ManheimBewertungen 

My 2 year lease deal on my 2020 Vauxhall Grandland X ended and an Inspector from Manheim turned up to inspect the vehicle. After his introduction and his manner I thought we’ve got a right jobs worth here. He then spent nearly an hour inspecting the vehicle, with a ruler, magnifying glass, camera and some card with horizontal lines across it. He then called me and pointed out what he had found. I could see a tiny dent in a door that was only visible from a certain angle. He then said he had noticed one dent to the panel above the near side wheel arch and something similar above the offside rear wheel arch. I stood back and said I can’t see any dents on either side. He agreed they weren’t openly visible but then held this card with the horizontal lines under the so called dents and shone a light on the dents and said can you see the lines they are distorted which indicates an uneven service. I said I can’t see a distorted lines and pointed out again there are no dents that I can see. He then pointed out some minor scuff marks on the alloys and a small scuff mark on top of the near side wing mirror. He then said the cost of repair would be £472. I refused to agree with his findings and he left. My opinion during this experience was this guy was forgetting this car was nearly 5 years old with over 58.000 miles on the clock but he was determined to find as much wrong as possible, even if it wasn’t visible to the naked eye.
I was wondering if they get some sort of commission on the so called damage charges they try to get from these inspections?

I was having sleepless nights worrying about the inspection, mainly due to the reviews on here. David Rowley was just a pleasure to deal with; punctual, friendly and utterly professional, I couldn’t fault him- a real credit to the company. Most surprisingly was how cost effective the few cosmetic damages came to, very reasonable and not what I expected at all.

David Rowley was professional and very helpful. He contacted me a few days before and explained the process and gave me a 1hr time frame for the collection of the car.

David was on time and his customer service was amazing. He explained the process and how long the inspection would take. Returning a car at the end of a lease is always stressful however David reassured me all would be good. I had looked after the car and returned it in excellent condition. He happily answered any questions I had and David was very polite and does his job well. Nothing was too much for David very polite. An asset to Manheim. Thank you David 🙂

**My £490 Leasing Return Nightmare (Settled for £18!)**

Let me tell you about returning my lease car, a Hyundai Tucson. After three years and 42,000 miles, I’d kept it in what I considered mint condition.

The inspector arrived and went over the car with a fine-tooth comb, searching for any tiny flaw. He produced a report with a laundry list of "defects," totalling a shocking £490.24. My options were to pay on the spot or reject the report. I immediately rejected it.

The most unbelievable claim? That the tailgate had a "rippled paint finish," suggesting a secret crash and a bad repair job. I was speechless.

After he left, I took my own photos and his report straight to my local Hyundai dealership. We compared it to a brand-new Tucson right on the forecourt. The salesman took one look and said, "That's just the factory finish. The inspector is at it."

It took weeks of back-and-forth and formal complaints to Hyundai, but I eventually settled the bill for just £18. Yes, you read that right—**eighteen pounds.**

My advice for anyone returning a lease to Manheim?
1. **Have witnesses.** I will have two people with me next time to watch and film the entire inspection.
2. **Challenge everything.** Do not accept a single word on their report without evidence. They count on you just paying up.
3. **Trust your gut.** If a charge seems ridiculous, it probably is. Fight it.

Don't let them con you out of your money.

Having read the reviews I'm not surprised at such a poor service and arrogant inspector and the things he was point out and noting were ridiculous and we are talking about a car that is 7 years old, we purchased it from 3 years old so 2 owner from new and picking up stone chips and general wear and tear you would expect of a 7 year-old car, even said great youve had the alloys repaired but you should left them and we would do it 80 a wheel so might have to strip them back and do again..wtaf.... End of it he quoted 1100 repairs ... needless to say that isn't happening and all disputed.. what are they wanting a showroom condition car thats 7 years old.. This company are just a bunch cowboys and need investigating

Basically my collection time was 10:50 and they send me message with 5 mins notice, didn't even had a chance to get the car to valeting, seems like they don't even respect people ...

After reading all the reviews I was really worried but I had a lovely lady turn up to do the inspection. She was thorough but fair and we had no charges. Car was taken by staff waiting in an adjacent vehicle. All completed within an hour.

