Mark2

I have been in correspondence with DVSA for the last 6 months including requesting FOI data in the dealings with Audi, their responses have been lamentable as you have seen from previous posts. However I am not giving up as they are suggesting FOI data cannot be released as it is confidential and I need to ask Audi, which I will do but have also gone back to DVSA as they are inconsistent with their answers. If anyone wants to raise this with them pleaae do so as they have an ongoing investigation ther more pressure the better. Here is my reply to DVSA- Dear Ms Keeling, Ref 2409-056095 FOI Request Relating to Audi 48v/12v mild hybrid failures Thank you for your letter dated 22 January. I regret the lack of transparency from your Agency gives me grave concern hence my further questions. If we go back to first principles, DVSA is a Govt body with the strap line ‘Helping you stay safe on Britain’s roads’, which is exactly what my questions are aiming to do. However, it appears from your answers and reticence at being open that you are actually more interested in protecting manufacturers than the British Public. My justification for saying that is because of what I see are inconsistencies in DVSA’s responses to my questions STAGE ONE 1] What are the visual and audible warnings triggered when the alternator fails to charge? You state you do not hold this information. However, in your email 15 August you stated -Our understanding of the failure modes is the vehicle has a two-stage warning both of which are visual and acoustic, and the vehicle fully meets type approval requirements. You must therefore hold this information or the response of 15 August is not true. This information is not classified by you as being client confidential as it must be in the public domain, meets type approval and must form part of your ongoing investigation. 2] How is the driver informed that the failure is that the alternator is no longer charging the battery? You state you do not hold this information. However, in your email 15 August you stated-Should there be a failure of the alternator, the warning strategy is triggered You know the warning strategy is triggered as you have said so, I am asking what this is. You could not make this statement unless you know what it is so you must hold this information. 3] How does this stage warn the driver that continued vehicle use will lead to ‘roll out’ and that he should park the vehicle safely as soon as possible? You state you do not hold this information. However, in your email 15 August you stated -Should there be a failure of the alternator, continued use will cause the vehicle “to roll out” and coast to a stop. If you know continued use will lead to Roll out you know if there is a warning to the driver of this fact YES or NO. If you do not hold this information is the question part of your on-going investigation. Why have you not asked the manufacturer to answer this as it is fundamental to this safety issue? 4] How long does Stage One last before Stage Two kicks in? You state you do not hold this information which is consistent with your 15 August email but you go on further to say the warning messages provided ‘have been considered acceptable through type approval processes’ Therefore, you must know all the warning messages which are produced so you must have the answers to my stage One and Stage two questions In your letter 22 January you state that the answers to the above questions are available in the manufacturers handbooks which is not the case. There would not be a multimillion USD law suit in the USA relating to this safety issue if it was covered in the handbook nor would hundreds of UK motorists be subjected to dangerous vehicle roll outs if this were covered in the handbooks On 6 November you advised me -We have withheld information that falls within the scope of your request under section 31(2)(c) (the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise) of the FoIA. This is because we believe that the release of the information would be likely to harm our ability to effectively conduct future investigations into whether regulatory action is required against any manufacturer Now we are talking about a safety issue where the British public are safeguarded by the DVSA why have you not asked the manufacturer if you can release information? Your email 22 January states Section 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FoIA was also applied to the request for correspondence. I confirm that this exemption was correctly applied. In my opinion there is a risk that other manufacturers could use this data to obtain an advantage over Audi and its competitors. This statement by you has the effect of you protecting the profits, reputation and brand image of a manufacturer rather than the safety of the British Public. Considering all manufacturers are concentrating on EV technology exposing answers to the safety issue is hardly going to given any competitors an advantage. This in my view is a convenient statement for you to hide behind rather than probe the manufacturer for answers. This is totally inconsistent with your stating ‘you do not hold this specific information’. Either you hold it but will not release it because you value your cosy relationship with the manufacturers or you do not hold it. The more I read back over this correspondence for the last 6 months the more I get the impression that DVSA have no teeth when dealing with manufacturers, you appear to accept manufacture’s statements at face value, there is little probing by you and then you put up a screen of smoke and mirrors and of FOI legislation to wriggle out of what you see as awkward questions but what I see as a member of the British public as fundamental vehicle safety issues which , by the grace of god , have not yet led to any fatalities. Please reflect on your inconsistencies and respond in clear concise terms with believable answers.

I do hope you told the dealer that if your diagnosis turned out to be correct and the alternator is at fault then they will reimburse the diagnostics they have undertaken which have proved worthless?

