Linas.P

That is great - we can agree on this. I might be flogging the dead horse, but so are all others who still insist IS300h is fast and comparable car to competition. Well, that is in terms of performance (which is what I am concerned about). In terms of build quality and reliability it is actually better - I have no issues with that. @Gerr28 - same here, the point I am trying to send across - there are no real mid-range performance/enthusiast choice. As long as we can agree on that, and the fact IS300h doesn't represent this "mid-range performance/enthusiast choice" - I have no other point to make.

There are 2 MB hybrids - diesel "de" and petrol "e", so your car was called C300de, not h. That is spiting hairs I know... but such blatant ignorance for nomenclature is what enthusiast would be ashamed of - same as calling Lexus IS-F a Lexus IS500 (that does happen as well). MB as well claims it has combined 302HP and 700NM, 5.7s 0-60 is as well quite an achievement, with overall better fuel economy and pure electric range. Very good car you had in the past. It is quite embarrassing, but yes you right - there is actually such thing as C300h and it is 201hp, 6.4s 0-60 diesel non-plug-in hybrid (still sounds miles better than ES300h). However, both before and after it the cars were called "de" - bloody confusing MB nomenclature. I take this back - sorry. PS. I could have edited this gaffe out, but I never been about hiding the instances where I am genuinely wrong.

1. It is SUV - apples to oranges comparison. 2. It is not more expensive - RX200t is what you meant (0-60 of 9.2s). However, I am talking about comparable car to GS/ES i.e. saloons. You know it is factually untrue (and I am sure you just trying to wind me up), even on paper IS250 does it 8.4s and GS300h/ES300h in 9.2s. I am not even talking about the fact IS250 is 1/5th of the price and 8-13 years older model (so clearly not more expensive). There are 2 MB hybrids - diesel "de" and petrol "e", so your car was called C300de, not h. That is spiting hairs I know... but such blatant ignorance for nomenclature is what enthusiast would be ashamed of - same as calling Lexus IS-F a Lexus IS500 (that does happen as well). MB as well claims it has combined 302HP and 700NM, 5.7s 0-60 is as well quite an achievement, with overall better fuel economy and pure electric range. Very good car you had in the past. But you do realised you did the same right? Sometimes directly and sometimes implied?! It is not that I am really offended by it, but at the same what stops me to reply with the same? Just to be absolutely clear what I mean e.g. by saying that you care about your family safety you imply that I don't, or by saying that you not boy racer that I am boy racer. Or that you are too mature to drive "fast", you basically saying that anyone who does are immature. Call it "tone response", but if we distil you statement to the basics you basically saying that comfort/reliability is "mature" choice and speed/excitement is "immature". That can be considered offensive statement? no? Finally, driving slow is not necessary safer. What is dangerous is not understanding where it is suitable to go fast and where it is not. 300h would be outright dangerous car for me to drive and I am not even making fun of this - it is so boring to drive, that I would be at risk of falling a sleep on longer drive. As we know factually more people die and kill from falling asleep, then from speed related crashes. So I am not even sure your family care is statistically correct.

Uniroyal Rainsport are good tyres (owned by Michelin), good levels of grip. However, few people I have recommended them to noted increased fuel consumtion. Additional grip and saving on tyres are probably totally worth it, but something to keep in mind.

3) most of the time they feel like riding on wooden wheel ... and last time I had puncture in run-flats it simply dismounted from inside and car was undrivable anyway... obviously no spare, so I had to get flatbed to "evacuate" me.

Senior managers (directors) could be held liable under senior manager regime, however GDPR data breach is not considered criminal. That is unless proven they have deliberately leaked data (not by negligence) and probably as well that caused impact to data subject which could be considered criminal damage. Example of that would be - one incorrectly leaks your debt, debt collectors sues you in high court (which is illegal in itself, but common), HCEO comes and brakes into your house and takes possession of your goods. In this case because initial debt was erroneous all other steps following are illegal and braking into somebodies house/taking possession of the goods is criminal damage. This is kind of ultimate scenario and would be quite difficult to undo the damage caused by fraudsters HCEO - in this case it woudl require counter suing, not merely complaining. Although depending on the impact, negligence can be criminal as well... but it is long shot (remember Grenfell tower - still no criminal liability!). In summary liability can be transferred to senior managers, but for GDPR it is very unlikely for it to become criminal.

