LenT

I may be mistaken - and it may vary from car to car - but I suspect that axle stands can also go under the axles. Hence the name. 😊 I’m not sure that two scissor jacks - or the pillar variety- are twice as safe as one. I would suggest that the best combination for anything more serious than just changing a wheel, is a trolley jack used to lower the car onto axle stands. Remembering, of course, to apply the hand brake! In fact, I can remember when cars came equipped with a wheel chock as well As mentioned earlier, I also put the wheels under the cills. They’ve got to go somewhere! Best combination is a well maintained trolley jack to lower the car on to stands. The only people who should be encouraged to go under a car simply supported by a trolley jack are those individuals after your catalytic converter.

With respect Mark, these are reasonably priced …to me. And you can pay even less. And they are less than a set of brake pads! But Colin has got it absolutely right. The fact that you currently think you’ll only use them this once is really irrelevant. It’s not what they cost you to buy, but what they could cost you if you don’t! Also bear in mind that once you have them, it’s often the way that you’ll find future uses that you hadn’t considered. Or that having them will make possible.

And rightly so, Mark. I presume you’re referring to its security. So I take it that you don’t have a pair of axle stands. This sort of thing: https://www.halfords.com/tools/garage-workshop/axle-stands-trolley-jacks/halfords-advanced-2-tonne-ratchet-axle-stands-657131.html?istCompanyId=b8708c57-7a02-4cf6-b2c0-dc36b54a327e&istFeedId=367c5610-f937-4c81-8609-f84582324cd6&istItemId=wrxqixrqt&istBid=t&_$ja=tsid:|cid:17363835999|agid:|tid:|crid:|nw:x|rnd:12545023101212641209|dvc:t|adp:|mt:|loc:1006551&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIt_7PrKSN-QIVDOztCh1v5QidEAQYBCABEgLgbPD_BwE And of course the wheel you take off is placed under the chassis so that, if everything fails, that’s what the car drops on to. And if you planned to do more work, good trolley jacks are very reasonable. My apologies if you already do all this! 🙂

Just a thought: have you found a moment to let Lexus Cambridge know what the solution to your problem turned out to be? Like most people, I’m sure the mechanics involved will appreciate being given the answer to this particular puzzle.

I see that you are fond of citing ADRs (Adverse Reactions) and thus the Yellow Card reporting system. To my certain knowledge, I have twice provided you with links to the latest issues and in particular directed your attention to the primary conclusion of the Report. Have you actually read one? I reproduce my last response below. (I see you have to expand the quote to see it!) In what way does the conclusion in bold suggest that 'vaccines are as useful as placebo'? I don't think that will reassure the villagers of Wennington recently devastated by fire. According to Alfie Stock, the fire started in his neighbour's three-foot high pile of grass which spontaneously combusted. These fires do not need a spark or a source. Given the presence of the right materials - damp, combustible grass, hay, straw - an ambient temperature of 40C is sufficient to initiate an exothermic reaction which raises the internal temperature to the ignition point of the material. And up they go! Many certainly are! And sometimes not stupid, but criminal! With regard to Ivermectin, I'm not too sure what point you're trying to make. It's a very effective antiparasitic drug used in both veterinary and human medicine, but it has never been promoted by any recognised health authority as an effective way of preventing or treating Covid-19. In fact it's almost a classic example of how misleading - and even fraudulent - claims are made by conspiracists and anti-vaccinationists about such products in order to try to discredit the treatments that actually are effective! So if you're troubled by head lice or scabies, then Ivermectin's just the job. For Covid-19 - not so much!

When I was reviewing our Home Insurance Policy a couple of years ago, somewhat to my surprise my bank (NatWest) turned out to offer the best combination of price and cover. Might be worth investigating your own bank.

This would seem to be yet another real-life example of the value of having dashcams back and front. Not much consolation now, of course. But perhaps worth considering for the future.

You might consider investing in a digital portable pump which enables you to set a target pressure which it inflates to before switching off. Unless you particularly want the exercise! With regard to the TPMS reset: my warning light came on after having a new set of tyres and the fitter also said just drive around for a while. After a couple of days, I decided - having finally located the switch hidden under the dash - to try the official reset procedure instead. This did - eventually - solve the problem!

