GR86 Vehicle Security

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vistalite said:
[

Thank you Mrs Miggins, I have lodged my complaint.

(There's a sentence I never thought I'd be writing šŸ˜„)
Click to expand...

I canā€™t help but hear your reply in Blackadders voice šŸ˜…

1700318183089.webp
 
MrsMiggins said:
If you haven't done so already please enter a complaint on The Motor Ombudsman website. Only takes a couple of mins.
Click to expand...
I want to do this but they need proof of communication with Toyota first. I haven't approached Toyota regarding this matter as I know it would just be wasting my time.
 
Just send an email to Toyota [email protected]. Edit the below as appropriate. You should receive your "get lost" response from Toyota fairly quickly since it's cut and paste.

Hello. I purchased a GR86 registration [your reg] on 20 Apr 2022. At that time the specification included alarm+immobiliser. When arranging my drive home insurance I was again advised that the vehicle was fitted with alarm+immobiliser. I have now learned (not from Toyota) that the vehicle does not have an alarm fitted.

If this is true then the vehicle you have supplied is not as described and you are in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Please confirm whether or not my vehicle has an alarm. If it does not, confirm when you intend to rectify this defect and fit the specified alarm or pay for one to be fitted independently.

Love and kisses

Ninjin
 
Last edited:
I am amazed that Toyota seems to be brushing the lack of alarm under the carpet hoping it will go away..... noting the mood of the forum, I doubt it will.

A company called Cobra, as an example, do a supply and fit of a Thatcham Cat 1 alarm (Cobra 4615 ADR) for Ā£499.99 (suspect this includes VAT of Ā£83.17 which Toyota could recover). If they did the decent thing and agreed to say offer this as a retro fit (noting it stipulated that the vehicle comes with an alarm and immobiliser) and all say 800 (?) cars accepted this, it would cost Toyota Ā£332664 net of VAT (This also assumes they couldn't negotiate a volume discount from them).

I think it would be a small price for Toyota to pay in the long run.
 
If I was CEO of Toyota UK I'd be embarrassed to admit that my people couldn't manage the exceedingly simple task of specifying and delivering this car to my customers. As noted earlier in this thread it's not the most complicated offering they have!
 
MrsMiggins said:
Just send an email to Toyota [email protected]. Edit the below as appropriate. You should receive your "get lost" response from Toyota fairly quickly since it's cut and paste.

Hello. I purchased a GR86 registration [your reg] on 20 Apr 2022. At that time the specification included alarm+immobiliser. When arranging my drive home insurance I was again advised that the vehicle was fitted with alarm+immobiliser. I have now learned (not from Toyota) that the vehicle does not have an alarm fitted.

If this is true then the vehicle you have supplied is not as described and you are in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Please confirm whether or not my vehicle has an alarm. If it does not, confirm when you intend to rectify this defect and fit the specified alarm or pay for one to be fitted independently.

Love and kisses

Ninjin
Click to expand...
Email sent with just a couple of amendments.... :LOL:
 
Shakey456 said:
I am amazed that Toyota seems to be brushing the lack of alarm under the carpet hoping it will go away..... noting the mood of the forum, I doubt it will.

A company called Cobra, as an example, do a supply and fit of a Thatcham Cat 1 alarm (Cobra 4615 ADR) for Ā£499.99 (suspect this includes VAT of Ā£83.17 which Toyota could recover). If they did the decent thing and agreed to say offer this as a retro fit (noting it stipulated that the vehicle comes with an alarm and immobiliser) and all say 800 (?) cars accepted this, it would cost Toyota Ā£332664 net of VAT (This also assumes they couldn't negotiate a volume discount from them).

I think it would be a small price for Toyota to pay in the long run.
Click to expand...
I was looking into CANBUS alarms and the 4615 would be my choice too. The ADR option will also stop Keyless Repeating theft, as the car won't start without the ADR tag in the car.

I've found this place who seem to do it cheaper than your price at Ā£395 fitted incl VAT.

Cobra 4615 Alarm with ADR Tags by Vodafone Automotive | Vehicle Tracking Tech

The Cobra 4614 Alarm with Driver Recognition by Vodafone Automotive is an Alarm system with Driver Recognition and Anti Theft via Key Cloning/RF Key Blocking. The Cobra 4614 provides the original vehicle keys with an additional passive digital signature.
www.vehicletrackingtech.co.uk www.vehicletrackingtech.co.uk
 
I chased Toyota GB today to get them to confirm that they were going to rectify, or confirm that they would not. They will not. They also asked for my mileage...
 
Toyota FS have acknowledged my complaint as per my call on Friday and have max 8 weeks to reply, then possibly financial ombudsman if still not satisfied.
 
Shakey456 said:
I am amazed that Toyota seems to be brushing the lack of alarm under the carpet hoping it will go away..... noting the mood of the forum, I doubt it will.
ā€¦
I think it would be a small price for Toyota to pay in the long run.
Click to expand...
Yes, Toyota acting like some two-bit car company here, not like one of the biggest and most capable in the world.

Their response is utterly shameful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: v8s
I havenā€™t had time to read through all of the posts on this, but Iā€™ve just seen the first few pages. Am I reading this correctly the car was advertised as having an alarm but doesnā€™t actually have one fitted?