I was about to ask you - so what is and where exactly GS 300h excels, but you kind of summarised it well yourself I am happy with above... except maybe "more expensive and slower" doesn't really exists, but in other hand Lexus probably is the most reliable. Few things to note here: 1. Argument here is about ES, not GS which apart of being slow car in my opinion it is fine. 2. It is not that 300h is very bad in itself - that is not my problem. My problem is that there are no other choice ... If Lexus would drop IS, GS and RC with 200h, 300h, 400h, 500h each, I would be dead quiet - "Here you are consumer you have a choice, now it is your matter of choosing what you need - no Bi****ing". However, if they chosen to give only 1 choice then that choice must be more competitive then it is now. Finally, that opinion based on the retail price - RC300h (or say ES) cost £40k... that is bad value for money and not even an "upgrade" for IS250. However, if tomorrow I am going to find one for £15k sold on autotrader I would buy it and would be happy with it "considering what I have spent on it".

real irony is that (not real) Top Gear actually have perfect summary, which matches 100% with your self reflection - ES300h might actually be the perfect car for you: "A saloon car for people who don’t really care about/enjoy driving <...> Lexus may have found a gap in the market. Just not one that’s ever going to interest the enthusiast." I want my car to be comfortable and easy to drive not a challenge. - says somebody who doesn't care about driving dynamics I want to keep my licence. - say somebody who could not be bothered to concentrate on the road, signs and perhaps avoid speed cameras I want to live. - say somebody not confident of car capabilities, or has a car which is outright not capable I want my loved ones and passengers to live. - says everyone I'm not a professional racing/test driver and unlike some I know it! - says person who doesn't like to drive nor enjoys it. PS... there are no such thing as MB C300h... just saying - enthusiast would be ashamed. PPS.. I didn't mean to insult, just found the nickname to be good match with to the post

I don't understand why everyone is so keen to prove to me it is "sufficient, capable enough". What is "enough", who defines "enough"? That is your subjective opinion at the best of time, which means there are many people who will disagree with you... I just happened to be one of them. Keeping up with the traffic... what that even means?!. basically, any car capable of reaching 70MPH at all could "keep-up" with traffic. Is that now qualifies as "more than capable"? Some statements here are "anti-progress"... sounds like some sort of Amish cult. Let's all disconnect the electricity and get horses - they are "more than capable" to transport humans. Or even better - let's walk... most of us are "more than capable" to walk. What about being competitive, cutting-edge, faster than most.. perhaps even unmatched? Why you only want to apply the terms which puts emphasis mediocracy instead of meritocracy of 300h experience? And what is this with all "insult me if you like"... snowflakes... if somebody disagrees with your opinion and challenges you to justify, it is not an insult. It is (sometimes) constructive argument. From when it became a norm just to simply agree with everyone.. just in case they can get offended by not having everything their way.

Not sure what you mean... calling the clubmember by his(?) nickname is insulting now? am I missing something?

.... no you are Sloth... explains it.

Not much else I could add... This time around I have already made a request for them to get my data prepared, but additionally I wrote complaint to CPM (the original company which issues charge incorrectly). My next step is to go to Information Commissioner and ask for them to intervene. This is now 4th time my data privacy is being breached without legitimate reason and sold on... I don't even know if they selling it in some sort of private circle on perhaps on open market. If this continues I would not be surprise to find all my details posted in corner shop adverts one day. And this is just one of many many cases...

Yes... do not speak with them over the phone. In worst case request that all what was said, they should put in the e-mail straight after the call is finished.

