DanD

I want to reject my IS...

Recommended Posts

... not me, I don't have one.

However, I came across this article earlier today (via twitter feed), which I thought made interesting reading.

https://twitter.com/whatcar/status/1228944109760634880?s=09 

or

https://www.whatcar.com/advice/owning/i-want-to-reject-my-faulty-lexus-is/n20993

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crikey. Anyone who solely relies on the rear view camera to park their car should have their driving licence revoked. Rear view mirrors should be used with the customary look over the shoulder. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes its seems that way and more and more are doing so,glad to say I am not one of them,got a brain and like to use it,lol,seems like in the not too distant future people will become  dumb and dumber. As a matter of fact how many people remember more than their own mobile number these days,in the not too distant past we remembered up to 5 different numbers. On the other hand it shows that if you can find a fault and are persistent enough there are rewards to be had🤑😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only fault! In 5 years of ownership from new. The car has been perfect. Yes, in the maybe 5 times I've parked rearward in all that time it ended up a little crooked in the parking slot. Big deal!

Oh well, it's really hard to find anything wrong with this car so when they do find something they blow it way out of proportion. Get a life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good God it beggars belief. 

Maybe she really wanted a number plate that reflected her name and tendencies? 

I struggle to believe that motoring journalists are so eager to put the Lexus down in comparison to the German "premium brands." I've owned three German cars and all of them have been seriously flawed. They are companies that are run by accountants, the lot of them. The problem being, the accountants provide the motoring press with luxury accommodation in the Alps with unlimited food and booze in exchange for a good review. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lexus Sidcup hogging the limelight for all the wrong reasons again I see 🤣

Looks like they do have the ability to rectify issues 👏Glad to see they look after some of their customers, at the expense of others...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus H ***** on a bike, what is she expecting? A Ten from Len if she lines up inch perfect in a space? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit to using the technology to park squarely, especially when parking in bays where there are only white lines at either end .The 'bird's-eye' view camera is ideal for checking that the car is fully in the bay as it tends to overhang in a lot of standard size parking bays (think I read somewhere that the newer RX will always stick out in a standard bay.). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to go against the grain and say she was right.  Now hear me out before crucifying me :smile:

I don't think it matters what the fault is, I think the important thing is there was a fault present.

Different things matter to different people and whether we agree that not being able to park without using the guidance lines is a problem or not, the car still wasn't doing what it was supposed to.  The fact that the Lexus technician in the end agreed that something was off suggests that the car wasn't working as advertised.

So, if this was the case, why should she accept a car that doesn't work as intended?  I also don't think it is up to Lexus Sidcup to decide what is important or not..

I do think it is strange that Lexus couldn't figure a way of adjusting it to straighten it up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are two parts to this story and that creates sort of mixed feelings. Form one side it is ridiculous that somebody could not park the car without rear camera. This is actually wider issue in UK - driving is very inclusive and a lot of people who should not be behind the wheel ended up driving and not losing their license. Pretty much as long as one is slow and careful - that is "good enough" even if they are creating traffic jams by constantly driving far too slow and could not park car properly.. it is fine just "take your time". The story linked plays on the same line - "if she cannot park without aligning the lines on the camera, she should not be driving at all!". To be fair that was my first thought...

However as @Shahpor said - if the camera is genuinely not straight that is a fault. Why should anyone accept to live with that in their car?! Even though I don't need camera to "align" when parking it would drive me nuts seeing that and living with it. I would raise it with Lexus as well and would ask it to be rectified.

I think the important part of this story is that Lexus seems to have admitted to the fault but just fobbed off the owner - this in itself becomes more of an issue than her skill or even whenever the car is faulty or not. If the camera where straight, then why would they provide the credit for upgrade etc?! and if it not straight then it is kind of embarrassing Lexus was not able to do such as adjusting it.

So in summary, by focusing of the driver inability of ... well driving. We kind of sideline genuine fault with the car - which may be small, but still a fault and should have been fixed.

Actually, think about this - what if you steering wheel would be not dead straight? I had it once and it would drive me crazy... the tracking was fine, car would go straight, would not pull, but the wheel was maybe 3mm to the side. One could say it is not important... wheel is round if you leave it alone the car go straight and no function was impacted by this, but still it feels wrong! I find this very similar - one could adapt to wrong lines, or use the mirrors, but this does not change the fact lines are not straight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drive around 12,000 miles a year commercially and very often find myself stopping at supermarkets either to take a comfort break or lunch. Company policy insists I always reverse park which I do but I sit there watching the majority of people who drive into the space and even this can take 2 or 3 attempts from some drivers. I often think if the same reverse parking was applied across the board the car park would be a quarter full.

Looking at the last picture in the report it would appear that the replacement car is worse given she has managed to park diagonally across the driveway 😀

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In supermarkets I honestly don't mind - I mostly park in reverse, but sometimes it actually makes sense not to. For example if you planning to load something in the boot sometimes it is difficult to get to it etc. so I am not overly judgemental about others not doing it. However, it drives me mad when people park front forward in their drives or parking spots on the the side of main road and then reverses back into traffic to get out...The latest trend now is not only to reverse into traffic on your side... but reverse across entire road into opposite direction. That is outright moronic and it is seriously dangerous. Obviously they cannot see at all, so they simply reverse slowly and hope that somebody going to let them in and not crash into them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately Lexus have now come up with a fix for the wonky parking system as demonstrated below, unfortunately this does not compensate for driver error or a wall built halfway across the driveway 😀

3207C651-2028-4268-8A35-6039F08DA844.jpeg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

In supermarkets I honestly don't mind - I mostly park in reverse, but sometimes it actually makes sense not to. For example if you planning to load something in the boot sometimes it is difficult to get to it etc. so I am not overly judgemental about others not doing it. However, it drives me mad when people park front forward in their drives or parking spots on the the side of main road and then reverses back into traffic to get out...The latest trend now is not only to reverse into traffic on your side... but reverse across entire road into opposite direction. That is outright moronic and it is seriously dangerous. Obviously they cannot see at all, so they simply reverse slowly and hope that somebody going to let them in and not crash into them.

