PromotiveReviews of promotive.biz

Rubbish. Took my car in for a leak-check of the air-conditioning system, and re-gassing. When I collected the car, the receptionist assured me the system was properly sealed and the air-conditioning was blowing cold again. This was untrue: the air-conditioning did not blow cold; at best the fans blew ambient air into the cabin. While I am not disputing that they filled the system, they obviously didn't check it properly. Any refrigerant gas they put in leaked out before I picked up the car. To add insult to injury, while my car was in their care, they opened the driver's window for whatever reason, and the window regulator broke. I returned to find my driver's side window stuck half-open and inoperable. The window glass was covered with dirty fingermarks where they had obviously tried to close it manually and failed. Somehow, they neglected to mention this either when it happened or when I paid and picked up the car. Promotive is unprofessional and slapdash. On the evidence of my experience, their work is of inferior quality and they are not trustworthy. I would certainly take no car to them again.

I chose Promotive because its website presented the business as an “MOT testing station” offering “dealer-level Lotus servicing” and told Elise owners to trust Promotive with the “expert care that it deserves.” That sounded reassuring. The reality was anything but. I handed over my 2014 Lotus Elise believing Promotive would carry out the MOT and look after the car at its Rogerstone premises. I was not told that Promotive would instead drive it on public roads to Cyril Rogers & Sons, hand over the vehicle and keys to another business, or leave it there overnight. I discovered where my car was only because I checked its tracker. Promotive later confirmed in writing that it does not perform the statutory MOT itself and that my Elise had been driven to its testing partner and stored there overnight. None of that was clearly disclosed before I booked or surrendered possession of the car. Promotive also replaced the rear tyres. The invoice described them simply as “225 45 17 Yokohama Advan tyre.” Only after I pushed for the full specification did Promotive confirm it had fitted Yokohama Advan Sport V105S 225/45 ZR17 94Y XL tyres. The Lotus handbook specifies Yokohama Advan Neova AD07 225/45 R17 91W tyres and states that the Elise’s specially tailored tyre construction is identified by an LTS marking, with replacements to be similarly marked. I repeatedly asked Promotive for the Lotus or Yokohama technical basis for selecting the materially different reinforced XL variant. That justification was never provided. Immediately after collecting the car, it felt alarmingly unstable at motorway speed. The weight seemed to shift from side to side under acceleration and I had to make repeated steering corrections. After I pressed for the actual pressure used, Promotive confirmed that the newly fitted rear tyres had been set to 35 psi. The Lotus handbook specifies 29 psi cold. Promotive itself acknowledged that this could affect the handling characteristics of a lightweight Elise. I then found both front tyres at approximately 18 psi, against the specified 26 psi. After reinflating them, both dropped back to around 18 psi overnight. I had also noticed a rubber-scrub or brake-release-type sound immediately while pulling away from the MOT centre, before any high-speed driving. That sound stopped after the pressures were corrected. I am not claiming, before independent inspection, that Promotive caused the front pressure loss. What I can say is that my car was released after an MOT with no warning about a serious and recurring pressure problem, alongside rear tyres that Promotive had deliberately inflated above Lotus’s stated setting. The result was that the vehicle became unusable and I had to abandon a planned journey to a wedding at short notice. I had been looking forward to arriving in the Elise; instead, I was left trying to arrange alternative transport while dealing with a car I no longer felt safe driving. I submitted a detailed formal complaint supported by Promotive’s own emails, website screenshots, tracker evidence, handbook extracts and photographs. Promotive declined to answer the individual factual and technical issues. Its proposed resolution was to refund only the two rear tyres, provided that I: • paid to have them removed; • sourced and fitted replacements at my own expense; • returned the tyres within seven days with at least 7 mm of tread remaining; and • signed away every claim arising from the work as full and final settlement. When I rejected those conditions and suggested a practical alternative, Promotive stated that it had “nothing further to add.” When I later reported the recurrent front pressure loss and explained that the vehicle was no longer safe to use, the response was simply that Promotive had not worked on the front tyres and that its previous position remained unchanged. What has stayed with me most is not simply that things went wrong. It is the complete absence of accountability afterwards. A business advertising “expert care” for specialist cars should be transparent about where those cars are being taken, able to justify the tyres and pressures it selects, and willing to investigate credible safety concerns. Instead, I experienced undisclosed vehicle movement, unanswered technical questions, an impractical settlement offer and repeated attempts to close the conversation without addressing the substance. I would not entrust a specialist vehicle to Promotive again. The service and repair dispute has now been referred to The Motor Ombudsman, and the website representations have been submitted to the Advertising Standards Authority. I will update this review when the independent inspection and formal investigations are complete.

Unfortunately, I have to give a negative rating and it’s kind of sad as I was so happy to find a MINI specialist around my area and now this happened. I can’t take it from them that they changed my tyres on the same day but they scammed me, too. I brought my car in for changing the two front tyres and the first few minutes we found out that the security nut is missing from the car. I searched the car and couldn’t find it either. Mechanic “we can remove it, no problem”. Me: “I would go home as I live 10 mins away, just wouldn’t book another appointment and it wouldn’t be too safe”. Mechanic: “it’s ok we can remove it, but there could be some damages” Me: “but just cosmetic ones, not functional, right?” Mechanic: “yes, just cosmetic”. Me: “yeah, let’s do it then, just be careful as much as you can, thank you!” He didn’t mention anything that he is going to charge me anything. When they finished, the guy brings the bill and there’s a £90 charge for removing the two nuts. Me: “mate, what is this? It’s too much. You didn’t say you’re going to charge me anything, you literally offered me to remove it. I told you I can just go home if you can’t remove it. You never mentioned you’re going to charge me and never agreed on the any price. Obviously, I wouldn’t have agreed on anything as I just live 10 mins away!” I have offered them £20 to pay and they didn’t accept it. I had a conversation with the owner, too and they didn’t want to release my car until I pay for it. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and general UK contract law, a contract for services requires mutual agreement on price — or at minimum, the trader must inform you that there will be a charge. If the mechanic said “no probs, they can remove it” with zero mention of any cost, he arguably created the impression it was included in whatever you were already paying. Shocking, disgusting and very low level of customer service. Shame.