting to read what the court said.

 

+1

Well said indeed

Labor cost to repair would have cost them more. When they sell these lemon cars, they don't offer extended factory warranty, and may be they even sell them without original warranty but with heavy discount which is my guess.

 

^^So very true, and exactly my feeling throughout my ordeal. There is no common sense at MBUSA, they’re out of touch.

My dealer couldn’t have treated me any better and in my opinion was the game changer for me. I think that because they are a large, high volume dealer my GM had a lot of pull with MBUSA.

I know that my previous ML was sold, and since they bought it back before I took them to court it didn’t have a “lemon” title. So I am sure they got full market value because aside from the many mechanical issues, cosmetically it was immaculate inside and out.

I really hope the person who bought it got an extended warranty, I really do.

 

I bought a brand new d2012 ML 350 in May of 2012. From the very onset I had intermittent problems with loss of power after slowing down, but not quite at a stop, and then accellerating. The loss of power always happened when trying to get into traffic or when in the middle of an intersection. A;so have problems with the car not locking all the time. Sometimes I have to get back into the car, restart it, turn it off before the car will lock. Nov. 2012, after miles I took the car back to the dealer, the service writer admitted he had had another car in the week before with loss of power also. The dealership told me they reprogrammed the motor and reprogrammed the tranny. I thought it would actually fix it but it did not. The next 4000 miles the car experienced more episodes with loss of power as I was driving in town almost exclusively so was slowing down and then had loss of power on accelleration. Took the car back April 2013 and the dealer had the car for 4 weeks. They drove it 200 miles and could not duplicate the problem. In the meantime I called MBUSA and they said they would work with the dealership and get back to me. Today I got a call from the dealership telling me to come and get the car, there is nothing they can do. If it does not have a code they can't fix it. THE CAR IS DANGEROUS TO DRIVE not to mention the fact the car intermittently will not lock. This is my first Mercedes and will definetly be my last.....maybe because I get killed in the one they told me to come and get. I would not recommend buying a Mercedes because if it is a lemon you are still stuck with a $60,000 car that is dangerous to drive.

 

Hi JFONTS, I replied to your private message, but in case you did not get it which happened to me on this thread before. Below is my reply to you.

"Hi JFONTS

If that is the case then I recommend getting yourself a GOPRO or Sony Action Camera and film every time you drive. It sounds ridiculous but necessary from my perspective. Unless you have proof, I doubt that it would be in your favor at court. Lawyers are just representing you, and they just want your money regardless of winning or losing. Well, I could be wrong about hiring lawyer. A very good lemon law attorney with genuine intention of helping you might be worth while. However, my experiences with lawyers dealing with lemon laws were not great. They are just a bunch of used car salesman with law degree. Katiesdad7 who has problem with his ML too was able to replicate it to the service manager but he hired attorney anyway. Below is what he posted on the thread.

"Finally after being fed up with their BULL I put the service manager in the car and showed him. He then said they know about it be can't say anything because the update wasn't done. Lie #1. The same thing with the AdBlue light. They said that it was normal even though we all know it was not."

The first time I visited dealership for my problem was in Feb 2012, and they finally came to decision in Nov 2012. As you can see, it was a long battle with many visits, on monthly basis or even more frequent, to the dealer for the same issue with other new problems along the way with not a single error code registered on ECU.

Anyway, lawyers are just representing you, so that the other party cannot use your words against you if you say anything wrong. However, good lawyers can present cases with different angles that people never thought of, and I doubt that there are any good one as such dealing with lemon law.

I personally believe that MB makes and designs good cars. The problem is at their factory in Alabama. I think the quality control and craftsmanship aren't up to MB standard. My parents' E-class was purchased back in 1991 (I know I posted 1995 but my mom said it was late 1991 and I didn't care much about cars back then), and it runs without hiccup until now with everything working including power windows. I have a C-class back in 2008 which I sold to a close friend in 2010. It has been serving her with zero issue until today.

Good luck!"

 

Hi JFONTS,

I just read Katiesdad7's thread. He actually had to get his car inspected.

"At the hearing he INSISTED that the board inspect the vehicle. I really wanted them to inspect the vehicle because the problem was easily duplicated. Unfortunately for the MB attorney, who put all his faith in the dealer, he didn't know that. "

Therefore, problem that I had and yours which cannot be easily duplicated probably not going to have any chance at the court without strong supporting evidences.

 

FWIW, I was able to demonstrate the air pressure problem with the vehicle. I had 2 major complaints in my case. Air pressure in the ears and the engine would hesitate when cold. I won on BOTH causes. Even though I never even drove the car at the inspection. The board made a decision based on credibility. THey said that even though MB was credible, I was more credible. My guess is that since MB INSISTED there was no air pressure problem and the board easily experienced it. Then they were less likely to accept MB explanation that there was also no problem with the engine.

As for video. I have a video of the problem. I will post it if I can figure put how. Its a real hoot. :-)

 

Thanks Katiesdad7 for the insight on your case, great that it works out.

 

I had the same problem with my 2007 S550.
It was fixed by replacing the Transmission Valve Body.

 

We had a sedan (gasser) with losing power problems and it took a long time to find the problem. Don't know if the 2012 ml has the same type of tank, but it turned out to be what they call a saddle tank which straddles the driveshaft hump under rear seat. There is a tube which connects both sides of the tank which is supposed to keep the fuel level in both sides of the tank. The tube was kinked in our case, so fuel would not flow from one side to the other and the car would stall even though the tank showed that it had plenty.