Past master said:
Of course we could just forget about the "21000 mile/2 year" service and service our cars sensibly on an annual/12000 mile basis. Not all Google results concern JLR - here's a very sensible one regarding Audi, Mercedes etc, which sets out very clearly what we all know, but in relation to German cars. The recommendation is to service annually and use premium grade fuel. Interestingly it does also suggest that at least some German models let you know that regen is happening by flashing the glowplug light. Oh - and it mentions "driving style" too.
https://www.autotecnic.co.uk/maintenance/diesel-particulate-filters-dpf-technical-info/
There was one mention each for "AUDI" and "MERCEDES" - but only because these names appeared in a marketing-oriented banner at the top. The company wrote this page to advertise their service-based wares:
"We specialise in Engine Management Diagnostics & Computerised Wheel Alignment for all German Cars."
The web page from Autotecnic [sic] contains generic marketing boilerplate and has nothing to do with the specific problems affecting D8 cars.
Some people who bought DS and Evoque motor cars were misled about short journeys and DPF clogging. But
everybody who expected a 21,000 mile service interval without incurring levels of diesel dilution that "will result in engine failure" was equally misled. Known faults (unresolved engineering "challenges") responsible for both of these problems were never disclosed to prospective buyers. According to recent accounts, many of the affected owners now find themselves being financially penalised as JLR and its dealers harden their stance over who should pay for additional oil changes, DPF replacement and so forth. This will get worse as more cars develop problems reaching the end of the warranty period. This did not arise as the result of an unfortunate accident: the evidence suggests that it was planned in advance.
People were told one thing.....
![]()
….but not another. This crucial information was withheld to prevent customer sales objections:
View attachment 9557
View attachment 7162
The reason this happened is unique to the D8 diesels made by JLR from 2015 onwards. The obstructing bulkhead and 70 cm of pipework has no parallel in any other car from this or any other manufacturer - perhaps because most car manufacturers carefully measure the engine compartment before selecting an engine. JLR's engineers didn't suddenly discover that this problem existed in 2016, they would have fully understood the implications of the "challenged" exhaust system long before a single car had left the factory.
Arguably, engineering should have persuaded executive management to come clean and change the service intervals to 12,000 miles while they had the chance. But that would have deterred many buyers and maybe that's why they left it where it was. Doing this enabled them to sell more cars: I know one victim who stated categorically that they would not have bought a diesel DS had it not been for the perceived benefits of extended service intervals. There are hundreds of others who would say the same thing. JLR eventually did change the brochures but some dealer sales staff still fudged the issue if it came up or created innovative ways to secure sales.
Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 outlines the risks for any person who makes a fraudulent representation with the intention of making a gain for themselves (or someone else) or exposes another person to the risk of loss. The attached paper from Burges-Salmon published in January 2016 explained how this legislation could easily have been used against VW for making money from fraudulent sales of polluting vehicles: "
Volkswagen appears to have admitted making false representations to customers regarding the emissions of its vehicles and the vehicles' compliance with EU emissions standards. It is unlikely that prosecutors will struggle to establish that these false representations were made with the intention of making an economic gain. Prosecutors are also likely to be able to establish that the conduct was performed with the required state of mind. The maximum penalty for this offence is ten years in prison, a fine, or both."
![]()
A few months later the government announced no action would be taken against VW here in the UK, a story that was covered by The Guardian in July 2016*. Presumably the UK felt that there was little it could do that would add materially to the prosecution being undertaken by the German authorities: in June 2018 Reuters announced that a one billion Euro fine had been levied against VW for its "emissions cheating" activities.
* https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jul/15/government-is-letting-vw-off-the-hook-over-emissions-scandal-say-mps
