2022 RAV4 stolen

[atartan]

9 hours ago, Yugguy1970 said:

I think you can't be short of a bob or two or you wouldn't be in a 2022 Rav.

I think for the sake of a few hundred quid you could be building up trouble in the future if the car is not officially fully repaired, when you come to sell it or trade it back in.

I think noone on here is trying to have a go at you but you take every comment that way.

I will get the car fixed at a reputable garage or at another toyota service but what I dont understand is people talking like it was my fault that the car was stolen and Toyota has the right to use the stuation to their advantage and make 6K from just replacing few connectors.  I own the car I would also like to learn how it works and how it can be fixed. This is what this forum is for, information about the car and how to fix stuff if its broken.

Maybe you solve all your problems just by talking to your insurance company but I am hoping that some people will read this forum and either come up with a solution to secure this car in a better way by either means of physical device or a third party alarm.

People like myself also like to see the feedback of business places where they get the service etc .. Some people write the good service they received some comment on bad service. In my case I went to Toyota service and they tried to run a scam and take my money. I am hoping that people will not take their car to Currie Motor Toyota.

[atartan]

I know many said that the cars be can stolen and manufacturers are not responsible for the theft...

 its not exactly the same security issue... hyundai/kia didnt add immobilizer to some models but they are willing to provide a solution. Yes thieves can go find a way to break these new security meaures but at least kia is making it harder to steal

https://www.carscoops.com/2022/09/hyundai-responds-to-concerns-over-dramatic-surge-in-car-thefts-prepares-new-security-kit/

 

[TonyHSD]

1 hour ago, Yugguy1970 said:

I think you can't be short of a bob or two or you wouldn't be in a 2022 Rav.

I think for the sake of a few hundred quid you could be building up trouble in the future if the car is not officially fully repaired, when you come to sell it or trade it back in.

I think noone on here is trying to have a go at you but you take every comment that way.

Absolutely agreed 👍 

Basically the insurance premium next year will be higher because of circumstances and what have happened no matter if the op goes through them for repairs or does it himself. The theft has happened, it has been noted and recorded. On renewal policy the insurance provider will ask about plus they will see it and of course will rise the premium a bit. It’s not gonna be crazy high but definitely higher. I can’t understand how people can be worried about insurance is going up while they haven’t done anything wrong, that’s what insurances are for, to pay you when things happen. 

Unauthorised repair on electrical systems, on nearly new car that cost over £40k , done by the owner , this doesn’t sound right to me. And yes the future problems can be huge and even lead to more problems if the repair hasn’t been done right. 

I agree with the op for one thing only the dealer to avoid at all costs “ Curry Motors” - curry and motors : doesn’t sound right , does it ?! 

[atartan]

11 minutes ago, TonyHSD said:

Absolutely agreed 👍 

Basically the insurance premium next year will be higher because of circumstances and what have happened no matter if the op goes through them for repairs or does it himself. The theft has happened, it has been noted and recorded. On renewal policy the insurance provider will ask about plus they will see it and of course will rise the premium a bit. It’s not gonna be crazy high but definitely higher. I can’t understand how people can be worried about insurance is going up while they haven’t done anything wrong, that’s what insurances are for, to pay you when things happen. 

Unauthorised repair on electrical systems, on nearly new car that cost over £40k , done by the owner , this doesn’t sound right to me. And yes the future problems can be huge and even lead to more problems if the repair hasn’t been done right. 

I agree with the op for one thing only the dealer to avoid at all costs “ Curry Motors” - curry and motors : doesn’t sound right , does it ?! 

You seem to be an expert and giving advice here but for your information this is not considered as a theft, Police and insurance told me that this is a criminal damage as I recovered the car. As I said earlier I will get the car repaired in a proper garage whether its through insurance or pay myself is another matter.

[TonyHSD]

7 minutes ago, atartan said:

You seem to be an expert and giving advice here but for your information this is not considered as a theft, Police and insurance told me that this is a criminal damage as I recovered the car. As I said earlier I will get the car repaired in a proper garage whether its through insurance or pay myself is another matter.

I am not giving any advice here as I legally can not.
I am sharing my thoughts, knowledge and experience. I also believe that getting yourself involved in the recovery and repair process it’s totally wrong and out of place and can lead you to further problems in the future.
Same also said by other members.
You are free to do anything you like, your car, your insurance, your money. For anyone else if unlucky to become a target of theft or criminal damage, best to let the insurance, police and the dealer deal with and then take the car fully repaired no matter the cost, this is between insurance and dealer., then enjoy your car again or sell it if unhappy and move on. Case closed. 
 

