Stever750

True, but that's not unique to Lexus, in fact, Toyota are one of the better at managing parts logistics and supply chains.

That's been my experience of having spent some time talking to one of the biggest accident repair specialists (work project, not personal) and why EVs are a bit of an insurance time bomb. I did wonder initially that the battery pack is pushing up the cost of insurance because you have to replace the entire pack, not individual cells after an impact if it's damaged, but then the Auris I have, nor my friends RAV4 seem to be affected, so it can't be that alone.

I'm thoroughly unimpressed with Lexus Cardiff. First and probably last lexus I'll own as they're the only dealer option for me living in South West Wales.

I opened the bonnet for the first time at the weekend to check oil levels. It was immediately obvious that it was very clean, not cleaned clean, but unused clean so that reassured me that the mileage is genuine. It's covered 8k miles since I bought it in March, and the oil still looks new, the cleanest I've seen in any engine after 8k for some time. Difficult to ascertain how much is in there, as no matter how I tried, the dipstick was smearing, but it's definitely still full. So far then the only issue I've had is a cracked windscreen at the weekend from a stonechip, not the cars fault though but still irritating especially as just had to change the windscreen on the Auris a couple of months ago.

Was reading in a Facebook group for lexus UK owners that some RX owners are being told by LV that they cannot longer insure the vehicle, some are getting insured at astronomical prices eg £2500 despite full NCD and over 50 years of age, others finding more usual prices of under £500. It's all very inconsistent so shop around. You'd think an IS300h would be at the cheaper end of the scale, given it's not stolen like the RX is/was, bur it's not. My wife's auris has same battery hybrid and it's less than half the cost of my 300h, my friend has a RAV4 hybrid and pays around half my premium. Bizarre.

That's been my conclusion so far, so happy to continue with that strategy. Financially it's been a benefit, which is what I hoped for, so the project is delivering against the plan!

Yep, first thing I did, shows it didn't move much for 2 years of its life. Legally it's genuine, so from a valuation perspective it's fine. I mean if it's genuine then I'm disappointed in the quality of the materials because it looks far more used than my 18 plate superb that I sold with 45k miles. I really can't believe that a Skoda interior uses better quality materials than lexus, that's the bit I can't reconcile.

No chance to use a different dealer, it's the closest one to me already and it 95 miles away! Personally I'm not really too bothered by the quality of their service work providing they uphold the warranty if they fail to do the maintenance properly. I could use a much closer independent lexus service centre, but lose the warranty cover of course. I'm assuming that the warranty is worth paying for!

Things I've noticed on more detail Shiny steering wheel, subtle but it's there. Slight shine wear pattern to drivers door suggests elbow rested on it Seats were worn leather shiny appearance, but this can happen quite quickly. The car is 6 years old after all. Lots of scuffs to the kick plate drivers side. It's been entered / exited a lot of times. Similar marks to the bottom of the door and speaker grille possibly from feet knocking it on entry and exit that weren't so obvious when I bought it after the showroom shine. Severe paint swirls, it's at best lazy ownership but could suggest more use (washes). Subtle wear marks on frequently used buttons in the cabin eg air con button. It looks like it's been pressed many more times than the others. None of these are definite proof, but either the interior materials are cheap and not very durable and mark easily compared to the VAG cars I've previously owned, or it's far more used than 25k miles would suggest. Latter is the more likely confusion, and even if the mileage is genuine, then it's still been occupied and used a heck of a lot. I'm thinking at the very least an urban taxi which would explain the heavy wear indicators from long daily periods of sitting in it and getting in and out.

6 months or so in, and covered around 7k miles in that time. I have no issues to report on that time, and the fuel eco has been as good and often better than I hoped, my long term average is at around 43 mpg. That's mostly after long motorway journeys cruising at a GPS speed of 70-75 mph and using mostly Tesco 99 Ron fuel. My biggest concern which is not really related to the car is that I do wonder if it has been clocked. Over the period I've started to notice little details that I missed on the initial cursory inspection, all of which suggest the car has had way more use than the 25k it had when I bought it. However, so long as it works reliably I'm not too bothered since I bought as a Selected Used Approved from Lexus so they've essentially guaranteed the history of the car, but my experience of the dealership so far is they're a bit clueless. My local FRF Toyota is way more professional and knowledgeable, which is disappointing. I've rung three times now about a corroding alloy wheel and despite a promise to do so, no one has rung me back. Time to call the dealer principal but you really shouldn't have to do that for a so called premium brand. My 14 year Skoda experience was much better in comparison too. Driving the car is fine, it's actually almost slightly fun as its quite grippy with little understeer. It should be given how much boot space is lost to rear suspension mounts etc.

If that is indeed the case then perhaps the insurance providers could be more transparent and consistent in their pricing, which often seems not to follow much in the way of logic. Two examples of this that spring to mind is the disparity of pricing between an IS300h (£800) a Toyota Auris (£300) and a slightly modified Skoda Superb 220 sport line (£500). The lexus and Skoda from same insurer, the auris a different company. I can do a compare the market for any of those cars and the prices vary by over 100%, which is bizarre when they all use a small(er) pool of underwriters. To the consumer, it arguably appears that there is little in the way of consistently assessing the risk and therefore the cost. Maybe if the insurers spent less time playing with volatile pricing, they would be less susceptible to losing money, and the consumer would avoid the risk of a surprise financial shock each year. It's almost as if attempting to be too competitive, it's making everyone's life a misery.

Indeed it wasn't intended to be personal, just my opinion 🙂

Ah, so that makes it OK then. Good to know. I have a different view, caveat emptor is not necessarily the basis of a healthy society. I'm all for rewarding hard effort and success but not everyone is born with equal abities. Sorry, but the insurance industry in the UK stinks and is profiteering from this pseudo competitive landscape of new customers only mentality, it might not meet the technical description of a cartel but it's behaviour sure is like one. To suggest otherwise is perhaps a little naive. It's not unique either to insurance, we've seen much the same problem with the railways (which of course have to meet regulations and standards too) where the deregulatory strategy has clearly failed.

Though still slightly confusing. You suggested buying a Chinese car presumably as its built by a communist country and then point out it's a crap choice. The issue is profiteering from insurance companies which is a by product of a deregulated free market. I think what @Mr_Groundhog was highlighting how that lack of regulation isn't helping the consumer, it's screwing us over.

Yes, see above. I edited my reply as you replied!