Graham Butcher

The context was that the cars in question are the subject of a manufacturer's recall as they have had incidents of said cars catching fire and they issued specific guidelines/instructions and are therefore a known fire hazard. The cars you are speaking of, are your own cars, and are NOT the subject of recall because there has been problems with them catching fire, therefore they are totally irrelevant to this discussion. Insurance companies only get twitchy about such risks when there is a fully justified reason, in your case, there is no such reason, so your comment is only serving to stir the pot

Oh yes, sorry my bad, that was also one of those pointed out by @wyx087, however the fact still remains that ICE fires are massively easier to bring under control and put out and stay out, in quick time. The fear that Insurance companies have is that once the high voltage becomes the source of the fire, or gets involved in the fire to the extent that it is itself on fire, then it is pretty much game over. And unless there are other vehicles or structures in the fire, the usual response from fire brigades is to monitor it and let it burn itself out as the fire engines cannot carry enough water to be effective, and then there is the problem of controlling the run-off water as it has become highly toxic and needs to be prevented from soaking into the ground and entering drains.

You are in denial, the fire risk does not manifest itself in ICE vehicles. I am not aware of any incident where a ICE recall could result in a fire and vehicle or building insurance being revoked if not following the advise given by the makers of the vehicle. The reason for that is the extremely high temperatures of a lithium Ion battery, it's verocity of sending out flamethrower jets of flames, and the highly toxic fumes given off as well and the fact that unlike an ICE fire which can be quickly quelled put out, battery fires cannot be put out quickly or easily and can reignite at any time. That us why the insurance could be withdrawn for non compliance with manufacturers instructions as the claims ensuing from any such incident could be massive. I expect that we will see more companies refusing insurance in the future until a way of dealing with the problems is found which is both quick and effective, I mentioned before that the UK Government have already imposed a ban on electric cars in any of their own underground and multi-storey carparks in Westminster, so the hazards must be real. Go back and look again for the link to their own website where they published that article, I don't have it any longer.

The letter, is the one that he has not yet received from Porsche, it is one has been sent to other Taycan owners of a particular batch of Taycans. He rang his insurance company to ask a hypothetical question about would happen to anybody in the situation where they had been advised not to charge undercover or park close to buildings until the repair had been carried out. You heard their response in the video. In the previous video when you posed that question he did not say who he was or if he had a policy with that company, they traced his phone through their records, found out he did, and have assumed that he has a faulty car and not notified them and so are refusing to roll his policy over without renegotiating or further clarification on if he has a faulty car or not. The implication being, that if you are one of these unfortunate people, then it is very likely that if you do not follow the manufacturers advise, they would withdraw cover in the event of any incident arising with your car being the cause of it.

Simples, that is the name of his channel and so if you want to refer to anything about his channel, then does it not make sense to use the name that he gave it? To my mind it is respect. Much the same as Land Rover Jaguar, everybody knows that they are owned by Tata Motors but when referring to either a Land Rover or a Jaguar, you don't say Tata Motors or do you?

I know that this is going to be as popular as rattlesnake in a lucky dip, but this is factual and not clickbait and this could be just the thin end of the wedge, and you have to ask yourself if you have and electric car and the manufacturer has written a letter advising you not to charge it undercover or park it near your house or buildings and your insurance company withdraw your insurance cover on car and or building/house or even both if you're with the same company for both, what are you going to do? I know many of you will smirk and chortle and the McMaster's misfortune, but guys, it is serious, not claickbait and given the large amount of electric cars that have been recalled for repairs because of fire risk (many makes are suffering this problem) , what do you do and where do you leave the car? Are you still saying that electric cars do not pose any risks, I'm not aware of any similar incident ever happening with ICE cars, are you.

@wyx087 Perhaps we should be looking at reducing deforestation, stamping out wild bush fires (seems that most are started either deliberately or by being reckless with campfires etc) and maybe take a leaf out of Chinas play book? China Removed Billion Tons of Sand From the Desert, What Happened a Year Later Surprised Everyone

Indeed with the Net-Zero what about the other affects that are caused by CO2 etc? Why is there a CO2 shortage and how will it hit food supplies? - BBC News

Surely electricity, gas, coal and oil are interlinked to keep them near enough the same level in a bid to not maximise the profits that each sector makes?

That is entirely possible if the Brex***** are to be believed as when we were part of the larger club, we could not alter VAT rates, but leaving the club would allow us to do just that, hmm food for thought....

These are the bits that you don't come across with an ICE car and is why I say that the future as it stands is NOT electric. We have had many decades now of plentiful PFS where you can rock up, fill the tank in minutes, pay cash or card and be on your way within minutes and if they seriously believe that electric is the future, and there genuinely is no other hidden agenda in the switch over, then these are the very things that they simply must get right. The total cost of doing that is going to considerably cheaper, and it would be far quicker than demolishing all housing stocks that do not have off-road parking and facility to have their own home charger installed.

