NON DISCLOSURE OF TWO ACCIDENTS

2. On the 08/07/2019 the dealership took the wheels from BMW 320D f30 2014 model and fitted them to BMW 335i, I asked them why they did not send the car to a tyre fitment centre. They did not answer me. They fitted wheels for themselves without doing a proper job, to send a car for a wheel alignment and wheel balancing. Then front wheels started to make noise while I was driving back to my place. The fact that on 05/07/2019 they send a car to roadworthy test and it passed, on the 08/07/2019 the date of delivery they changed tyres, they put tyres that come from the other car. They delivered a car to me without doing a proper inspection that it means the road test, is invalid since they made changes after road test. 3. I need more clarity why they did not disclose the two accidents that happened to the car in the past years, before bought it? • I need more explanation to the fact that even if the dealership thought that this is a minor accident, does that mean or give the dealership authority not to disclose such important information to the client? The dealership still has an obligation to disclose it, to the buyer before we come with a valid agreement. 4. The minor accident that you mention is a proof that you were fully aware of those two accidents that happened to the car and you did not disclosure it to me. The fact that the BMW highlighted those two accidents as major accidents not minor accidents. 5. On the 08/07/2019 the dealership enforce me to take the car even it was uninsured, I state to them my insurance will start to cover the vehicle from on the 09/07/2019, they use duress influence. “If I am not take car on that date they will give other client”. I am end up take the car even it was not insured and I sign delivery note on 08/07/2019 the release. Policy confirmation caver attach 6. There is nothing involving dealership direct or indirect regarding my insurance claim and decision taken is personal.

Conclusion NON DISCLOSURE OF TWO ACCIDENTS • The dealership hid the Material Fact and they didn’t act in an honest manner and with integrity to me. It means they are many facts that were hidden regarding that vehicle which lead the car Couse to mix fire. • For them not to disclose the material fact, they reduced the powers an obligation to the buyer to take an informed decision to buy or not buy the car that had accidents. • They used false information so that the buyer can sign the contract. • They Caused damage to the buyer because they failed to act honestly and with integrity. • They sold the car to with a high value, because it was measured with incorrect information as if it had no accidents at all. • The fact that the buyer was not aware that he bought a car with previous accidents, it means their intention is to Robb the buyer and MFC. • The fact that the dealership misused MFC to Robb the client and failed to disclose full description and full nature of the asset that should be financed. • Why MFC put Autonische dealership on a list of trusted dealerships while they do not compel the act of honesty and integrity • The autonische dealership are fully accountable to compensate the buyer because they did not act honestly and with integrity the time they sold the car to the buyer. • They mislead client to sign and to enter into an agreement without full disclosure of materiel fact.