1
Hasan is completely dissatisfied with the result

Unresolved Chronic Issues With My Chery OMODA 5

Hasan
September 04, 4:44 pm
32

Chery OMODA 5 frequently experiences Bluetooth and Apple CarPlay disconnections, and reconnection does not work until the vehicle is restarted. While driving, there is also a loss of throttle response, causing the vehicle to stop accelerating. The Start-Stop system fails to function consistently, sometimes causing shaking and raising safety concerns, and when stopped at a red light, the vehicle automatically restarts after 25 seconds. Additionally, the multimedia system occasionally suffers a complete loss of audio, which can only be restored by fully restarting the vehicle.

Progress
Progress

September 21, 8:49 pm

On 14.06.2024, I purchased a Chery Omoda 5 Excellent with chassis number LVVDB21B6RD888059 and engine number SQRF4J16AURC05727 from Diyarbakır Odabaşı Madeni Yağ Akaryakıt ve Pet. Ürün. San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. Starting from August 2024, I began experiencing serious technical faults with my vehicle. Issues such as Start/Stop system malfunction, sound interruptions, stalling and loss of power while driving, and occasionally failure to start occurred.

To resolve these faults, I delivered my vehicle to the authorized service center three times on 24.10.2024, 05.11.2024, and 25.11.2024. Despite the vehicle staying at the service center for 2-3 days each time, the problems were not resolved. In June 2025, a technical team from Istanbul also acknowledged the existence of the faults, and this was recorded in the service records. Most recently, on 21.07.2025, I delivered my vehicle to Van Berk Motorlu Taşıtlar Paz. San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. Chery service for the fifth time, and my vehicle has been waiting at the service center for 62 days, exceeding the legal time limits. During this process, a replacement vehicle was provided only after the 10th day.

Although my vehicle has only 6000 km on it, it has been to the service center more than three times for the same faults and has remained in the service center for over 30 days. Therefore, under the Turkish Commercial Code and Law No. 6502 on Consumer Protection, my vehicle qualifies as a 'defective product.'

In accordance with my legal rights, I request that my vehicle be replaced with a new, non-defective one. I want my grievance to be resolved and the legal obligations to be fulfilled.

September 05, 11:22 am (18 hours after complaint)
Hasan
September 10, 4:25 pm

The same response is always given to complaints and suggestions. With nice words like 'We apologize, we have forwarded it to the relevant department, you will be contacted as soon as possible, we will continue to keep you informed,' you stall the person concerned and do nothing. It is true that I was called regarding the complaint written on 04.09.2025, but that was all. Customer service only called and repeated the nice phrases written here, that's it. The service advisor did not call, the technician did not call, no one from the technical team called, etc. I have no information whatsoever about the vehicle. The vehicle has been in service for 51 days (21.07.2025-10.09.2025). I have no information about how much longer I need to wait. Even if a part is being ordered from abroad, as far as we can tell from our own overseas shopping experiences, it should have been here within a maximum of 28 days. Apparently, everything remains in writing and words only. This does not suit Chery Turkey and Chery International.

September 10, 4:28 pm
Hasan
September 10, 4:41 pm

As a customer, I don't know if it can be removed from a vehicle for sale and installed in my car so that neither I nor you are aggrieved. This way, you would pay less for car rental and I wouldn't have to use the replacement vehicle that I am dissatisfied with. Problems should be approached with a solution-oriented mindset. Or, approve the replacement of my vehicle with a faultless one, which is my legal right, and let this issue be resolved.

September 24, 3:43 pm
Hasan
October 07, 11:42 pm

Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers – Articles 8, 10, and 11 In the following cases, the vehicle is considered a 'defective product' and the right to replacement or refund arises: 1- The same malfunction occurs for the 4th time: (The decisions of the 13th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court are also in this direction.) 2- If the time spent in service exceeds 30 business days: According to the Warranty Certificate Regulation (Article 13), if the repair carried out within the warranty period is not completed within 30 business days, the manufacturer or importer is obliged to replace the vehicle with a new one. 3- If the malfunction affects the safety or usability of the vehicle: If there is a malfunction in safety components such as brakes, engine, steering, electronic system, the right to replacement or refund can be exercised directly without waiting for recurrence. • Law No. 6502 (Articles 8, 10, 11, 56) • Warranty Certificate Regulation (Official Gazette, 13.06.2014 – Article 13) • Regulation on the Return of Defective Products • Supreme Court 13th Civil Chamber, 2018/11042 e. – 2020/6720 k. Decision: 'If the same malfunction recurs for the fourth time, the product is considered defective and the right to replacement arises.' In summary • The vehicle has been taken to service 5 times for the same malfunction, • It has been in service since 21.07.2025 (far exceeding 30 business days), • The service has stated that the malfunction cannot be fixed. Within this scope, I request that my demand for replacement with a brand new vehicle be met. Additionally, I request that my grievance caused by my vehicle being kept in service for a long time be taken into consideration, and if necessary, that the refund of the vehicle price or the replacement process be initiated promptly. Otherwise, I hereby state that I will initiate the necessary legal process before the Consumer Arbitration Committee of the Ministry of Trade and judicial authorities.

October 08, 2:21 pm
profile-icon
To be able to comment, or .

Comments

Be the first to comment
Report a Similar Issue