Setting the example of one member with one bike aside for the moment, (I will get there) I want to comment on the issue of the role of BMW MOA in our contentious society. I think having an Ombudsman (Consumer Liaison) is a good idea. That allows a calm advocate for any member who feels aggrieved by BMW Motorrad USA or a dealer or vendor. It can add a calm voice to try to sort out a given problem.
But no voluntary recreational membership association has much clout to force or cause a company to do what it is unwilling to do. Trying to do that is both futile and harmful. We have a variety of institutions that do have the ability to require companies to do things. They include warranties; state lemon laws and attornies general; state consumer protection agencies; the US DOT NHTSA when safety is an issue; and of course attorneys, courts, and litigation. Depending on the circumstances they also include the availability of small claims courts.
I was around and still remember the days when BMW MOA and Butler and Smith (the importer) and later BMW of North America saw themselves as adversaries. When BMW MOA saw itself as having "clout" it took a while but we did discover that we had no such thing really. And the membership suffered to a degree by the bad relationship between BMW MOA and BMW.
I understand that in these days of mass social media sometimes it is possible to embarrass a big company to cause it to do something it has decided it doesn't want to do (Apple Maps comes to mind). But I would venture that in the many attempts to do this few succeed. I do recall driving by a hand painted yellow car with a big "Lemon" sign parked in front of a Chevy dealer once and recall that I thought it was pretty funny but I still would have bought a Chevy had I wanted one.
Now to the current case. BMW offers a 3 year - 36,000 mile warranty to protect against defects in materials and workmanship. Honoring that warranty for three years or 36,000 miles is their duty. Beyond that time period, whether we like it or not (and I don't) they are entitled to tell us to go pound big rocks into little grains of sand. The bike in question is now, I believe, seven years old. The real question is whether the defect was discovered within the warranty period but never repaired. It appears from the narrative that the defect was evident within the warranty period. It also appears from the narrative that repeated efforts to treat the symptoms never cured the root problem. Assuming adequate documentation, if that were my circumstance, I might seek redress under the original warranty. That might entail an attorney or self-representation in small claims court. Or, I might not. I might decide that taking a trade offer from the dealer of about half of retail for a 7 year old bike that needs a new motor wasn't all that bad. In my specific case I suspect I would be getting out the tools and putting the bike on my lift to install a used motor.
But this is all just me. I know others see it differently.