My pickup truck leased from Novuna was inspected by Manheim upon termination of the agreement. I had no choice but to use Manheim as that is who Novuna use.
Firstly, Novuna sent me lots of useful information about what to expect when the vehicle was examined. I was given links to videos and told exactly what damage would count against me.
I thoroughly cleaned and valeted my truck myself the day prior to inspection. I am a cautious driver and I had treated the vehicle well. It only had a tiny dink above a wheel arch where I had climbed on the tyre to clean the rear window. My knee made contact with the wheel arch causing the dink.
The inspector arrived on time having phoned ahead first. I had cleared my drive and placed the truck in the centre so that it could be inspected properly.
I left the inspector to do his job without interruption and i was surprised when it was completed in about 20 minutes.
The dink was priced at £75 but Novuna ‘allow’ £150 of damage free so I incurred no extra fees. It’s worth pointing out that the alloys were unmarked. If I was buying a used vehicle, I’d expect a reduction in price for damaged alloys. Reviewers who complain they were charged for ‘light scuffing’ to wheels obviously didn’t read the paperwork!
The whole experience with Manheim was first class. The inspector was friendly, courteous and explained everything. He actually thanked me for taking trouble to ensure he could do his job easily. I got the impression he didn’t often inspect a vehicle that had been so well looked after.
Now that I have experienced how Manheim work, I would be happy for them to inspect my vehicles in the future.
Having read all the info I was provided, there were no surprises. Ignore the reviews that state the inspectors try and find faults to penalise the customer. They’re just doing their job to the industry standard!

Be very very cautious in dealing with Manheim who claim to adhere to BVRLA guidelines (on fair wear and tear) and Novuna inspection requirements on car collections. Novuna were unwilling or unable to explain to me the inconsistency of their stated vehicle “visual inspection “ and the 90 minute (Novuna quote a 30-45 minute inspection time)spent by the Manheim inspector (an ex-second-hand car salesman he told me who arrived without any identification) with mirrors and a Zebra board on his hands and knees looking for any tiny imperfection!
Not sure how that aligns to a “visual” inspection?
I am a 30 year experienced retired financial services regulator, currently a Non-Executive Director of a quoted finance group with a motor HP subsidiary and experienced in the introduction of the FCA’s Consumer Duty regulations and have colleagues closely engaged with the Finance & Leasing Association (FLA).
Hopefully, my background shows I am both industry experienced and understand what a consumer should reasonably expect from their financial product provider as part of the “customer” journey.

At the completion of the inspector’s tablet documentation - having left the car running for 30 minutes to apparently see if any warning lights would come on - the car was serviced 3 weeks earlier by a main dealership (he also apparently spoke to VW service plans to check details of service requirements when full documentation was available) and been informed that I had a compressor and puncture repair kit missing (tubeless Hankook self-seal tyres fitted to my Seat) a report with a c£245 bill raised to Novuna.
I signed his tablet with my dispute of the charge for missing equipment and a pin head chip (£85 charge) on the rear bumper described as a “gouge”.
I immediately raised a complaint with Novuna, contacted Hankook’s technical team and Seat Customer Services to confirm I was correct with my assertions.

Before Novuna responded upholding my complaint and waiving all charges (they have a £150 allowances) they had the cheek to send an invoice for the Manheim identified charges.
Having not received a satisfactory reply from Novuna regarding the distress a consumer could suffer I intend to raise the matter with the Financial Ombudsman Service which, I believe could cost Novuna a charge of £700 when I might have been placated with an apology and confirmation that they would reflect on the possible failure of their understanding of the “customer journey “ expectation!

Long-time customer betrayed – dangerous car sold with false inspection report

I’ve been buying from Manheim for over 10 years, and I’ve even left positive reviews in the past. But after this experience, I feel genuinely betrayed.

I recently purchased a Ford Grand C-Max through Manheim’s online platform, relying entirely on the vehicle description and their SureCheck Silver report a service I paid extra for. What I received was nothing like what was advertised.
• The car has a severe gearbox fault loud “dhug” noises when shifting into Drive or Reverse, harsh engagement, and it barely moves.
• It should have been sold as a non-runner.
• The DPF pressure sensor was missing, the oil dipstick was left open, and the engine bay was covered in oil.
• The smell inside the car is unbearable, and no normal person could sit in it for more than a minute.
• The car took four attempts to start, misfired badly, and clearly has major mechanical faults.

None of these faults were mentioned in the SureCheck report. That report gave me false confidence to commit to the purchase.

When I filed a SureCheck claim, it was immediately dismissed with technicalities: “fault not covered because it was reported while stationary.” This is a textbook example of how SureCheck staff are trained to deny genuine claims, no matter how obvious the issue is, while carefully wording responses to protect themselves instead of the customer. I’ve seen other buyers face the same tactics.

To make matters worse, workshop said it looks like engine appears to have been swapped because all the major wiring and pipes are not connected in order and clamps are either open or different which doesn’t even show on the HPI report. And now I’m stuck with a dangerous, misdescribed vehicle. They knew everything about car, because car had few stickers from previous sales that confirms they have been trying to sell it but couldn’t get anyone hooked up to it. Further investigation shows cars been off the road for last 6 months. So they charged massive amount in terms of fees but can’t tell truth after even charging for it.