If by this you mean that the car no longer has a DPF, as it has been removed, then I suggest you read the relevant section in the following Guide. You may find that it’s illegal to use on the road. Or possibly even to sell as a roadworthy car. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diesel-particulate-filters-guidance-note/diesel-particulate-filters

As others have said, in case individual insurers take a specific view and you’re concerned, then just email them with the query, so you get a written response. But as Ken suggests, I suspect that Insurers only get interested in the event of a claim - and then it would concern the state of the tyres. If they were illegal in any way, or mixed types on the same axle, then they might contest the claim. If they were RFs and it could be proven that they had been damaged and then driven at speeds and distance greater than the imposed limits, then that might also invalidate any claim. Fortunately, not so easy to prove. And it might also depend on how much tyre condition contributed to the cause of the claim.

I’m with you there, Nigel. My previous car (new Honda Accord) came with the injectable glop system, but I insisted on a SpaceSaver - or it was No Sale. I may have misunderstood, but this seems to suggest a remarkably high rate of tyre failures. Were these replacements mainly compensating for the inadequacies of the tyres? If they were the result of accidental damage, then I can understand that a ‘contribution’ would be required. As with any new product, a tyre will come with certain warranties and, no doubt, cover under Consumer Law. But it may - or may not - be significant that I cannot recall any tyre retailer ever offering insurance cover for the new ones I’ve just bought. And that, surely, would be a good time to do it.

It’s a Premier version with a 15 speaker ML system….so I’m told! I’ve been called worse…🙁

With respect, Paul, I suggest that the choice of audio system might be more influenced by the standard of your hearing! I’ve never thought that a car interior is the best place to listen to high fidelity reproduction anyway. I have the ML system and I’m pretty sure it’s wasted on my hearing aids! But you’re not yet 60 and I imagine hope to have the car for some years and this appears to be a retirement present to yourself. It’s always easy to spend other people’s money, but I would think that if audio quality is important to you - and the additional cost less so - then enjoy the extra quality of the ML while you still can! It’s only a small thing, but once retired you don’t want to look back on things you might have done.

I had the same response when asking why Michelin did not make a CC tyre for one of the two sizes I needed for the 18” wheels of my Lexus. I was surprised because it was a size that also shod such as BMW. But presumably there was not sufficient demand!

Just for clarification, David, you’re saying that this was a run flat. If so, then that damage is surely extraordinary as they are supposedly designed to withstand running on the rim. Which brand was it? If not ROF, then it’s the expected result. Like you, I prefer the option of a SpaceSaver and associated tools. But then I can still change a wheel. However, on a motorway I can see a good argument for calling for roadside assistance purely on safety grounds. Having been an AA member since 1967, I think I’ve already paid for the odd recovery!

It occurred to me that to put these figures into perspective, it’s worth reminding ourselves that in 2019 over 100,000 people died of MRSA. This started as a hospital acquired infection but then spread to such community-based organisations as prisons and nursing homes.

A very interesting question, John. This article in the BMJ dated June 2022 raises very valid points. It states that since March 2020, 32,307 patients admitted into English hospitals with other conditions have contracted Covid. Of those, 8747 died within 28 days.. We do know people who feature in the first group, but fortunately not in the second. I suspect that in that period internal hospital procedures will have improved - possibly at the same rate that patients and visitors have become more blasé. As NHS workers will be well aware, we have a group of fellow citizens who believe that curtailment of their freedom to do whatever they like, is an abuse of their human rights. Last year MrsT spent a couple of months on a specialist ward during which one bay was reserved for Covid cases. In theory, this was an isolation bay. In practice, there was nonstop coming and going, mainly staff but also patients - including my wife who had developed a tendency to wander around the Ward! https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1492