Going by recent performances, I would not bank on that happening.

@OotohereDon't you believe it that more than half of Londoners have off-street parking where they could install a home charging unit, that is just pure BS. Yes it is true that there are loads of homes that do have the chance of using space such as their front gardens for off-street parking and a few minutes using Google Earth will illustrate this point neatly, but these places in the main tend to be located around the very outer edges of London, largely in the areas in that are now in the ULEZ area that always used to be in the surrounding counties like Essex, Kent, Surry, Sussex, etc. In the more densely populated areas and the closer you get to the centre, there are very few homes where that is even remotely possible, and is high blocks of flats become the norm for people, of which very few have underground parking. I have spent years of my life working within these areas with electrical consulting engineers, Housing Associations, Local Authorities and private landlords, schools, hospitals and government depts etc trying to find ways of upgrading the electrical installations and services of the properties there to make them compliant and fit for modern life. I also have extended family members living in the areas, and they would love to have the same standard of housing those that living towards the outer edges of London enjoy.

I think much work needs to be done to the system before they can say that electric is the future.

In other news today, The Good Law Project have twice this year taken the UK Government to the supreme court over their Net-Zero and won. On both occasions the Government strategy has been ruled unlawful, so what now?

Not good is it, imagine if you were on your last gasp of power when you reached them 😭

Makes sense to do WP at the same time as the CB, if it's the same engine as in the Passats and Superbs, it is recommended to do together.

Maybe they are doing what so many EV owners/users/drivers keep trying to tell everyone that you should only drive for about 2 hours and need a comfort break and something to eat and as so often happens when going out to eat, time slips by waiting for the service to catch up. I went out to celebrate my late Father in Laws birthday on Wednesday last week, 1.30 table booked for a pub lunch and it was over 2 hours before we actually finished, spent most of the time waiting for food to arrive.

Arh, good old hot fish and chips, always welcome in the winter months, also a good idea to keep plenty of sweets in the glove box and a bottle or of some sort of drink. 👍👍

@Ootohere totally agree for real world comparisons EVs need be treated and driven just the same as you would do with an ICE. People banging on about home charging etc are living the dream that as Jayemm said is not currently even remotely possible for many millions of people. In that case if your trips are short enough that you can replace what you use each time with a home charge and have the means to charge at home, then it might make sense and if you can shut out the possibility of the alleged immense damage to other people's environment overseas where minerals are mined and huge human costs being paid by the alleged children mining them, from your mind, when they go on about how good they are for not emitting any tailpipe emissions, when the damage is being done elsewhere out of sight.

@Ootohere I can't see that changing anytime soon, either, as it would be counterproductive to their net-zero strategy. When you consider that there is far less processing put into the production of diesel when compared against petrol, and was really prior to the surge towards diesel powered cars, considered more as a waste by product with limited commercial value, then the whole thing with it being the more expensive fuel, a complete mockery. Another issue with diesel powered cars is that emit 20% less CO2 per litre than the equivalent Petrol powered vehicle, and given that you get way more MPG with diesel that means for the same journey of say 100 miles, a petrol car produces way more CO2 then diesel does over the same distance, thus making the whole net-zero policy flawed when diesel is being penalised, which was after all one of the main reasons for the governments global push a few years ago towards diesel as a motive power, as it drastically reduced the CO2 levels being held up as the major cause of global warming. Makes you wonder if the current global warming is the result of more petrol powered cars on the roads then diesel because of the way diesel is being portrayed as being evil? Yes, we know that diesels produce NOX, but then so do petrol cars, and also I have repeatedly stated that the air quality has improved massively with the introduction of DPFs etc over the last few years and is still being improved upon all the time and will, I have no doubt, be considerably less than petrol if ICE cars continue. This chart taken from the UK Governments own sources shows just how much diesel has cleaned its act on the NOX side over the last few years.

I agree with everything he said, and I have had similar discussions with others in this thread who are just like the EV owners he mentions who constantly have a go at him for doing it all wrong, should be home charging, etc. I have had this feeling for a long time that what with the advent of 15 minute cities etc, that they really don't want the average person to be able to travel very far at all and that the great plan is for the poor to be heavily taxed, have their freedom taken away from them and that basically only the elite in society will be able to afford to run a car and have the ability to effectively be free to go and do whatever they want. The essential workers that we all depend on every day are very rarely from the elites, and yet it is these people who are being squeezed till they bleed, I could go on but I know that I shall get a barrage of negative comments from those that cannot see the overall bigger picture.

I don't think that is likely to happen as Big Oil does not have to try and entice people to use their product or services.

Merry Christmas everyone, I hope you all have a cracker of Christmas.

That sure was a lucky gamble he got there.