For those thinking of buying online from Manheim be extremely cautious. The SureCheck report is NOT reliable. It’s not a real protection it’s a checkbox exercise designed to avoid liability. You’re paying for a false sense of security. Perhaps this is their new business model lie to sell, if it turns out bad we can lie more and no need to own it anyway, technically this is how businesses go down so quickly and they just wonder the cause of business failure. If you can’t tell the truth, if you can’t respect people who have been with you for years, if you don’t respect yourself and own it. Then it’s a big lesson to be learnt for people who are thinking about purchasing anything from this place. So disappointed that i can’t describe in words

Funny they replied after a year when they had people in their customer service to bark at me, their branch refused to attend phones and did not reply to emails, i bought another car, fake report i asked to confirm if certain things are what they say are but in photos they were not, it was a provisional bid wasn’t even confirmed sale, and he said i can’t confirm then i told him i can’t be a victim again i am sitting 300 miles away i can’t come to see things all you have to say is yes or no, he said well it is what it is, 2019 golf, and he sold it to me without confirming but i refused to pay, guess what same branch started calling me , emailing me they responded to all emails, they carried on send me threats but didn’t want to confirm what i asked, pressurised sale by sending me storage charges almost everyday then said we will have to close the account, it’s only this Colchester branch and certain individuals in leeds in their customer service but rest are fine, never had issues at Bristol Birmingham and many other branches, but these two places are shocking that has no explanation now they want me to get in touch. I tell you the couldn’t sell that car for 6 months obviously mt suspension were right. All they had to do is to tell truth and nothing would have happened.but business model has changed to dishonesty.

It would actually be hillarious how bad Manheim are if it didn’t make returning the car really stressful. The vehicle inspector was so rude I thought he was joking to begin with. You wont have an option to opt out of using them if that’s who your lease holder uses to return cars. The review more of a warning of the service you are about to receive.

I had a very positive experience with Manheim this morning. Derek called me yesterday to confirm that he would arrive between 10-1pm today and at around 10am he called again to say he was 5 mins away. Shortly later, he pulled up with his colleague, Stan, whom he was training. They were both very courteous and professional and inspected my vehicle thoroughly. Although I was given a £200 bill at the end, this was to be expected given the issues they found, and I can't fault them for anything.

I've leased cars for years and never had the pleasure of Manheim before (always BCA collecting), however I know the ropes on collection day but this time was an experience I've never had with BCA and was a farce from start to finish.
3 men turned up at just after 8am, one hung around at the end of my road (which was about 50ft away - no idea why as he was the one who eventually drove the car off), one sat in the Skoda across my driveway and the other got out to inspect - right off the bat that can be intimidating. The inspector took the keys, with the full Hyundai Service History, locking wheel nuts and within the pack, the MOT cert from the car passing it's MOT THE DAY BEFORE at Hyundai Main Dealership (however I hadn't mentioned the MOT when handing the docs over). I think it must have been all of 2 mins before he called me back to say he can't take the car as the tyre is illegal. I asked him to show me, he put the gauge in the very outside of the tyre, I told him that is completely incorrect and to measure within the middle 75% and in an actual tread as the very outside is not classed as tread (as it doesn't have the tread wear bar/mound within), he then puts it into the next in line ON the tread wear bar and promptly tells me it is 1.59 so illegal. I explain to him he is measuring on the tread wear bar and not on the actual tread plus he already measured incorrectly on the outside rim. 5 mins back and forth, the inspector then puts on a show of 'calling his manager' - proceeds to wander off down the street out of earshot, then wanders back a few mins later talking on the phone 'So let me just confirm boss, it's a definite no'.....
So basically I am now at my most 'direct', I show him the MOT cert from the day before where the car passed, I show him the Service Notes the car received the day before all from Hyundai. I then tell him to measure the middle 75% of the tyre in front of me and with me filming it and to measure on the actual tread and not the wear bar - first time the inspector does this he tries to STILL rest the gauge on the edge of the wear bar but it doesn't give him the read he wants - I point out he has still done it wrong, he proceeds to tell me he needs to recalibrate the gauge, he does this, then re-measures where I tell him to - reading is absolutely fine so he then says it needs recalibrating again and then proceeds to measure multiple times in the right tread lines across all the tyre - low and behold NO ISSUES and he accepts he needs to sign it off as legal. 10 mins later proceeds to tell me the alloys (where 2 of them did have scuffs on which I was aware of and expecting to be pointed out albeit i think would have fell within fair wear and tear), tells me they are not scuffs but actual corrosion which is chargeable. He then points out another tyre has a tear in it (it wasn't a tear and again I pointed out the MOT and Service notes - no mention of it otherwise it would have failed!). I took all pictures of my own and videos of my own as the inspectors pictures seemed very subjective. At the end of the inspection he told me he needs to cover himself so is putting a charge on for the tyres regardless and putting the alloys as corrosion - £680 in total. He told me Manheim have higher standards the BVRLA and manage their charges differently. I said I'm disputing with all my own evidence, he told me to wait for the finance company to contact me - I didn't I raised it with them immediately after he left. I also had to chase the inspector for hours to get the report through via email - told me it would come through within 10 mins (i knew then he was talking nonsense - email should be through instantly after report being submitted). Once I got the report through, he had put the wrong collection date on, captured the MOT date incorrectly (in fact classed it as un MOT'd!) and had put the wrong engine and fuel type down too. I disputed and complained to the Finance company and the charges have been removed. This company and this inspector (and his mates) all acting like wide boys and geezahs around me, telling me they make no money out of this nor get any kick back but then tell me their company that they work for (Manheim) auction the cars once back as quickly as possible meaning that if the company turns a nice little profit then the employees are likely to benefit from bonus etc so it's no wonder they tray to fleece the regular person. Awful inspector (I haven't named him here but bloke was a total wally as you can see from my review) and awful practice on a car that had done just over 20k miles in 3 years and was in great condition - the fact he had to go after the tyres and alloys only shows that they were searching for something to grab some money back.

