Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

Touché 😂 — I completely missed that you were talking about Lunaz rather than the Range Rover above.

Of all the posts I could have misunderstood, obviously I chose one featuring an old Range Rover that’s survived long enough to be given a whole new life — while my considerably newer one managed to set itself on fire 😂🤦‍♀️

In my defence, when the donor car is a Range Rover and it still has RANGE ROVER written across its backside, you can perhaps see how I got there 🤷🏽‍♀️

Although dragging my 4 followers into it was a bit savage 😭😂 They’re innocent!

Give me time, AutoPap. You were a newbie once too 👀😂

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

N900 SSM - @JLR_News @RangeRover are aware of this globally

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

@JLR_News
@RangeRover
@Motor_Ombudsman

How close does a family have to come to being seriously injured or killed before Jaguar Land Rover considers a vehicle fire worthy of proper investigation?

• We weren’t in a collision.
• We weren’t abusing the vehicle.
•We were simply travelling home in the JLR Approved Used Range Rover Sport SVR we had bought from JLR’s authorised network.

The “engine catastrophically failed.”
A connecting rod breached the engine. Oil escaped onto the hot exhaust. The vehicle caught FIRE while my family were inside!

We got out. I don’t want to contemplate how differently that could have ended.

Yet after months of trying to understand why this happened, JLR has now issued its final response, closed the case and confirmed:

“no further review will be undertaken.”

And that is what I cannot accept.

Because since the fire, I have obtained JLR’s own records. before this vehicle was sold to us as JLR Approved Used:

06/03/2025 — 40,878 miles
P0430-00 — Catalyst System Efficiency Below Threshold (Bank 2).

JLR’s own technical guidance specifically concerning P0430 on the L494 5.0L SVR says TOPIx information should be followed and:

“all other possible root causes of the catalyst DTC’s are investigated first.” TOPIX-5642.pdf

The vehicle later returned with a reported possible smell of coolant.

Then came the catastrophic failure and fire.

The JLR technician who examined the failed engine identified the connecting rod as either cylinder 2 or cylinder 4 — Bank 2.

And the JLR diagnostic read following the incident, at 48,423 miles, contains P0021-71 — Intake (A) Camshaft Position Timing – Over-Advanced (Bank 2).

That’s only 7,545 miles between the Approved Used diagnostic scan showing P0430 Bank 2 and the post-incident diagnostic scan.

Let me be absolutely clear because this matters:

I am NOT claiming that P0430 caused the engine failure. I am NOT claiming that a post-incident DTC proves what happened before the engine failed.

I’ve been asking JLR to INVESTIGATE whether any of it is connected.

What was done about P0430 before it was cleared and the vehicle sold?

Was JLR’s own TOPIx/SSM guidance followed?

What caused the subsequent coolant smell?

Were there warning signs of an underlying problem?

Is there any technical relationship between the earlier Bank 2 history and the eventual catastrophic Bank 2 failure?

I don’t know the answers. That’s the point.

I expected the manufacturer to want to establish them after one of its Approved Used vehicles suffered catastrophic engine failure and caught fire with a family inside.

Instead, JLR’s final response tells me the original manufacturer’s warranty had expired, the Extended Warranty is administered by Car Care Plan, diagnostic information is proprietary and SSMs are internal.

And then:

“no further review will be undertaken and the case will be closed.

This is not about asking JLR to pay somebody else’s warranty claim.

This is about vehicle safety.

A warranty expiry date doesn’t explain why an engine catastrophically failed.

It doesn’t explain why the vehicle caught fire.

It doesn’t answer what investigation was performed into the diagnostic evidence before it was sold as Approved Used.

And it certainly doesn’t answer the question I cannot get past:

If a catastrophic engine failure and vehicle fire with a family inside isn’t enough for the manufacturer to want to understand what happened, what is?

I’ve attached the evidence and JLR’s final response.

They have closed their case.

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

UK SSM’s … P0420/P0430

[Katie Hopkins @KTHopkins]

Batshit Bonkers Britain: real news told well.

We have no idea where we might get some water from …

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

I cannot believe that this is the level Middlesbrough has actually dropped to…

A innocent little girl, her life’s over before it even begun.. these ain’t gangsters!