Funny, I run exactly same tyres and same sizes - I prefer 245 instead of 255 in the rear, makes car feel more RWD. Although, when it comes to actual tyres I would go back to Dunlop Sportmaxx RT2s. Other cheaper choice is Sava or Debica, own by same company (Goodyear) and I believe some of Dunlop Tyres are actually made by Debica.

They have 14 days to respond, but you right they usually send acknowledged automatically. I guess OP meant - they haven't properly responded with reasonable answer.

Don't worry... you remember that debt I mentioned... yes that one where I have parked in my own space with valid permit? That one where DRP has sent me my details clearly showing I am right and shows me parked in my bay with my permit. I already mentioned that after DRP were defeated, I got letter from Gladstone Solicitors, they got defeated, I think there were one other company and now guess what: These are just circular... they have template and routine for every debt, it is automatically printed and sent, I reply them from template as well, because I already know what is going to come. As already mentioned, they should not sell on my details when they fail to secure the debt, especially where it is proven it do not own them anything, but they still do. So CPM sold it to DRP without checking, DRP to somebody else and now when I going to defeat Trace, they going to sell it on. There are 2 ways to get rid of them - complain against the source in your case Adrian Flux and get Ombudsman to specifically rule for them to go out and pick all your data from all the places around the world where they have scattered it or the the stupid debt collector expose themselves in the court, when court decides that their requests are false that should be enough.

I do agree with what you said - what is your issue with my sentence you quoted?

It would be fair if you would answer my questions, before asking further: I had IS300h for 3 days, IS200t for a day, as well RC300h for 24h test drive (I would say all in all ~ 1800-2000miles driving in various conditions). More importantly, I had 3 different IS250s, for ~8 years and over 100k miles - so whereas I cannot say I know IS300h that well, I know very well how IS250 would behave in exactly same circumstances. From my experience IS300h feels broken and sluggish under acceleration, it doesn't have lineal pull of IS250 and sound trashy. With IS250 - the harder you drive it the more rewarding it gets, IS300h - the harder you drive the more trashy it gets. If you just cruising along at 50MPH both are good enough, but mk2 still feels sturdier build, mk3 wins in terms of equipment (if fully equipped, base equipment is actually better in mk2). But mk3 is 2013 car and mk2 is 2005, mk3 costs ~£15,000 in good condition whereas mk2 costs ~£5,000. For 3 times the price mk3 is slower car which is not as well build, but have few new toys like BT music streaming and phone integration (if equipped). Overall, mk2 was about average car compared to contemporary competition and mk3 is one of the worst.

That is what I thought, IS200d does have somewhat improved reliability, it seems Lexus has updated head gasket and de-tuned it by 25hp/40Nm which helped to prevent problems found on IS220d. However, that said you still have all typical diesel problems DPFs, ERGs, Injectors, that strange manual gearbox Lexus used etc. So I think for most part IS200 is only better, because it is newer, but provided it is same age/mileage and been used for short trips in the city it will have all the same issues... less head gasket. To answer question at hand... which I agree will be last of your worries on IS220d. I think the only way is to get new head unit with BT/DAB... in which case you better of to look for car without Sat-Nav (cheaper), because you will be ripping the unit out anyway.