[Yugguy1970]

Aye, I genuinely hope you can get it sorted.

Someone mentioned it earlier and I have found it true, main dealers don't really like to do too much investigative work.  If the codes say replace a part, they will do so, and book the exact 1.5 hours to Toyota and move on to the next job.

I don't think they're trying to deliberately con you, they're just not set up to do things in the same way as an indy garage.

[atartan]

5 minutes ago, Yugguy1970 said:

Aye, I genuinely hope you can get it sorted.

Someone mentioned it earlier and I have found it true, main dealers don't really like to do too much investigative work.  If the codes say replace a part, they will do so, and book the exact 1.5 hours to Toyota and move on to the next job.

I don't think they're trying to deliberately con you, they're just not set up to do things in the same way as an indy garage.

I understand where you are coming from but they want to charge £800 to connect a disconnected head-lamp. No new part or long hours of work involved. The muppets didnt even notice that they already connected it at the shop and returned the car to me.

[AJones]

8 hours ago, Devon Aygo said:

You can't blame a manufacturer for building a car only for years later a component becoming a hot target for theft, the cat thefts are a relatively new issue yet catalysts have been fitted since 2001, it took nearly 16years and sky high resource costs before cats became an easy target.

For older cars I agree, but once catalytic converter theft is a known issue as it has been for some years now, it seems reasonable to expect car manufacturers would incorporate catalytic converter security measures by default. Are Cat Locs installed by default on all new Toyotas?

8 hours ago, Devon Aygo said:

In Toyotas defence once the issue was noted they worked with Catloc and designed a product to mitigate the chance of theft, worked with and supported their suppliers to increase production, reduced the cost of Catalyst replacement to cost and offer free Smart water kit application to owners.

Yes it is good that Toyota responded, but then Toyota had to respond because at its peak the reports of thefts in the news were so frequent that it starts to affect the brand and saleability of hybrids. 

8 hours ago, Devon Aygo said:

Shortly after the introduction of remote central locking thieves realised they could intercept the signal ever since its been a cat and mouse game, manufactures design a system or a fix these prevent the average street thieves however the organised gangs quickly work out how to overcome the update/fix/system, as we can see not long ago relay theft was an issue a fix was issued, people became aware and took action etc now CAN BUS attack is taking over.

You say these issues were fixed but they were only fixed, going forward, for new vehicles, there isn't a fix for all the existing vehicles sold. What's the fix for all of the cars with the unsecure keyless entry system? I thought it was left to the owner, to either use a Faraday pouch or switch the system off? Is there a fix out there for that, a keyfob upgrade being offered?

8 hours ago, Devon Aygo said:

In the case of CAN BUS attack a simple fix would be to prevent any system access without direct communication to a Toyota server e.g encrypt the system and only allow unencrypting via secure access but this would be against the law as EU anti monopoly law ( see Block exemption ) states that Toyota ( and any other car company selling in the EU ) cannot prevent open access to these systems or even access to their own diagnostic & technical information access is so easy it is discussed openly on the web and even by users of this helping others find free TechDoc downloads and where to find free software keys etc, put these systems into the hands of organised crime and CAN BUS attack is the result

I'm unconvinced by this argument, open access does not mean zero security. Why couldn't the car manufacturer apply a password or access control to the system and provide that unique access code with the vehicle documentation to the owner, allowing the owner to take that to any garage? Similar to what was done with car radio unlock codes.

Same with the CAN bus attacks, most network systems have segregation and firewalls, you wouldnt expect the CAN bus to the headlight unit to have access to modify the keyfob bindings, or start the vehicle. You'd expect reasonable physical security measures around any canbus connections with this level of access.

[Yugguy1970]

30 minutes ago, atartan said:

I understand where you are coming from but they want to charge £800 to connect a disconnected head-lamp. No new part or long hours of work involved. The muppets didnt even notice that they already connected it at the shop and returned the car to me.

It's like if you want basics like a headlamp bulb changed, some dealers will charge stupid money because their books say it's a headlamp unit out job and that takes an hour and that's it.

