GR86 Vehicle Security

Status
Not open for further replies.
very much agree with @MrsMiggins, but to add a little light-hearted perspective, could be much worse… You could have bought an Alpine A110.

Had one earlier this year, owned it for 5 months before being forced to trade it back to an Alpine dealer after a series of bungling issues. Alpine are woeful to deal with and kept returning the car to me, claiming critical issues had been resolved. Will be taking them to small claims court to recover some of my losses, but just very happy to be rid of the car.

Basically it was a £55k ornament on my driveway for 95% of the time I owned it.
 
Scaramanga said:
very much agree with @MrsMiggins, but to add a little light-hearted perspective, could be much worse… You could have bought an Alpine A110.

Had one earlier this year, owned it for 5 months before being forced to trade it back to an Alpine dealer after a series of bungling issues. Alpine are woeful to deal with and kept returning the car to me, claiming critical issues had been resolved. Will be taking them to small claims court to recover some of my losses, but just very happy to be rid of the car.

Basically it was a £55k ornament on my driveway for 95% of the time I owned it.
Click to expand...

That is very disappointing, given the cost. I would love to have one of those but prices are sky high. Perhaps given your tale, they aren't something to aspire to.
 
Scaramanga said:
Alpine are woeful to deal with and kept returning the car to me, claiming critical issues had been resolved.... Basically it was a £55k ornament on my driveway for 95% of the time I owned it.
Click to expand...
That is so disappointing to hear as the A110 was on my list of future cars to own, along with a 2024 Mustang Dark Horse. The lights of the Alpine remind me of the Ducati 999, which some would consider an ugly sister against the beautiful 996. Nevertheless, I love them all.
 
I still haven't had a reply so I told them I have already found the answer they couldn't be bothered to provide and asked for an alarm to be fitted, lets see what they say.
 
They have replied with the stock answer given to others previously, told them it's not acceptable and to treat my query as a formal complaint.
 
Disappointing, not least due to the abysmal tone. It’s one thing delivering bad news but doing so with the written equivalent of a DILLIGAF/gallic shrug is even more incendiary.

With the long dark nights now well and truly here it’s the sort of thing that needs projecting on the front of Toyota’s head office so any potential customers get a crystal clear view of the company they’ll be dealing with!
 
I was fairly mocking in both my emails, they really are a joke for such a large company, they should just hold their hands up and make good the situation. They would get far better publicity out of it rather than try and duck their obligations.

#myfirsttoyotaandmylast
 
Apologies adding to this thread but we're at post #429 and still no resolution.

As per v8s, having chased my TOL contact, he dutifully provided the lengthy standard answer that we all appear to be receiving, full of sweepings under the rug, and signing off hoping it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the car etc, etc. 🙄

My enjoyment of the car per se will not be affected but it's the principal fact that you said it had something that it didn't!

It is like selling a selection box and the Topic (remember those?) hasn't been included.

I concur with others in that the response is pathetic and very much less than watertight legally.
 
Don't forget the mirror that has disappeared. Early on a lot of us had paid with the specification in hand, before seeing the vehicle.

Only later did they spin this approach of "that's the spec, take it or leave it" which was obviously an after thought after the point of sale clearly a response to them becoming aware of their own mistakes when ordering from the factory

All round terrible decisions by Toyota UK, only having costs in mind, and not their own company values. I can't imagine Toyota Japan would treat any of their customers like this, never mind customers of their enthousiast products.
 
Vistalite said:
I concur with others in that the response is pathetic and very much less than watertight legally.
Click to expand...
Indeed. To quote Toyota "Sadly, we are not able to advise on a retrospective fitment or a compatible third-party unit." Utter utter cobblers. GR86 has it fitted in other countries. What makes the car so different for the UK market that it is impossible to fit one. Plenty of after market alarm installers have made a living out of putting alarms in cars and I bet any number of them wouldn't have an issue with putting one in the GR86. Do they not realise how dumb they are coming across when they make a statement like the one above. They just don't want to have to do an expensive recall plain and simple and they are going to do everything they can to avoid it.
 
