J.R.

It never sounded like the pistons were replaced and the OP has now confirmed that it was bent valves replaced. There is no warranty to complain about, they received a non running vehicle with a slipped timing chain and bent valves, they replaced these components, the engine is now running, arguably if the valve stem seals were damaged they should have been replaced or should have been done so as good practice, we only have the garages opinion that the oil burning is due to worn valve stem seals. I dont believe anybody will be able to force the garage to do the additional work at their own cost and I don't believe the credit card company will get involved in any way shape or form.

I am really not sure what I am looking at in the photograph or should be looking for but if you can see that the boot floor is buckled then a vehicle of such low value will be written off for it and it really is not worth them spending the money for an inspection which will undoubtedly confirm that. It is absolutely fixable if you are competent, uneconomic if you have to pay someone given how much the insurers will want for you to retain the salvage, given where it is photographed you have long ago dropped your trousers and lost any control of the situation and hoping for a reasonable payout. Keep your eye on the Copart Auctions and the DVLA vehicle records and you will probably see it back on the road, you may even be able to buy it back once repaired as a Cat S or Cat N but the repairs wont have been done regardless of cost, quite the opposite. 💡I think that I know what I am looking at now, is the photo of the spare wheel cover taken from inside the car? Can you confirm from what angle? I think it may be from the open OSR door looking towards the NSR door? If I am correct then they have pushed the floor covering forward to create a hump to justify their narrative, there is no way the impact damage transmitted by the rear bumper has caused that sort of deformation. But when all is said and done its 100% a write off, it will be sold on for 40% plus of their valuation. So take their value, deduct how much you paid for the 2 years insurance (which includes the 6 months that is lost when they write it off), deduct the excess they have retained, deduct how much you new insurance will go up, deduct the 40% + they will get for the salvage and you will see that its cost them very little and its in their interest to write off rather than repair.

Not all that is needed, fluency in 3 letter acronyms is essential to have even the slightest clue what the above means. Any chance of a glossary of terms? I am guessing that V2G is voltage to grid? and V2H is voltage to home? Or is V for vehicle? As for the rest, no idea!

I think silly me has a vague idea of what 450kg mass is thankyou!

I dont think that will help, the system at some point saw or thought it saw a wheel rotation speed out of specified limits although all 4 wheels are now showing the same speed when you test, the same as if you had reinflated a partially deflated tyre, the system wants you to tell it to accept the current tyre rolling radii as correct but of course you have no means of doing so. This might well be the one case where the old wives tale of disconnecting the battery etc might actually work, I hope for your sake that it does.

Correct and for the example of a clutch plate then the greater the force (mass x acceleration) the greater the friction, for the breakaway of a tyre where the inclined plane experiment is appropriate then the mass cancels itself out as it is on both sides of the equation. In any case the assertion questioned/challenged by several of us was that during cornering the mass loads up on a weaker tyre (whatever that means) resulting in less grip, even if it could miraculously load up it would not change the frictional grip according to me or would increase the frictional grip according to you, either way it was a daft statement put across in an authoritative manner.

A problem with the connector would definitely, whatever the cause if it does not light up the vehicle will be immobilised, I would start first with Xmans advice regarding the relays, I hope he is right as it will be simple to remedy. Good luck!

I didn't want to download the list but was VCDS able to communicate with any of the modules? Specifically instrument cluster and Canbus Gateway modules? For the engine to start the instrument panel needs to recieve RFID data from the inductive reader around the ignition switch then communicate that to the ECU via canbus. I think the instrument panel decides if the key is valid and tells the ECU to start the engine or not or maybe the ECU holds the authorised key date I cant recall which but if there is a failure in any module or the communications between them the result is cranking and firing for 1 second only. Dry or fractured joints between the instrument binnacle connector and the circuit board can cause the problem, there are specialist repairers out there.

Well he cant be expected to actually back up his statement can he? Better to say, I dont know or I explained that wrong than to dig a deeper hole with even more outlandish defiance of physics. Understanding static and kinetic friction forces is very simple, you just have to imagine a mass on an inclined plane or better still recall the experiments in Physics classes at school, technical college or university. Mass has no effect on friction a heavy or light object on an inclined plane will both slide at the same angle.

I'm chuckling with her at the thought of the bodyshell bending with a 450kg load!

Defrost cycle of the evaporator? I have experienced something similar once when the vehicle suddenly steamed up on the Rocade de Calais a few minutes after restarting after the channel crossing.

Says the person whose posting today on this thread with personal attack on another contributor was deleted by the mods including the details of your salary and pension. You can blame me for that.

You have that backwards, timing is retarded when the knock sensor detects pre-ignition. The vehicles are mapped for the highest octane that would produce higher power and that depends on the compressio ratio and/or boost pressure. We are on the same page though, many vehicles will not show any gain from higher octane fuels, its usually only the higher powered versions.

Thats clever stuff, so you can fill a 60 litre tank with 63 litres of E5 carburant and get more range as well!

It is done automatically via the knock sensor and has been the case for 30 odd years since 3D mapping became the norm. Higher compression ratios require higher octane fuel but will run with less power on lower grade fuels thanks to the knock sensor and 3D mapping, basic lower powered models sold globally where many countries have lower octane fuels are unlikely to have high compression ratios and will not show any benefit from higher octane fuels, high powered models like the VRS will. Any turbocharged engine will have higher effective compression when on boost so it can be that the exact same engine will have lower and higher powered variants, one which will show no benefit from higher octane the other which will which comes back to your statement about the mapping.

I presume the vehicle still performs it primary function in a safe and reliable manner and that it passed the MOT? Do you even want an SOS module if it is so problematic? It may be possible to disconnect it and have it removed from the "Installed list" of the Canbus gateway controller, this should stop all the warnings.

