Brian R

This nonsense dreamt up (or so it seems) by insurance companies has often left me wondering as to whether there is any lawful validity to some of the suggested absurdities of motor insurance. I do feel that in a court of law, an insurance company would be hard pushed to justify the non-payment of a claim based on, for example, the colour of a brake caliper, but I stand to be corrected.

I think as Colin says very carefully check the warranty which does on the face of it seem exceptional for a 16-year-old car. Then also check just what is covered by the warranty, and I'm sure you will discover that certain items are not covered, which of course will be those you now think could/should have been covered. Sometimes the "quit while ahead" approach serves one well!

Hilarious and one to remember.😂 It's one thing to be scammed but believe me it's another to try and report a scam. A (sadly) known to me individual who lives on another continent opened two accounts with a well known UK bank using an address to which I have a connection. He deposited a 6-figure sum by effectively using a false address. I wrote to said bank by e and snail mail upwards of 6 times, and phoned them on 2 or 3 occasions to report this "scam". Each time I was promised they would be in contact "within 24 hours", but I never heard from them, not once. Even their head of complaints department couldn't be bothered to reply to my letters and my entirely justified concerns. In practice, I suspect the individual was trying to fool various authorities by suggesting he lived in the UK and milk the tax/benefit system for all he could. All duly reported to the HMRC and the DWP, given the bank simply didn't want to know. Now, call me old-fashioned, but perhaps the bank had north of £100K on account and simply didn't want to know its origins? Just a thought........

I suspect in the cabin, yes, but the thought of manhandling one into the rear would not be for the faint-hearted. I guess you could put it on the passenger seat and then house your passenger in the rear. In fairness, they might have something to say about that especially if they are any size. As for the boot, then most definitely not. For me at least, I think I would be looking to Green Flag to get me out of trouble. 😀

Very good point and 100% spot on! In a word no, it will not go in the boot but maybe in the rear seats area, albeit I would imagine a real game and a half. These wheels are not light weights, and the prospect of lifting one in/out of the rear seats would be daunting!

I've just collected the car and overall the experience was not too bad. Parking was not as easy as it was in Flemming Way but having arrived at around 8.30, I was able to pick from a couple of spots and in the event I parked about 2 spaces away from the front door. A little disjointed when I arrived and I sensed the staff might have been a little overwhelmed having to contend with 2 marques. The reception staff were looking a bit "homeless" but I was duly invited to take a seat in one of those god awful Lexus chairs that look like something out of a James Bond film, definitely more style than substance! Upon collection, I settled up and the car that had been secreted somewhere was driven round for me to then head off into the wide grey yonder.

In a word, yes, they are different. As I recall, the front wheels are 8.5J and the back 9J. The stud pattern should be common to all Lexus models. In practice, I shouldn't think it would matter if you had a wrong width wheel given the space savers tend to be "skinnies". Clearly you need the right wheel if you intend to motor distance and at speed but as a get you home, a slightly wider or narrower shouldn't present any problem. I stand to be corrected here, but as I said if a skinny space saver is okay then why not?

Mine goes into Toyota/Lexus Gatwick this morning and for another "major" service at just 11600 miles. I have a feeling I am going to find the experience a tad stressful, given there is next to no parking at the site, and it looked extremely crowded when I swung by earlier in the week. Good to see the Lexus staff have migrated to the new site so at least there will be some continuity. Will report back as I find.

Ah, I had the telex machine in my office and used it more than anyone else. The equivalent to copy/paste were numerous tapes I would feed through the machine to answer customer queries. My office looked like the BBC April fool spaghetti tree had successfully taken root!

Just had it confirmed it is indeed the Toyota site, mores the pity.

Thanks Nick but curiously earlier this morning I phoned Lexus Gatwick (at the original location) and having gone through the obligatory push button exercise I was put through to various numbers that were not answered! I then contacted Lexus direct and they said the original location was still operating and to take my car there. I'll be honest and say I was less than convinced the fellow knew the facts. Long story short, I've again asked by mail where I should take the car. Must say from what you said it rather sounds like the Toyota dealership, a place I really do not like visiting!

Drove past the Gatwick site yesterday and could see the Lexus signage had been removed from the building. I assume the building is now closed and my forthcoming service/MOT will be at the Toyota dealership just down the road. Have to say the email I received this morning wasn't entirely clear as to when the move takes place but I guess it must have now happened. A bit of a pain because the Toyota site is not an easy place to park, and especially given I think they may well keep my car for a few days.

About 1 nanosecond, or less?

One of the cars I would seriously consider, albeit I think I warm more to the latest Z4 which of course is basically the same car. I just feel the Supra didn't quite translate from the early mug shots I had on my office calendar. However, given it's a Toyota, I would imagine the reliability will be better than the BMW. It'll be interesting to hear what you make of it.

Ah, I now better understand the circumstances. Thanks for the update and as you say someone now has a chance to pick up a very rare car.

Hello Brett As I recall you've not had the LC for any length of time and I sincerely hope the decision to sell was not based on the "thievability" of the car? It does seem as if navigating the car to the main road was the primary reason, is that correct?

Well done Essex police! I suppose a new front bumper isn't the end of the world and before it's fitted, an ideal opportunity to safeguard against another canbus attack. Great shame this is happening, and really any manufacturer who leaves this access point vulnerable really ought to be sorting this out with some measure of urgency.

Hmmm, I'm not overly surprised by the final test results, and particularly that the Bridgestone was way down the ranking.

Antony, absolutely no need to apologise and I'm just glad to have if confirmed I haven't misinterpreted the purpose of the two systems.

Colin, I'd be very interested in your feedback because I'm not a great fan of radar control, given its propensity to brake/accelerate and be influenced by traffic in close proximity. I had this feature on a hybrid Golf GTE that I was obliged to use for a shortwhile. Whilst the Lexus isn't quite as touchy as the Golf was, I'd rather live without radar and drive on proper cruise.

Perhaps all fellow owners can now source from "morethanpolish" who now have the required template. 😃

Constant speed control is exactly what I want but it seems that whilst it should be possible when selected there is nothing constant about it but simply radar control with a different name.

Not quite I think. Please find attached the relevant section of the full user manual. Clearly, there should be a distinction between radar and cruise. As one would expect, radar slows the car down when appropriate, whereas cruise should not. Radar and cruisel.pdf

I understand how the radar cruise control should work and indeed it performs entirely as expected but the so-called normal cruise control works in exactly the same way. Nothing differentiates the two methods. To further explain, when I engage radar cruise control the word "Radar" or some such comes up on screen but on cruise control I simply see the green speedo icon on the dash display. Normally on cruise control I would not expect any form of braking as I approach any car in front but that's exactly what does happen. It's as if cruise and radar are in reality one and the same thing.

I, too, have exactly the same "problem". Whilst I have radar cruise control it seems "normal" cruise control behaves in exactly the same way, I really cannot tell the difference between the two alternatives.