There scum!!!

[TheEnglishPatriot @TheEnglishPat]

@GBNEWS 7-year-old girl died 💔✝️🙏🏻

[That's The Badger! @Thatsthebad]

Lawless youths torch field of cars in warped tribute to victim of A66 crash: As hundreds of extra police are drafted into Middlesbrough amid fears of gang carnage, masked thugs show what they think of crackdown

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

@RangeRover I have sent the private message

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

@LandRover_UK I really don’t know where else to turn now. My Range Rover SVR suffered catastrophic engine failure and quite literally tried to BBQ me and the kids 🔥 — after just 13 months and fewer than 8,000 miles in my ownership. Still waiting for help...

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

6–7 March — diagnostics/inspection
10 March — failed MOT
20 March — passed MOT
21 March — battery test
25 March — rectification technician/New & Used Preparation entry
28 March — cover begins
29 March — we collected the vehicle.

Having now seen those records, I no longer feel able simply to accept that this was

“one of those things”

without the vehicle’s history and the circumstances surrounding its preparation and subsequent failure being properly examined.

This is why the diagnostic history matters so much. A JLR retailer completely unconnected with the supplying Lloyd dealership was extremely helpful and confirmed to me that diagnostic history exists for this vehicle going back to its first registration. Sharing their concerns about the latest information taken- and shock at the treatment we’ve received.

So I’m struggling to understand JLR Client Care’s response. Why, rather than helping establish what that history shows, am I simply being told that I am “not allowed” to have it?

I appreciate there may be processes governing what information JLR can release from its systems.

But if that’s the case, please explain them.

Simply telling me I’m “not allowed” to have it isn’t an adequate explanation when I’m trying to establish the history of a JLR Approved Used vehicle which subsequently suffered catastrophic engine failure and caught fire with my family inside it.

Likewise, I’ve been told I cannot be provided with information relating to relevant SSMs, despite JLR technical communications/SSMs being obtainable through other legitimate sources.

If there’s a genuine restriction on what JLR can provide, please explain what that restriction actually is.

And to be absolutely clear:

I am not asking JLR simply to review that diagnostic history internally and tell me what JLR considers relevant.

I am asking for access to the underlying historical diagnostic/DTC records themselves. I want to properly understand my vehicle’s history and, if necessary, have that evidence independently reviewed.

Another JLR retailer has already confirmed that diagnostic history for this vehicle is visible going back to first registration.

So being told simply that I cannot have it is extremely difficult to understand. I’m not asking JLR to admit liability on X.

I’m not asking anyone to manufacture an answer in my favour or tell me what I want to hear.

I’m asking for transparency, evidence and answers. I’m asking somebody within JLR to care enough to investigate how an Approved Used vehicle catastrophically failed and caught fire with a family inside it, explain the decisions subsequently made and allow the relevant evidence to be examined.

So before I send another private message and explain this entire serious situation yet again, can you tell me whether you are actually able to do something differently?

Because please don’t just send me back around the same departments I’ve already spent months trying to get answers from.

I need somebody within JLR with the authority to look at the whole situation to actually take ownership of it.

I just want transparency, my vehicle’s diagnostic history and proper answers about how an Approved Used Range Rover SVR 5.0l v8 L494 ended up here.

Had the outcome that day been worse, sympathy afterwards wouldn’t have brought my family home.

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

I’ve repeatedly tried to deal with this privately through the proper channels, but I’m struggling to get anyone to actually speak to me in this pretty serious situation
@LandRover_UK please can somebody from JLR Client Care please contact me and actually help get me some answers?

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

JLR Client Care opened a Vehicle Fire case on 23 July. On 11 August I contacted JLR again and was expressly told that my case “remains under review”, that the relevant team was seeking an update that day and that somebody would contact me.

I’m still waiting.

[Nia Mills ✨🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❣️ @Nade444x]

@GMB @susannareid100 This is sickening - people in government need to speak to these people there stripping this benefit from. This government have schemes in place with Serco rewarding and providing for illegal immigrants- yet plan to make our disabled suffer further!