Jordan coles arrived this morning to collect my Nissan leaf, I had a text last night confirming time and they were dead on.
Inspection took about 30 mins and the only thing that came up was what I was expecting (small dent on the wing) at £34
He was friendly explained everything and I was very happy with the service overall.

I was really worried having read the reviews that this was going to be a bad experience. I did not get a text or notification of when they were coming - because the lease company had given them the wrong number! So the guy turned up while I was at the swimming pool. Fortunately someone else at home. He waited for me to return, did a very fair inspection of the car (one dent £48) and politely and pleasantly did the return. I could not fault them - genuinely. Not the bad experience I was expecting at all.

Ian Matthews was the inspector for the return of my car after being leased from Novuna.
He arrived on time and introduced himself and a colleague from head office.
He explained the process and how long he would take to do the inspection. After the allotted time he presented me with a full report on damage charges. The charges were in line with BVRLA guidelines and as I expected.
I did explain the that i had not damaged the alloy wheels and he agreed they were as a result of corrosion and he would note that on the report.
He was calm and respectful and after I was concerned about reports I had heard about Novuna he reassured me that the car was well kept and I should have no issues with charges in the future if I kept the cars in the condition it was in.

If there was an option for zero I would select it. Baring in mind all of this occurred only 3 weeks after passing a valid MOT. First collection was aborted due to a supposed bulge one of the tyres. When I return from work there is no evidence of said bulge. After being told their inspections are completed to a higher standard than MOTs (how an earth are customers supposed to know how to make sure the car is fit for collection!). When changing the tyre the company that changed state that there was no bulge whatsoever (they pumped the tyre to 50psi!) and agreed to go on record! First collector (after a 2 hr inspection) stated if it weren’t for the tyre he would have taken it. Complaint to Stellantis and collection rebooked. Now rejected on other grounds (not mentioned before). This is a scam and a way of racking up abort charges. Bunch of crooks.

In the last 30 year I have had many company cars and lease privately from Hyundai Finance and never paid reparations - until this year 2024 - I have never had anyone inspect a vehicle on return like this firm - they are actively out to make money off the customers on behalf of Hyundai Leasing - due to delay with delivery my vehcile was 4.5 years old they expected it to be in show room condition - £858/ bill (they alway do the - you don't have to sign it just dispute it with your leasing compnay excuse) - I will never lease a car either company or privately if I know that this firm is their logistics agents - raise an issue with regulator as to their impariatity -

Very poor service from one of their team. They turned up 15 minutes early to pre arrange appointment (10am). Message from someone called James using 07385661896 confirming appointment time day prior.

When I turned up at 10am there were two males sat in a Skoda in the car park of my office. While I parked outside my office the Skoda began leaving the car park. I walked over and asked if they were here to collect the car to which they responded abruptly saying yes however were just about to leave. I responded saying my appointment time was between 10:00-11:00 and the time was 10:04. The male in the passenger seat then said ‘yes but my message said the times may vary’

Due to his dismissive arrogant tone and attitude I asked them to leave.

Very poor service

My vehicle was due for collection today. Inspector turned up, took ages inspecting vehicle, then after approx half an hour told me one of the tyres was defective and the car was unsafe to drive. The vehicle passed its mot 4 days ago! I think they were looking for an excuse to abort the collection which costs customers £174.