Where does it state the car has an alarm ? Iā€™m a little surprised to read this. I wonder if this slant implication of insurance claims and if I ticked the car has an alarm (but now doesnā€™t).
 
Jayware33 said:
I havenā€™t had time to read through all of the posts on this, but Iā€™ve just seen the first few pages. Am I reading this correctly the car was advertised as having an alarm but doesnā€™t actually have one fitted?

Where does it state the car has an alarm ? Iā€™m a little surprised to read this. I wonder if this slant implication of insurance claims and if I ticked the car has an alarm (but now doesnā€™t).
Click to expand...
Someone posted the original spec sheet in pdf form earlier in the thread and it stated it had an alarm, people who took the free 3 day insurance at purchase were told to complete the insurance application as having "standard alarm/immobiliser",

Toyota are brushing it off by saying it doesn't have one, doesn't need one and insurance won't be affected. How do they know if won't be affected come renewal? What happens if there are companies that would provide a cheaper quote if it had an alarm but then refuse to quote because it doesn't have one thus reducing the size of the market for available for quotes? That could have a financial cost for years at every renewal.

I hope none us have to find out how picky insurance companies are if there is a theft and they try and wriggle out of claim due to "incorrectly completed application form."
 
Jayware33 said:
I havenā€™t had time to read through all of the posts on this, but Iā€™ve just seen the first few pages. Am I reading this correctly the car was advertised as having an alarm but doesnā€™t actually have one fitted?

Where does it state the car has an alarm ? Iā€™m a little surprised to read this. I wonder if this slant implication of insurance claims and if I ticked the car has an alarm (but now doesnā€™t).
Click to expand...
I wouldnā€™t consider an alarm a relevant ā€œrating factorā€ for an insurance underwriter or actuary. The immobiliser is far more important from a risk perspective. Both are incidental in comparison to driver record, no-claims, location etc.

A high value, high risk or vulnerable vehicle; Porsche, Ferrari, Range Rover, Defender [any] likely to attract specific underwriter conditions; evidence of a Tracker with subscription service a typical minimum requirement.

The FSA [and Insurance Omnbudsman in particular] have a history of favouring the consumer so donā€™t sweat the absence of an alarm.
 
Thanks - Iā€™ve just read that surprisingly (to me) cars dont have to come with an alarm and is not a mandatory requirement.
Iā€™ve went to do a new insurance quote and it doesnā€™t actually ask if it has an alarm, just asks if it has an immobiliser or tracker. Not as worried now.
 
KobayashiMaru86 said:
Since it pertains to security I've noticed the keyless has some odd behaviours. I asked Toyota to open all doors on keyless from drivers door. This I think is right as mates have been in car since and I've not had to open door for them. But 2 nights running leaving work I've opened passenger door, put bag in, gone to driver door and it's locked. I open it, go shopping, come back to dump shopping in passenger side to find that door still open. It's very odd and quite concerning and I'll be raising it again on first service, along with some other things.
Click to expand...
I worked this out. I'd locked it from the inside on the switch on the door so was working almost in reverse. Must've clipped it when I did my speakers as I don't carry passengers often. Now it locks as expected.
 
Toyota are being very ā€œcoldā€ in response.

They have in simple terms told me that they consider it a NFA (no further action).

I have in turn asked them-

* Valuation for rejecting car
* Legal team contact detail for legal process claim
* If theyā€™d like to reconsider and if so what budget they would offer for a 3rd party system fit

Should have also told them that I will use all media available to let the world know there failings, anyone friends with Martin Lewis?

Iā€™m getting really quite miffed about the stance TUK have takenā€¦.
 
Filled in the ombudsman form. Advise everyone to do anything to apply pressure, and hope we get Toyota to see reason.

Don't see how you can differentiate this issue to the parking sensors. And even the mirror if I chose to fight that.
 
Chris Mc said:
Toyota are being very ā€œcoldā€ in response.

They have in simple terms told me that they consider it a NFA (no further action).

I have in turn asked them-

* Valuation for rejecting car
* Legal team contact detail for legal process claim
* If theyā€™d like to reconsider and if so what budget they would offer for a 3rd party system fit

Should have also told them that I will use all media available to let the world know there failings, anyone friends with Martin Lewis?

Iā€™m getting really quite miffed about the stance TUK have takenā€¦.
Click to expand...
I'm in... Re the social media gig... I'll be slagging them off to high heaven
 
I was in an exchange with them today and they were very demeaning saying that they told me about the lack of alarm before final payment and that I should have pulled out if the alarm was so important to me!

I told them they should have read my emails correctly that I did tell them in writing that i was going to purchase the car on the assumption that they were going to do something about it, which was what they gave the impression of at the time. They chose not to respond to that email.

They then said they now put on record that they disagree with my assumption, checked my email records and that I only gave them 30 minutes between sending that qualifying email and making payment. I told them that if they disagreed with such an important assumption, they should have told me even after Iā€™d paid them and offered to refund me by confirming that I misunderstood and the alarm would not be sorted out. It was clear at the time they had no idea and chose not to reply.

I was exchanging emails with them every 5 minutes today and i told them that this shows they had enough time to reply to me if they wanted toā€¦so the excuse of not giving them enough time to clarify before paying them was ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top