"Just" £28k pension, my heart bleeds for you.

I did one for the repeated tailgating headlight flashing muppet, the grip was undiminished which was a pleasant surprise to me. Driving sensibly with respect to the conditions especially forward visibility and the water dispersal of my tyres I was far safer than the majority of those overtaking. A small proportion were completely reckless (congenital stupidity probably) and way out beyond them was one driver of a very large Van who was driving far faster than anyone else and far faster than I thought those vehicles were capable of

I wasn't arguing, I was stating a fact. Do you have anything to back this up other than it has been repeated so many times now that it has become recieved wisdom? There is no such thing as "standard summer tyres", you have bought into the myth perpetrated to sell winter tyres. That sounds very convincing and autoritative but reads as total nonsense to me, are you really trying to say that a "weaker" (and you really need to explain what you mean by that) tyre will alter the dynamic weight distribution of the vehicle across its 4 contact points during cornering or braking? If not what were you trying to say? I drove 800km yesterday on tyres that were all down to the TWI's and possibly lower, very evenly worn though, the conditions were atrocious, flooding everywhere to be seen, visibility aside there were no problems on the A and B roads, one brief aquaplaning from one front wheel when passing through a deep puddle (oncoming traffic so could not avoid it), a glimmer of the dash light for the 3 letter acronym stability system, it did not apply any contra-braking but probably engaged the rear Haldex 100% to oppose any torque transfer to the opposite front wheel. I had been out for a play in the downpour the day before and learned that the tyres will aquaplane more than a newer tyre but only slightly and that the 4WD Yeti was remarkably stable during the event, I did not need to back of the power or make a steering correction which would have been necessary on the previous FWD Octavias. It was on the flooded autoroutes that I found the biggest difference, it was the wettest sustained conditions I have ever driven in, the wipers were on the whole time and on the high speed for 80% of the journey, had there been a higher speed I would have selected it, at 100-110 km/h there was no aquaplaning whatsoever and a very relaxed drive visibility and moronic drivers aside, from 110-120 km/h there would be mild aquaplaning, I could see the deep water ahead of time and just feel it and see a brief flash of the dash light, from 120-130 km/h it was a fairly constant occurence, enjoyable, it kept me alert but did not make for a relaxed drive, it was exactly like the parade and initial laps on a wet or drying circuit driving on slicks when others had changed to wets. The thing is I innately knew what was the maximum safe speed, it was only when I realised how many mainly new vehicles were passing me that I went a bit faster, then faster still just to experiment, that is what I mean about driving to the conditions and knowing how and being able to react, for those driving much faster aside from not having the visibility to do so were IMO lulled into a false sense of security by their superior tyres (there I said it! 😁) and the electronic systems that they were probably unware were happening (none of us watch the dashboard at these times) that extra 10 or 20 km/h meant that when they aquaplaned or changed vector too rapidly things would get out of hand very quickly and I reckon very few of them would have had the experience and the reactions to save the situation. More tread on their tyres or not I dont believe that any of them would have been driving so much faster than the rest of the traffic a few decades back when the driver drove the vehicle without assistance, back then they would probably have been fearful when I drove past them faster than they felt safe to drive, yesterday it was the opposite. Plus ça change....................... At one stage the devil in me brake tested a very annoying knobhead, the standing water was quite deep but there was absolutely no loss of braking traction which surprised me. What I learned from the journey was that if my vehicle was a FWD variant with the same remapping I probably would have changed these tyres before now and that I really should have fitted the winter tyres before setting off as its a lot colder here in the North, I still would not have driven any faster on the autoroute though.

Dangerous mix? Sub optimal maybe but no worse than driving on winter tyres for several months when the temperatures oscillate wildly around the notional switching point that people believe so religiously. Perfectly legal to change one tyre at a time (arguably not so in my country but for protectionist not safety reasons) all they would need to do is press the TPMS reset button once. I still havn't fitted my winter tyres yet, the weather hasn't justified it, I bought them down here before having lived here for any length of time, in 30 minutes I will be doing an 800km autoroute journey on standard tyres worn evenly to the TWI markers that have done 52K miles in my ownership and an unknown distance before that, its 7.5° and raining here and will be colder in the North. The winter tyres will be fitted in spring when the old ones become visibly illegal and will probably remain on rain and shine until worn out, my new circumstances do not require changing tyres with the seasons. Anyone who has driven 60's vehicles either in period or in the 70s and 80s as bangers will know how to drive to the conditions and available grip, how to modulate the power of a higher performance vehicle, todays drivers have only ever driven cars which would be very dangerous in inexperienced hands but for the traction and stability control systems, they freak out when suddenly in snow and ice they are unable to overcome their deficiencies as well, for them changing tyres with the season is sensible.

No but it is almost certainly your problem. I could explain further but will leave you to ponder the enigma!

Yes I had forgotten that, what a stupid thing to have been programmed in!

Immobiliser problem, try spare key as suggested.

Thats actually good news, it rules out the minimum cranking speed thing, sounds like you tightening the terminal fixed the non start but a new battery might be required. The only time my MK1 Octavia ever broke down was not a breakdown as such but a similar failure to start, my pal tow started me and once home I set to cleaning all the leads and connections in the starter circuit, it was corrosion and oxidisation under the main battery cable tab on the starter motor, only visible when removed and only a slight film. But it was after 20 years of running and at that point 300000 miles so pretty good going in my book.

The adoption of the expansion vessels was in part mandated because of todays compensation culture that rewards those who do foolish things and punishes the innocent manufacturers who can write all the warnings in the manuals and on stickers in the world and still be liable.