OBD2 BT adaptor brand plays little difference when it comes to clearing the codes. I have cheap Chinese BT adaptor, the only difference is that I have "torque pro", which I believe doesn't have adverts on it. You don't need to "find" the codes to clear them. In theory you should look to the codes stored on ECU to make sure you could address all the problems before deleting. However, when you send "clear" command it deletes all the codes - the ones displayed and those saved in the past. The only issue here is that you potentially going to delete some useful information (without seeing it) which could help diagnose the issue. Few months ago VSC Check + ABS appeared on my car randomly when cruising on motorway, I stopped at service station, but Torque did not found any codes. I stop and started the engine and the warning lights disappeared. Still not fully satisfied with the information I tried few apps and the one which showed most comprehensive list of errors was "car scanner", which is as well totally free. It has 6 levels of scanning, the 6th being most comprehensive and takes like 10 minutes to run. It found 2 codes which did not make sense to me, cannot remember what it was but something Cruise control related, so I just deleted the codes via "Torque" and for couple of months now they haven't re-appeared. Again "Torque" didn't even see those codes, but still deleted them. In summary, if you simply want to clear codes any BT adaptor and pretty much any app will do. If you want to see the codes which does make sense for troubleshooting then the best way to go is Techstream, secondly you can try "Car Scanner" app - maybe in your case codes will make more sense. Finally, in my case I have deleted the codes and 2 month/2000 miles later they haven't reappeared, which means it was some sort of false positive alarm. BUT if codes re-appear after deletion, it means you actually have a problem there, so do not simply delete the codes every time without actually fixing it.

Basically what you are saying is that - you don't know how to drive in wintry conditions? I cannot blame you for that - in UK you do not have winters, so it is unreasonable to expect british drivers to have skill or equipment for winter conditions. Has nothing to do with the car. If anything RWD could be more fun in winter, could end-up badly, but still more fun.. and if you hit ice on summer tyres then it doesn't matter which wheels are driving, could be AWD you would still just go straight into the ditch. I am pretty sure all the cars sold in UK have summer tyres fitted from dealership. Maybe on some rare occasion you get some cars with universal tyres. I believe NX in dealership had Michelin CrossClimate. But that is not winter tyre! Yes if you going to hit some wet snow on them that is fine, but if it is -8C outside and you get on ice, they are pretty much as useless as any summer tyre. ES certainly had summer tyres, I think the one I tried had Dunlop SP Sport Maxx.

I didn't know such list existed, but I would not be ashamed to be on it if that what it takes to protect your legal rights. I am kind of missing all of the debt collectors from this list - most of their claims are clearly vexatious and extravagant. My favourite is this guy, has a matching name for Vexatious litigant: Anal Sheikh added to list 4 April 2019. On more serious note - when you make the tiniest mistake or forget to pay £3, or pay your bill few days late etc. etc. big multi-million corporations comes as hard on you as you are proper criminal. However, when they systematically mess-up everyone lives everyday then they try to get away with "We are sorry". Try to say that to bailiffs and see how far your "sorry" going to go. So here I think it is everyone right, even everyone duty to take any such example of corporate mess example all the way. In my case I have only ever lost the case - example with video and the guy damaging my car. But it doesn't fit the conditions for vexatious litigant, because case had merit, just didn't have enough evidence and to be honest it wasn't even me taking the guy to court it was CPS, I have been invited there as "witness". John - we don't know what we don't know. If one party decided not to be fully honest when seeking advise, then they get advise which doesn't really apply - there is nothing we can do about it. My advice is purely on the information available here on the forum. If you think it is incorrect based on whet we know, then I am happy to discuss and admit I was wrong (like 6 vs 3 month deadline). But otherwise I am just taking it on face value, because as you say we might not know all the details and we don't want to know all the details. Sadly, this doesn't happen often enough... I am still waiting for my perfect opportunity to use GDPR hammer to bankrupt one of those crooks. As I have said it is common practice to sold on the data where debt collection is unsuccessful, even where it is clear to debt collector that they pursuing wrong case. Going back to my case with DPR above - do you think showing them that they wrong stopped them? Nooooo. they just sold on the case to another bunch of criminals - I believe it was Gladstone Solicitors who dropped me few welcoming letters a month later. Currently, I am just wasting their resources and time with GDPR requests, but one day I am sure they going to provide me with some detail they not suppose to even have or collect about me... then you going to read about it in your morning newspaper.

Wow... that is quite a step-up 🙂 I was thinking - "it is not like you can choose GS-F colour you want to buy" when there are only 2 at any given time for sale, but as it happens one of them is beautiful white 2017 example, so I reckon it is the same car you looking at. Anyhow, I cannot advise much about GS-F here, just to wish you happy purchase.