Toyota have just responded again with this following:

“With reference to our previous email our conclusion is this model does not have an alarm unit fitted. Sadly, we are not able to advise on a retrospective fitment or a compatible third-party unit. we are unable to offer a contribution to have a third party alarm fitted. Please kindly attach a photo in response to this email of the odometer for the mileage of your GR86.”

I won’t speculate at to the reason for wanting an odometer reading. I think my communications with Toyota have concluded.
 
craig_16 said:
I think my communications with Toyota have concluded.
Click to expand...
Nah, escalate it to formal complaint.
Why are they asking for mileage reading? What has that got to do with anything?
 
To establish misrepresentation, you need to show that the seller made a statement of fact (rather than opinion) to you, which induced you to enter the contract and was, in fact, untrue. There are three different types of misrepresentation: fraudulent, negligent and innocent.

Negligent misrepresentation: a representation made carelessly and in breach of duty owed by Party A to Party B to take reasonable care that the representation is accurate.

To bring a misrepresentation claim to a civil court, you, as the Claimant, must prove on the balance of probabilities that:
  1. A false statement of fact or law was made.
  2. That statement induced you to enter into the contract.
  3. Because of the misrepresentation, you suffered a loss.
False statement of fact, auto dim rear view mirror and alarm system were part of the specified package.

Carr purchased on assumption that the specification was as per the sales and marketing details.

Loss, because the items aren’t included, and loss because the group 45 setting must be influenced by lack of alarm function.


Out of interest does the auto have an alarm in the UK, anyone know?
 
v8s said:
Why are they asking for mileage reading? What has that got to do with anything?
Click to expand...
I'm not a lawyer and may be barking up the wrong tree, so please take this with a pinch of salt: It might have something to do with preempting any attempts to reject the car. I.e., Toyota showing that the owner has had many miles out of the car before raising a complaint re. a perceived fault/missing equipment.
 
v8s said:
Nah, escalate it to formal complaint.
Why are they asking for mileage reading? What has that got to do with anything?
Click to expand...
I have some ideas, but I’m not going to speculate publicly, and I won’t be giving them my odometer reading in order to find out.

Regarding a formal complaint, I don’t really have the time or energy for it. I’m going to try and focus on the positives (about the car and my life in general) rather than putting mental energy into something negative. Toyota have simply lost me as a future customer, but otherwise I reckon I’m done with this.
 
I was looking at the more advanced dash cams with interior camera’s, motion sensors, 4g alerts. Seems like a decent product to consider.

I ‘might’ ask TUK if they want to buy me one
 
Silver Fox said:
I'm not a lawyer and may be barking up the wrong tree, so please take this with a pinch of salt: It might have something to do with preempting any attempts to reject the car. I.e., Toyota showing that the owner has had many miles out of the car before raising a complaint re. a perceived fault/missing equipment.
Click to expand...
Possibly. Seems as though they are looking for evidence to fend off any claim already.
craig_16 said:
I have some ideas, but I’m not going to speculate publicly, and I won’t be giving them my odometer reading in order to find out.

Regarding a formal complaint, I don’t really have the time or energy for it. I’m going to try and focus on the positives (about the car and my life in general) rather than putting mental energy into something negative. Toyota have simply lost me as a future customer, but otherwise I reckon I’m done with this.
Click to expand...
It only takes a minute to reply to the email asking them to turn your query into a formal complaint, even if you don't have the fight in you to follow it through you will be helping others that want to take them on, the more complaints they have the better for us as they will not be able to fob us off with their crap attitude if the trickle of complaints turns into a flood.
 
Surly mileage can't be held against us as we have all assumed the alarm was working the entire time. Its only recently we became aware it might not even be installed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top