Iguana wrote:

Spoke to my contact today, he's not heard of any re-design or reason for it, but he will speak to a few people he knows at Dagenham

Ok, so getting these extra cases to me wont really help I don't think, other than to show LR we have more and more evidence to add to the 20+ oil pump cases I already have (most appear to be fine, some with markings appearing)

The issue as I see it is this.....

We first thought that the failures could be down to a fault in the casting, hence metallurgical testing and x-rays. As farmerboy mentioned above, I have spoken to a couple of forum members that are in the alloys and castings industry and a ‘fault’ on this scale and with such a broad range of ages is unlikely. The testing that castings (particularly automotive) go through to ensure no air pockets or anomalies appear in each batch, would have identified this and production in all of the major casting houses would have been stopped to resolve the issue. So an ultrasonic and metallurgic analysis is expensive and we now know is unlikely to provide us with any meaningful additional data into a ‘fault’.

The re-design of the oil pump casing (now on its fourth version since changing to the EuIV engine) is evidence that there was something not quite right. The fourth version has been with us since 2009 and has not been changed since.
This indicates to me that the failure is a design characteristic issue and not a 'fault' with an item.
So then we move on to how to prove that LR knew that there was a design fault with the oil pump casing. Without the evidence of information that LR design team would hold in house and would be very unlikely to publish, we don’t really have much more to go on. We don’t have any design whistle-blowers as I’m sure they will be very loyal to the brand that they have helped to build up.

A ‘strongly worded’ letter of our disappointment and statement of the facts as we know it, I feel would do little to help the overall cause, but I feel if any action, this is about the only action we can take, other than supporting the individuals that are lucky enough to find us here.

Shan, at 85,000 miles in your instance, I would be strongly pushing back to LR as it sounds as though you have service history, if your belt was changed 1 year and 2 weeks ago, and it is an 07 registered car, then it has been completed within the requirements that LR state.

As a general comment when dealing with them, there are a couple of key points that you may want to hi-light to them…

This catastrophic failure you believe is caused by the design of the oil pump casing and it’s structural strength to manage the stresses of being the mounting point for the timing belt tensioner.

This is your vehicle, any and all components and fluids remain your property unless otherwise agreed in writing with LandRover.
I would reiterate to them that you have examples of this same catastrophic failure occurring on multiple other vehicles. (The evidence is compelling on this site alone!)
The cause of the failure has been known to LR hence the subsequent redesign on the oil pump casing parts 07A00001 on it supersedes 3 times to finally end up at LR013487
LR002465-LR007131-LR007798-LR013487 until the casing had been sufficiently strengthened to stop this known failure.

There is no possible check described by LR as part of either the normal or arduous service routine that would have assisted in identifying this issue to make a preventive maintenance action. Land Rover have been aware of this issue and put commendable steps in place to stop it occurring on later vehicles, but this is a known issue, caused by a known weak point, that neither LR or its service agents have been notified to make customers aware of. Land Rover additionally have not put additional steps in place as part of its service routine to check for this known failure point to rectify prior to the subsequent catastrophic failure occurring.

All parts that may have been removed for inspection by LR or its agents remain the property of yourself and you reserve the right to retrieve all parts and fluids for further analysis unless otherwise agreed by you in writing.

LR will not do anything unless it is inspected by a LR dealership. In most cases, this cost is attempted to be charged to yourself. It’s down to individuals if you wish to pay to or start the discussion as you mean to go on. IMHO that discussion should be aligned to expectations that you expect based upon this design characteristic of the oil pump case, which has caused a catastrophic failure of your engine, to receive a replacement at no cost to yourself.

Success has varied in the above from a 0% (usually where the mileage is very excessive or service schedule not been adhered to) to 50% LR contribution (which they will still make a mark up on) right up to 100% LR contribution. I am happy to say that I have helped many members on here get at least 50% but often 100% contribution.
LR also on occasion state that they have not received any other instances of this issue, which we all know is complete . I am happy to stand my Registration number as one of the 100% LR contribution engine replacements as evidence that they do know about this issue. They will have on their records certainly in the exec office EC07 MUD replaced at Shukers Landrover in Shrewsbury in June/July 2012.

In relation to the fund that has built up, I mentioned very early in the thread.

Quote:

“If we get to the end of this process and there is any money left over, I would suggest that it is donated to Charity, Help for Heroes springs to mind as it is generally well supported amongst the LandRover fraternity.”