It is actually a traffic offence to reverse onto a trunk road/A class road but doubtful if anyone would be ticketed for it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, steve2006 said:

It is actually a traffic offence to reverse onto a trunk road/A class road but doubtful if anyone would be ticketed for it.

Yes and many other things, which people do all day.. everyday. Plus - who are there to ticket them?! I have seen on several occasion where driver creates a dangerous situation (almost literally crashes into police car) and police just drives away... because they were MET and not highway patrol/traffic police. That is just dumb..

This is why I hate - "policing by automated cameras" system in UK. People now literally drive from camera to camera - comes camera they drive properly and then they drive anyway they like in between! Further, cameras only work on some specific simple to prove offences like speeding and red light, but are completely blind for more nuanced things - like lane hogging, tailgating, cutting off, indicators etc. And it is getting increasingly worse - at least that is my experience driving 12 years in London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Yes and many other things, which people do all day.. everyday. Plus - who are there to ticket them?! I have seen on several occasion where driver creates a dangerous situation (almost literally crashes into police car) and police just drives away... because they were MET and not highway patrol/traffic police. That is just dumb..

This is why I hate - "policing by automated cameras" system in UK. People now literally drive from camera to camera - comes camera they drive properly and then they drive anyway they like in between! Further, cameras only work on some specific simple to prove offences like speeding and red light, but are completely blind for more nuanced things - like lane hogging, tailgating, cutting off, indicators etc. And it is getting increasingly worse - at least that is my experience driving 12 years in London.

I completely agree, there are certain criteria to be met when parking at night without lights, it must be within a 30 MPH speed limit area, there must be street lighting, the vehicle must be facing the flow of traffic but 5he law is never applied.

The police complain of budget cuts but they could make a grand a night in fines just on my estate for parking infringements!

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it would be "right thing to do", but sadly we are living in times where police operates like "for profit organisation" and enforcing all the laws are not profitable. However, it is profitable to focus only on those laws which gives best profit margins and that is what they do.

Police now treats the laws like toy company treats their lines of toys - some toys sells well, are popular and cheap to manufacture - so they will make more of those. Some other are more complex to make and are not as popular, so they stop making them.

How it works with laws? - some are broken more often, are easy to prove and are cheap to enforce. Further you can even artificially make people to break them more often. Perfect example is speeding - requires little investment and almost no maintenance, does not require real officer at all and with new "dumb motorways" they can now change the limit at whipm and crack few thousand more tickets even when people are not actually speeding. Enforcing violations like you mentioned, would require thousands of officers in the fields and hundreds processing files etc. Yes it would make roads safer and driver more compliant, but the cost of administering the whole shabang is much higher.

Again - one would think police should have safety and law and order as their priorities and the cost of enforcing it should be more of justified necessity, but that is just not the case. I reached conclusion that believing in police caring about public safety is rather naive concept... and I mean police as an institution - I am sure many individual officers are great people and truly caring..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, steve2006 said:

I drive around 12,000 miles a year commercially and very often find myself stopping at supermarkets either to take a comfort break or lunch. Company policy insists I always reverse park which I do but I sit there watching the majority of people who drive into the space and even this can take 2 or 3 attempts from some drivers. I often think if the same reverse parking was applied across the board the car park would be a quarter full.

Looking at the last picture in the report it would appear that the replacement car is worse given she has managed to park diagonally across the driveway 😀

 

Why the insistence on reversing in Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought - it's a parking "assist" system, not a "we'll guarantee that you park perfectly straight every time" system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, steve2006 said:

 

The police complain of budget cuts but they could make a grand a night in fines just on my estate for parking infringements!

The "grand a night" wouldn't go into the policing budget. We won't get a police force that's capable of enforcing everything until we increase their numbers, and we won't increase their numbers until we all step up to the mark and a). Pay the same income tax that we did in the 70's and b). Force some, or most businesses to pay their fair share. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Paul Brooksbank said:

a). Pay the same income tax that we did in the 70's and

b). Force some, or most businesses to pay their fair share.

a. the amount of income tax is higher now than it was in 70's - so I don't know what you talking about. Further, things like fuel duties, VED, Insurance premium tax and mandatory insurance itself has skyrocketed in prices. Government has plenty of revenue to spend if they would be efficient, but obviously they are corrupt instead.

b. this is true - nowadays the bigger is the business the less tax it pays... kind of strange. But as pre previous point - there are no shortage of funds... they are just simply wasted via defunct and corrupt system our government is running on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used my Park Assist system to reverse park into a space at my local Sainsbury's this afternoon. I thought I had done a pretty good job, so I got out and canvassed the opinions of my fellow shoppers. They all said "well done Reginald Molehusband!" which will only mean something to a select few of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey. You must have reversed so very slowly lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.