[atartan]

27 minutes ago, Yugguy1970 said:

It's like if you want basics like a headlamp bulb changed, some dealers will charge stupid money because their books say it's a headlamp unit out job and that takes an hour and that's it.

I replaced one of the bulbs for my old honda and i had to take the bumper off and it wasnt easy but Rav4 head lamp was just disconnected and needed to be plugged back in , 5mins job? Thieves seems to do in in 90 seconds without opening the bonnet..

[ernieb]

As the car is virtually new I’d be concerned that the warranty would be impacted as ‘Toyota’ already know there has been a problem with the car and I’m sure the dealer has already got the details into the online Toyota service/repair record system. Sadly, I believe that if anything goes wrong including anything not connected with this damage would be effectively excluded. I like to be wrong but I’d have automatically gone through the insurance company.

I think everyone on this forum feels your pain Ata, born out by the number of us who are actively looking at additional mechanical form or visual protection.

[Dippy]

You can do your own maths. You can pay the excess (£300?) and rise in insurance premium (£200 max?) and let the profit making businesses sort it out between them.  Or you can take it to an independent, probably pay a similar amount to unofficially repair a brand new expensive car, and risk invalidating your ?5 year Toyota warranty, which could cost you so much more if a future claim is denied. 
 

From that maths it seems you are standing on principle which no one else will notice and which could harm you more than the others involved. 
 

Fine if all my numbers are wrong, you certainly know them better. But your judgment seems a bit clouded at present. 
 

You’re in a crap situation, I do hope it gets solved to your satisfaction. Thanks for highlighting to this naive driver the weaknesses in modern security systems. 

[NASY]

I get the impression from much of what's being said here that people seem reluctant to repair their own property, in this case a car. I would be reluctant to pay out for something I thought I could do. I even painted all my outside windows last year using my own scaffold tower. As I disassembled the tower it toppled over, fell on me and broke 9 ribs and a leg, air ambulance landed in the garden and rushed me to hospital which I was grateful for. So there may be a message there somewhere but I find it a mixed and confusing one.

[flash22]

10 minutes ago, Dippy said:

 risk invalidating your ?5 year Toyota warranty, which could cost you so much more if a future claim is denied. 
 

 

as of 2021 (april ?) its 3 year on new cars then its the relax warranty

 

why rip a whole car apart to replace whole looms when its just RF connectors that need replacing, if done correctly you will not know the difference - insurance will use a 3rd party repairer anyway - as its a newer car in current production parts will be on back order

the fact the dealer didn't bother with testing and just let the service writer load the parts cannon is poor

[forkingabout]

FWIW while the vehicle is under manufacturers warranty, repair of wiring looms / connectors might not be allowed - replacement might be the only acceptable option.

[TonyHSD]

53 minutes ago, forkingabout said:

FWIW while the vehicle is under manufacturers warranty, repair of wiring looms / connectors might not be allowed - replacement might be the only acceptable option.

And the right way to go,  because in an unlucky event of fire or other problems in the future and claim made against Toyota for warranty repair Toyota uk will not do it, just because the car had been repaired not by the book. The second thing even worse if the fire starts from one or more  components that been involved in the incident and been repaired not up to the Toyota standards even the insurance may refuse to pay. If any of that happens after the op has repaired himself then it’s all on him, and here is the thing do you really want to be fully responsible for your property if something goes wrong?! And we are talking about an expensive product not a 20 years old car. I don’t like dealing with dealers, I like to do things myself too but in certain situations like this case best is to leave the third parties do it themselves for your peace of mind and to avoid any possible future complications. Otherwise it’s job super easy done, reconnect the wires properly and insulate them, buy the missing parts and fix the car yourself. No need to get involved insurance or dealer, but as op said this theft counts as criminal damage and it had been registered with insurance already best is to live the car to them to deal with. Next year you gonna pay higher premium anyway, therefore cover yourself and get your money worth. That’s my point. Good luck 👍

[FROSTYBALLS]

I would suggest that replacing the loom would be the easiest way to prevent possible issues in the future. 

Aside from that having the work done by a Toyota dealer would probably mean the parts used would be covered by the parts and accessories warranty (usually 12 months) rather than the remainder of the new car warranty.

An insurance repair would probably have a longer warranty and they would likely replace the loom as well rather than piecemeal parts.

[Cyker]

The problem with CAN is you can't encrypt it - It's a real-time low-latency protocol and encryption would add too much overhead. CAN is so fast it can be used to trigger the airbags at just the right nanosecond because communication is as near-instantaneous as you can get.