This is a very important point you’ve identified, ERIC. It used to irritate me when a BBC Newsreader would announce the daily deaths FROM Covid, when the table clearly identified the figure as being in reality, ‘Deaths from any cause within 28 days of a positive test’. So in fact it’s deaths of people WITH Covid-19 and not just FROM Covid-19 – a significant difference! As you rightly say, this would include people who were particularly vulnerable due to age and the various conditions you identify. And even some who fell under buses, off ladders etc. And also – let us not forget – who hadn’t had the appropriate vaccine! As a point of information, the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that cardiovascular diseases account for about 17.9 million deaths annually, making CVDs the leading cause of death globally. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cardiovascular-diseases-(cvds) In terms of deaths FROM Covid-19, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) makes this statement: There were 148,606 deaths where COVID-19 was identified as the underlying cause of death in England and Wales between the weeks ending 13 March 2020 and 1 April 2022, compared with 35,007 deaths due to flu and pneumonia. It goes on to state: In contrast, there were 170,600 deaths, where COVID-19 was mentioned anywhere on the death certificate as cause or contributory factor, compared to 219,207 deaths involving flu and pneumonia. The ONS goes on to state: Directly comparing COVID-19 deaths with those from flu and pneumonia has limitations. For example, death certificates likely underestimate flu deaths because not all patients are tested for it, and circulating flu causes increases in deaths due to other conditions such as cardiovascular diseases. However, these figures do allow us to compare the trends and approximate mortality associated with each. It is now recognised that deaths directly attributable to flu decreased significantly during the Covid years - in the main due to the unusual social actions taken to reduce viral transmission. How coronavirus (COVID-19) compares with flu and pneumonia as a cause of death - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk) This article from the British Medical Journal (BMJ) although dated October 2021 and thus slightly out of date, nevertheless has some interesting points to make. Covid and flu: what do the numbers tell us about morbidity and deaths? | The BMJ I can’t say that I have noticed not being allowed to discuss it. In fact the ONS has some interesting statistics in this regard: It’s headed: Sheet 13: Number of deaths involving COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified (U12.9), by age group, deaths registered in March 2020 to May 2022, England and Wales And you should be able to open it at this address: https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/may2022/monthlymortalityanalysismay2022.xlsx If not, it states that the number of deaths in that period involving COVID-19 vaccines totalled 37 in England with none in Wales. You mentioned ADRs (Adverse Reactions). Previously you’d cited the Yellow Card report, albeit a year-old version, so I had then provided a link to the latest edition – which I do again! https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting It’s important to note the limitations of the Yellow Card scheme. It’s also important to note that the conclusion remains the same. Namely: Vaccines are the best way to protect people from COVID-19 and have already saved tens of thousands of lives. Everyone should continue to get their vaccination when invited to do so unless specifically advised otherwise. I trust that will reassure most people. 🙂 PS: I also hope my links work - or I will just have wasted a lot of valuable TV watching time! ☹️

May I make a suggestion, Kris. A 16GB SD card is actually quite small. What I have done is buy the biggest SD card that my BlackVue will accept (128GB) and keep the 16GB ready as a spare. When we were hit by an HGV, I was able to swap them round to ensure that the video files were preserved intact. When I format the card - which should be generally done on a monthly basis and which I do in my PC - I use it to ensure that the dashcam is always ready to go. All the best with the new Lexus.

Ironic, perhaps? 🤔

But with regard to my earlier question, ERIC, unfortunately not any that you can actually name? Or know or have worked with? Clearly that might be a criminal offence, ERIC. Clearly you’ll be presenting the evidence in your possession to the relevant Police Authority. Clearly such behaviour in Public Office cannot be tolerated.

Stan this thread found by ‘Huwge’ looks well worth reading. But I also found another AA solar panel which claims to deliver up to double the output. One of its advantages, I suggest, is that it connects through the EOBD port. I note others that claim a greater output but either have to be connected to the battery posts or via the power accessory socket. https://www.amazon.co.uk/AA-Essentials-AA1432-Battery-Charger/dp/B084M5ZL5L/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&th=1 And there are others. So just as well you’re not indecisive! Incidentally, what I do have is a NOCO Power Pack and that certainly lived up to its claims on the occasion it had to start a battery so flat that even my trickle charger was having no effect. They claim to hold a charge for up to a year and provide enough power boost for four starts in that time. But I can’t personally vouch for that. Still, plenty of options I think.

Just out of curiosity, ERIC, who are the politicians that you actually know? How many have you actually worked with?

Have you considered a solar panel charger? Not needed one myself, but I do know someone who leaves a caravan on a camp site with one connected, which keeps the ‘vans battery topped up. You need to start with a fully charged battery and the car in a well lit position, but the panel is inside the car so no external connections are needed. This AA branded panel seems to be typical. Frankly, not a huge investment if it does the job! https://www.amazon.co.uk/Powered-Battery-Charger-Caravan-Package/dp/B07P7C6QLD/ref=asc_df_B07P7C6QLD/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=232037057466&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=16977707793069661225&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=t&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=1006551&hvtargid=pla-782175424793&psc=1

Flat tyres render a car unroadworthy. Unless you were made aware of it at the time - and accepted their condition - then it was a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988. And that applies to both Trade and Private Sales. Not sure if you can take retrospective action, but that may be a possibility. They might have to prove that you were made aware of the condition and accepted it. For example, was it mentioned on the Sales Particulars of the car? I suspect not! And you will have to provide supporting evidence of the condition of the tyres.