I bought couple of bikes for occasional cycling in country side (not planning to use them on the road for commuting... that is madness) and just realised I have a problem to solve. Never though about that before... There is really no good way to mount the bicycle rack on IS. I got the cheapest rack just to get home and although it covers number plates and partially rear lights as well it is otherwise good quality and securely fits 3 bicycles. Obviously, I took chances driving back, but it was 3.7miles from the shop... however if I use it as intended to say take bicycles to Scotland, then it won't work. The number plate is kind of less of an issue - I could get separate one ordered and find the way to mount it to be visible. Much bigger problem is lights - they kind of gets partially covered and based on some people vision or police officer discretion it could be argued I need repeaters signals. Obviously, both could be solved by getting "Lighting board" - but where do you plug it in?! In summary - does anyone have rear mounted bicycle rack on IS (don't want roof top one.. for "reasons"), which is legal and one could recommend or how do you connect repeater lights? Thank you for suggestions in advance. I am aware of these, but they require tow bar fitment and still - how do they connect lights? https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Genuine-OEM-Lexus-Rear-Bicycle-Bike-Holder-Rack-For-2-Bikes-13-PIN-Tow-bar/264226943329?_trkparms=aid%3D555018%26algo%3DPL.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20140122125356%26meid%3Ddf5d025c96fd4b5aa42c478c7d2d101c%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D7%26sd%3D172142990079%26itm%3D264226943329&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851 Here are instructions as well... I am either a bit thick or it isn't very clear where they plug-in the lights: https://www.toyota-tech.eu/aimuploads/f30fae94-e2ef-49c5-a212-b71b0430d3c8/Bike holder_PZ41B-00500_2-00_AIM 002 530-1.pdf Certainly, owner manual doesn't have this as an option - contrary it actually states that car is not designed for "Tow hook", towing or any "tow hook mounted accessories". Am I missing something here?

Not sure what you are trying to suggest? This case is as clear as it gets - administrative error on Adrian Flux side, person didn't have the car nor insurance with them for the case they trying to claim money from him. It has exactly 0% chance of succeeded in in court. If it would have chances they would not sold it, they would sue. In my case I had video showing guy hitting my car, but court decided "it cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt that he damaged it". He admitted hitting it, but maintained he did not hit it hard enough to bend the panel... That is a bit of a joke decision, but just illustrates how hard is to prove somebody being guilty. Ohh.. and another thing - if debt collector would do homework and would know they have realistic chances of winning they won't send you 10 intimidating letters, they would simply sue you and win. However, they neither have strong case, nor do home work... that is not their business model. Their business model is to intimidate into submission and work on margins, not individual cases i.e. 80% of people pays-up after first letter and takes advantage of "fake" discount e.g. £60 instead of £100. After that they don't really care is remaining 20% pays, they already have secured their profit. In rare cases just to make example they actually take someone to court like in "ParkingEye Vs Beavis". However, this case doesn't apply here - Beavis was outright at fault and he did not argue his innocence, he only argued that the charge of £85 was "extravagant and excessive" for overstaying on supermarket parking (with which I agree). However, he would have been more successful arguing his innocence and legitimacy of contract e.g. whenever the rules were clear, whenever they were visible, whenever he actually agreed with them etc. I lost the count of times clueless debt collectors have thrown this "ParkingEye Vs Beavis" at me, but it simply did not apply as it is kind of niche case. What they got back in all instances were DPA or later GDPR requests, which allowed me to do "my homework" and see how strong of the case they have - in all instances they had nothing and I just told them to fob-off. That again has nothing to do with this case here. Just to illustrate how they work, see take out of my data which I received from DPR for parking without permit. So the reason for charge is "not displaying valid permit", but you can see in pictures my permit says "bay 190" and I am parked in 190... so I have valid permit (I know that because it is my bloody land - I own it!) So do you think they actually "KNOW" what they chasing? no they don't care - they just have an industrial printer for junk letters, that is their "business model".