BMW cancels YouTuber's finance after tuning £60K M4

[Andy M]

“BMW have given Riccardo Senior of LivingLiveFast just a week to pay, threatening to take away his £60,000 BMW M4 Competition, if he fails to cough up the full amount.

BMW says he is in breach of their contract because the car is modified.”

https://drivetribe.com/p/bmw-cancels-youtubers-fin...

[BFleming]

I had to stop watching his videos a while back; he's pretty depressing to watch, and anyone who films themselves driving like a complete dick on public roads deserves what they get. Even in his latest upload he thinks he's the victim. Not the sharpest tool in the drawer is he?

[designforlife]

Can't help feeling he got his just desserts there... how did he think it would end? especially putting it out there in the public domain.

[Adrian W]

Its funny that they can try to do this yet if you want to fix their st mapping by putting the GTS gearbox map in they say the warranty will be void.

[amare32]

Driving fast is one thing, but putting it out in the public domain is just idiotic.

On the BMW Finance cancelling his finance, he should've known until he owns the car outright, it's not for him to mod.

[Schermerhorn]

amare32 said:

Driving fast is one thing, but putting it out in the public domain is just idiotic.

On the BMW Finance cancelling his finance, he should've known until he owns the car outright, it's not for him to mod.

Plenty of people mod their cars under finance though.

[JMBMWM5]

Andy M said:

“BMW have given Riccardo Senior of LivingLiveFast just a week to pay, threatening to take away his £60,000 BMW M4 Competition, if he fails to cough up the full amount.

BMW says he is in breach of their contract because the car is modified.”

https://drivetribe.com/p/bmw-cancels-youtubers-fin...

Fecking GOOD he's a complete dick head, if you can afford to BUY a car then modify it, he's just renting it and making money out of it too, complete tosser.

[sagarich]

Haha!

I wonder if all this attention will flag his bad driving to the authorities? Although I don’t know how common is it to pursue dangerous driving offences in video form?

[toon10]

Schermerhorn said:

Plenty of people mod their cars under finance though.

True but I'd argue they are wrong to do so. It's not rocket science as to why you shouldn't modify a car that you don't own, especially if you have a huge following on social media/YouTube.

I have an M135i on PCP. The only mod I've done is to add a Pistonhead sticker! I'll remove that before handing the car back. It's not my car, I'm fine with that and I'm under no illusions as to my "ownership" of the car.

Putting things on that can be easily removed is OK if you return it to stock before handing it back unless you want to pay the balloon at the end and actually own it. Engine mods goes into a different territory for me though. How much extra stress and wear and tear has he added running more power? It's running over 700bhp now I think.

[Zarco]

He's too much of an 'innit bruv' for me.

[Sheepshanks]

Schermerhorn said:

Plenty of people mod their cars under finance though.

Going back a bit, but I remember SEAT doing this and causing some consternation amongst other "owners" as many mod their Cupras.

[anonymous-user]

Always thought his videos were cringey, and modifying a car before paying it off is foolish.

Takes your chances etc..

[budgie smuggler]

Fully understand the modding thing, but whats the crack with BMW cancelling it on the basis that they don't think he can afford it (1:54 ish)? (Assuming he's being truthful about making all the payments on time...)

[Mark-C]

Schermerhorn said:

amare32 said:

Driving fast is one thing, but putting it out in the public domain is just idiotic.

On the BMW Finance cancelling his finance, he should've known until he owns the car outright, it's not for him to mod.

Plenty of people mod their cars under finance though.

But that doesn't make it OK though ... the terms of any contract I've seen make this very clear.

If you want to modify something then you really need to own it - no different to renting a house.

[BFleming]

budgie smuggler said:

Fully understand the modding thing, but whats the crack with BMW cancelling it on the basis that they don't think he can afford it (1:54 ish)? (Assuming he's being truthful about making all the payments on time...)

Someone in BMW UK is obviously worried about their brand reputation, and have done some simple digging on him. I speculate that if there was some 'hyperbole' on the credit application to begin with, and/or any late payments, BMW are well within their rights to reclaim the car. The mods are the final straw of course.
He's broadly getting roasted on the comments to his youtube video, to the point where I'm surprised he hasn't taken it down yet.
This isn't going to end well.

[OPOGTS]

Mark-C said:

Schermerhorn said:

amare32 said:

Driving fast is one thing, but putting it out in the public domain is just idiotic.

On the BMW Finance cancelling his finance, he should've known until he owns the car outright, it's not for him to mod.

Plenty of people mod their cars under finance though.

But that doesn't make it OK though ... the terms of any contract I've seen make this very clear.

If you want to modify something then you really need to own it - no different to renting a house.

If you read the terms - as I did last month picking up my new car - actually it only says you have to return it in reasonable condition. I also asked the salesman to check this, which he did.

Not stating for a fact it isn't hidden somewhere, but i read all the paperwork i was given by BMW upon collection.

Be good to see exactly what is says if it's clear? (and BTW, i'm not be arsey but geniunely i could not see anything about mods in the paperwork, so am interested to know where and what it says about mods)

[toon10]

He's replied to someone on his Instagram account (on a separate photo) that his issue is now "sorted". Doesn't say how or expanded on it. No doubt that will be for a follow up YouTube video at a later date.

[Pit Pony]

Mark-C said:

But that doesn't make it OK though ... the terms of any contract I've seen make this very clear.

If you want to modify something then you really need to own it - no different to renting a house.

The way i see it. As long as you return the house as it was in the condition report, minus scceptable wear and tear the landlord cant reslly complain.
Not so easy with a car. To put right the extrs wear and tear.

[Teddy Lop]

Doesn't really stack up, so long as he isn't asking bmw for warranty on modified parts or handing it back with mods that devalue the car, at this point what loss have bmw suffered?

[M5 London]

Teddy Lop said:

Doesn't really stack up, so long as he isn't asking bmw for warranty on modified parts or handing it back with mods that devalue the car, at this point what loss have bmw suffered?

The car is no longer under its manufacturer's warranty, which is obviously the case, as there have been clearly documented heavy modifications to the car.

Therefore the value of the car is much lower, in the market, than if it still had its warranty.

So for example, if he starts defaulting on the payments and BMW repossessed the car, they are not going to be able to recover its true market value by selling it into the market. Its a year old M4 with no warranty.

Secondly if it was involved in a 'total loss' would the insurer even pay out ? The insurer has to always pay off BMWFS first (the legal owner) and then anything above the outstanding debt, goes back to the customer. In this case if they do not pay out, BMWFS are very much out of pocket and will then have to pursue the customer for the debt on the car....starts getting messy.

If the customer pays off the debt in full, today, then pretty much BMWFS are fine and all is good again, in their eyes at least.