an apology either way based on the outcome of the report would probably go part way to resolving some of the tension, but lets be realistic, that is very unlikely to happen!!!!!!!

FWIW, If the OP has a report from an qualified expert that states the cause of the problem etc and the vendor (CT in this case) can not prove this to be untrue, then on the balance of probability, the vendor could get a court judgement against them..

I may be missing something, but isn't the report actually from a competitor company to CT as opposed to an independent and unbiased expert. While their findings may well be correct, it is in their interest to see that CT is blamed for this.

Interesting read.

:popcorn:

I may be missing something, but isn't the report actually from a competitor company to CT as opposed to an independent and unbiased expert. While their findings may well be correct, it is in their interest to see that CT is blamed for this.

They are another company with experties in the field.

As such it's reasonable to expect they might well know what they are doing.

As such if CT can't disprove it then you might take on the balance of what is said that it is true. I'm sure another party that both sides are happy with could do an assessment too to total three reports.

At the end of the day a civil case in on probability not reasonable doubt from my memory

Criminal cases must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt

Civil cases (like this one) need only be proved "on the balance of probabilities"

(like Mark said, above)

Just a quick has an agreement been reached post to see if this matter has now been settled?

I would also like to know the outcome, i used a whole hour of my lunch reading this!

Hope it's all sorted either way

no agreement or admission of liability at this time..

sorry to disappoint :lol:

Fascinating read. Might as well chuck in my two pennies worth.

While the OP did somewhat fire big guns in the initial e-mail, and given that some of the information about the alleged fault, was from forum members and probably speculative at best. However, the response from the vendor was a classic example, of why you should never take action while you are upset.

Not everyone can be William Shakespeare, but basic grammar, and punctuation are a must, if you are to look professional.

The big mystery to me, is the posted pictures of equipment used to map cars using the OBD2 port, yet the vendor maps by removing the chip and flashing it outside of the ECU.

I worked in electronics for more years than I care to remember, and wouldn't dream of removing anything other than plug in chips for flashing. Even using infra-red heat pad stations to remove surface mounted components, would result in the odd failure due to thermal stress of the component. Plus there was always the risk of thermal damage while refitting the component, even with proper temperature controlled solder stations.

IMHO postal re-maps are a very bad idea. Yes you will get some that work, but you cannot beat a dyno/OBD2 port map, as it can be adjusted to suit the engine of the car being tuned.

As for who or what damaged the ECU, IMHO the checksum error is the big clue on that one. It is VERY rare for a hardware fault to cause a checksum error. So it would appear that the software update is the most likely cause.

I would like to look at this further, so a PM of the report would be appreciated.

Totally agree with your comments there

As to the OP, I didn't expect there to be one, but I figured we could always hope things turned out well.

HTH

Any update on this?

The News of the World?!

Speaks volumes in itself.

I got all excited then, thinking there was an update on the thread :grumpy: never mind, one day?

Still nothing?

Yeah what happened with this one in the end?

I'd be interested to see some graphs from a postal map if anyone has had theirs postal remapped and then got it rolling roaded.

Yeah what happened with this one in the end?

I'd be interested to see some graphs from a postal map if anyone has had theirs postal remapped and then got it rolling roaded.

Mods with full exhaust

AFR + BHP@ Wheels

Martz that was with what mods, a turbo back exhaust and panel filter?

(you have PM btw)

Edited 10 September, 200916 yr by chicken_eyebrow

Turbo back exhaust and Ebay CAI, inc the Ebay cone filter (which i wouldn't recommend, poor dust filtration)

Pm replied

Okay, an update; for all those wwho are still reading this (or watching it with baited breath and popcorn)

I won the court case. (Well, CT never bothered responding to the court after initially denying liability) so the court found in my favour and ordered them to pay up for my losses, plus court costs.

However, CT have failed to pay me to date (since August) so I now have to decide whether to just write it off, or throw even more money at it is the form of bailiffs, earnings orders etc...

This British court system is a joke really isn't it?

Suffice to say I won't be sending anything the THEM for mapping again... lol

You may not have recouped any money but what you have done is proved your case in the courts. Now no one can argue in favor of the mapping company as their opportunity to voice their side has passed. Good news to finally have an outcome on this thread and it wont take long to filter to the other threads/boards either.

RESULT mate,

it is a joke! because they failed to turn up they should have a warrent out for their arrest and then be made to pay all costs and bills plus a bit extra for the system before being set free and then still be left with a criminal record. What is the point in going to court if they are not gonna pay? how stupid is that?.

Yes well done on seeing it through - you'll have judge if you think you have a realistic chance of securing assets/monies before taking it further.

But let's be clear, you won by default, not by case proven.

You might think the court system is a joke, but as the claimant you have the 'power' - it was pointless the guy turning up because you would have won on the balance of probability, there is no way he could prove what he did DIDN'T cause the problem, which is the only way he could 'win'.

It is a bit biased the small claims system, for peanuts you can whack a claim in, and if they don't turn up you win by default!

If I was innocent though, 100% certain I'd be there fighting my case. A win is a win at the end of the day.

Like you've learned though, winning is only the first part, getting any money out of them is a bit trickier. I'd give the court a bell and ask for advice. The least you can hope for is he'll get a CCJ on his file for 6 years

Well done mate!!!!,

"won by default"?, technically yes but lets be honest, if I felt I was in the right and believed I could win in a court case i'd fight tooth and nail as i am sure most people would.

I would go to a small claims if it falls within their remit, at least you would make it more public and and thereby alert anyone else considering

going down the same route of modding their ecu.

Once again Congrads

Peter

But let's be clear, you won by default, not by case proven.

One has to ask why CT did not respond to the court case. Perhaps because they knew they would lose?