I Demand Chery Tiggo 8 Pro Taillights Be Replaced Under Warranty Due to Internal Cracks

Hello, I purchased a 2024 model Chery Tiggo 8 Pro (VIN: LVTDB21B4RD443764, Plate: 28 ADH 908) from BLF Otomotiv in Samsun. My car has only 38,000 km on it and has received all of its scheduled maintenance at this authorized dealer. During the 45,000 km service (which I completed early), I showed them clear internal cracks forming in the rear taillights. The service team said they would report the issue to the warranty department.

To my shock, the warranty team responded by blaming “user error.” They asked whether I had applied PPF (paint protection film). I told them no—and the scratches on the bodywork prove it. Their reply? “Maybe you had it applied and removed.” That makes no sense. Why would someone pay nearly ₺100,000 for PPF only to remove it later? Even if I had removed it, what does that have to do with internal cracks?

They also claimed taillights might have been removed during PPF application. I asked the service rep, “Can’t your technicians tell whether the taillights were removed or not?” No answer.

Another absurd response I got was, “These cars sit for months under the sun—if they were going to crack, they would’ve cracked then.” I responded, “So you accept fading paint as a chronic issue and cover it, but this isn’t? That logic would mean no part should ever qualify for warranty!”

In addition, the sunroof curtain issue I’ve reported during every service—where it doesn’t close fully when the car is locked—still hasn’t been resolved. They keep applying spray and calling it a “fix.”

I demand a proper inspection by your authorized mechanics to determine whether these taillights were removed or damaged externally. Based on the clear signs of a manufacturing or installation defect, both taillights should be replaced immediately. I also request that necessary warnings be issued to the BLF Otomotiv service team regarding how they handled this situation.