I have just had a response from the DVSA regarding my FOI request regarding Audi's respose to them. They have not send me any FOI info siting two sensitive issues which I think are BS and either a cover up for their inefficiency or the hope I will go away. I am escalating this to a DVSA internal review with my response below- Dear sirs, I am unhappy with the response from DVSA which has provided me with no information and the excuses appear perfunctory. It also may indicate lack of probing by the DVSA into the responses given by Audi and there is some back covering going on. I do hope that is not the case the DVSA must be working in the public interest. The two reasons for your failing to provide me with FOI information are summarised as follows : Section 31 -disclosure of info may harm your ability to obtain info in the future Section 43 -the information requested is commercially sensitive and could be used by any competitor to Audi I should like therefore to address each of my questions and test those against your reasoning above STAGE ONE 1] What are the visual and audible warnings triggered when the alternator fails to charge? This is a reasonable question and Audi have stated to you there is a two stage warning so that is in the public domain, they must have designed the mild hybrid cars with such systems and they would have advised users what those warnings were, otherwise they would not have designed any warnings. How can this answer possibly fall within Section 31 or 43? 2] How is the driver informed that the failure is that the alternator is no longer charging the battery? Vehicle manufacturers have generally for the last 80 years provided a warning lamp on the dash to warn the driver that the Dynamo/ alternator is no longer charging the battery. This is not a new system which could provide a competitor an advantage and it can hardly be regarded answering it as jeopardising the DVSA relationship with manufacturers. 3] How does this stage warn the driver that continued vehicle use will lead to ‘roll out’ and that he should park the vehicle safely as soon as possible ? This is actually what happens , any Audi competitor can discover this is what happens by searching on the internet or by replicating the failure in an Audi vehicle. Competitors buy their opponents vehicles all the time to check them out. These vehicle were designed 5-8 years ago so are not exactly cutting edge technology. As this is what occurs and in the public domain how can the answers possibly fall within your sections above. 4] How long does Stage One last before Stage Two kicks in? A reasonable question as Audi have declared there are two stages how can there be a secret about when they occur? 5] What does ‘the Code’ state is the reasonable warnings and time given to the driver to take action This is a question for the DVSA as it relates to your Code. How can your answering a question about your own procedures be governed by commercial sensitivity to a manufacturer? STAGE TWO 1] What are the visual and acoustic warnings triggered at stage two? This is a reasonable question and Audi have stated to you there is a two stage warning so that is in the public domain, they must have designed the mild hybrid cars with such systems and they would have advised users what those warnings were, otherwise they would not have designed any warnings. How can this answer possibly fall within Section 31 or 43? 2] How is the driver informed that he is now in Stage Two and this is becoming more critical? A reasonable question as Audi have declared there are two stages how can there be a secret about when they occur and their urgency? This is just the sort of driver info that the DVSA should be ensuring manufactures instal. 3] How does stage two warn the driver to stop as soon as possible and what is the average time frame between stage two activation and vehicle failure- ‘roll out’ ? Audi have declared the two stage warning, it is incomprehensible that the DVSA have not probed that further to establish the effectiveness of such a two stage system. This has no commercially sensitive info but is critical for any driver experiencing full vehicle shut down and as such must be in the DVSA’s remit to publish the answer. 4] What is the Code spec for stage two? This is a question for the DVSA as it relates to your Code. How can your answering a question about your own procedures be governed by commercial sensitivity to a manufacturer? I look forward to a full investigation and the DVSA providing answers which are of paramount safety interest to all Audi Mild Hybrid vehicle drivers.

Did not notice any changes in my RS6, all back to normal, but those are the items to kill if the yellow lights come on again

It’s [email protected]

I am really sorry David but I have no axe to grind. I’m requesting FoI date from DVSA and will not let this go. However if you can use what Audi have done for me to improve your situation I am happy to pitch in and help.

Have you written to Mr Doyle at Audi UK, this is the way to get results.

That is also my view that is why I put it out there so anyone else can use my example with Audi UK, if they can do this for one owner they can do the same for everyone. Let’s face it the trauma is the same whether you drive a Q3, RS6 or RSQ8

My RS6 was out of warranty by 3 months, I had no breakdown cover so was exposed. I just made a nuisance of myself writing to Mr Doyle and threatening to write to Audi Germany etc. so I was in the same boat without a paddle as everyone else. I know you should not have to do this but telling Audi UK you are not going quietly got all my costs and a good will settlement so this should be open to everyone.

Just an update for everyone that you must pursue Audi UK and do not give up. Audi UK have now paid for- recovery charges from the breakdown to delivery to Audi Bath a courtesy car while the car was in for repair for 6 days the repair and replacement costs MY EXTENDED WARRANTY PREMIUM FOR 12 MONTHS GOODWILL GESTURE OF £1000 I think it is quite obvious Audi UK know they have a problem and will do what they can to keep customers on side. So do not give up make a lot of noise as there is no reason my treatment should be any different from anyone else.

I think that is a reaction we all have, let’s get out. However that could be out of the frying pan into the fire as most modern cars have their issues. My thoughts have been - I have been through this now understand the warning signs will take immediate action to turn every non essential electrical circuit off and drive to a dealer or safe location. I have a spare alternator in my garage, which I take on continental trips so I can get any competent garage to replace it. That way I am comfortable to manage any future failures.

The fact that thevAA ‘ found not charging’ should be enough to pin point the Alternator.

Well done. Mr Corcoran has responded to my question which he is unable to answer because he trotted out the response he had from Audi, which was probably in very guarded language. He has suggested I submit a Freedom of Information request to the DVSA for the Audi response- which I have done. Watch this space!

Nik, now you have had the fault and know how to deal with it it is not so bad. I still love my RS6 and do not really want to part with it but have a spare alternator which I tske with me on long trips abroad just in case, so I have decided I can live with the issue.

I have confirmed this document with Audi Bath and it is genuine from Audi UK to all dealers as Audi UK are picking up the bill. I have purchased a spare alternator which is sitting in my garage waiting the next failure. Part number A4N1 903 028 B should be the same for all mild hybrid VW/ Audi cars