Encryption/decryption will by necessity add several ms (milliseconds!)  of processing latency and/or require much more powerful (and complex and expensive!) hardware. We take it for granted now because we effectively have supercomputers in our pockets, but encryption requires many times more processing power than doing things plain.

But this is a well known issue; As I said from another thread where I was comparing Tesla and Toyota's strengths, Toyota is a traditional car company and are not so good on the software side, and it shows with naive design like this; What you'd normally do is have at least two totally separate CAN networks, sometimes more, but at least a 'secure' one and an 'insecure' one; The secure one would be important things like the main ECU and connection to the ignition circuitry, key authentication etc., and be kept inside the car and as close together as possible.

The insecure would be everything else, esp. ancillary devices that are mounted outside the cabin, and would be totally separate from the secure one; This would prevent people tapping into easy to access sections of CAN bus and accessing the power and ignition commands. At best they would be able to turn the lights off and on.

That said, I thought Toyota had a system like this, so maybe there's been some sort of separation failure in their code or design some how allowing commands from the insecure CAN to cross over to the secure one?? Because it should not be possible to access the ignition CAN from the headlights...

 

[duncerduncs]

2 hours ago, Cyker said:

The problem with CAN is you can't encrypt it - It's a real-time low-latency protocol and encryption would add too much overhead. CAN is so fast it can be used to trigger the airbags at just the right nanosecond because communication is as near-instantaneous as you can get.

Encryption/decryption will by necessity add several ms (milliseconds!)  of processing latency and/or require much more powerful (and complex and expensive!) hardware. We take it for granted now because we effectively have supercomputers in our pockets, but encryption requires many times more processing power than doing things plain.

But this is a well known issue; As I said from another thread where I was comparing Tesla and Toyota's strengths, Toyota is a traditional car company and are not so good on the software side, and it shows with naive design like this; What you'd normally do is have at least two totally separate CAN networks, sometimes more, but at least a 'secure' one and an 'insecure' one; The secure one would be important things like the main ECU and connection to the ignition circuitry, key authentication etc., and be kept inside the car and as close together as possible.

The insecure would be everything else, esp. ancillary devices that are mounted outside the cabin, and would be totally separate from the secure one; This would prevent people tapping into easy to access sections of CAN bus and accessing the power and ignition commands. At best they would be able to turn the lights off and on.

That said, I thought Toyota had a system like this, so maybe there's been some sort of separation failure in their code or design some how allowing commands from the insecure CAN to cross over to the secure one?? Because it should not be possible to access the ignition CAN from the headlights...

 

The criminals don't access the ignition from the headlights.

They use the connection to release the doors and then use the OBD port to start the vehicle. 

You can buy OBD locks to secure the port.

[Hybrid21]

15 minutes ago, duncerduncs said:

The criminals don't access the ignition from the headlights.

They use the connection to release the doors and then use the OBD port to start the vehicle. 

You can buy OBD locks to secure the port.

Thanks for that info Bryan, explains this CAN bus attack a bit more to the uninitiated like myself 😀

[Cyker]

45 minutes ago, duncerduncs said:

The criminals don't access the ignition from the headlights.

They use the connection to release the doors and then use the OBD port to start the vehicle. 

You can buy OBD locks to secure the port.

Ahhh thanks for that - I thought it was a bit weird!!

That kinda sucks tho' as once they get in there's not a lot you can do; Even if you blank off the port they only need to access the data wires, and if they're smart enough to know to splice into the headlight CAN wires, they can probably get at the OBD data wires too  

[Tomv]

Just wonder, is this just RAV related or other models are affected too?

[robo1]

If you have a look at your car might give you an idea if it’s  possible. The RAV has only a plastic wheel arch which can be unclipped allowing access to the connectors. I’d seen the plastic wheel arches but wrongly assumed there were good old steel arches underneath.

 

[Tomv]

Thank you for the explanation, I will have a look at it.

[TonyHSD]

36 minutes ago, robo1 said:

If you have a look at your car might give you an idea if it’s  possible. The RAV has only a plastic wheel arch which can be unclipped allowing access to the connectors. I’d seen the plastic wheel arches but wrongly assumed there were good old steel arches underneath.

 

Now a good idea for production of metal arch plates that can be installed on that place to stop thieves getting into the cables.