I drove 120 miles yesterday, there and back again, starting from 75% battery, at high speeds on the freeway, at high speeds on a twisty highway, and in stop and go traffic on the same twisty highway, not to mention the twisty canyon I live in. I ended up with <10% charge when I got home. Sometimes I was in sport mode and sometimes in comfort. The car was smooth, fast, comfortable, and easy. I'd buy another I-Pace if it came up.

 

There is big difference from the forced 72% restriction from H441 and limiting at 75%. With 72% you get about 80 miles down to 10% and with 75% it’s way over 130.

 

If your VIN is on H484 you should limit the charge to 75%. The risk cells having thermal overload is minimal. Charging to 100% puts the cells at risk. With H441 installed this will be identified and charge limited to 72% next charge.

 

I do not think this is correct. My car went in for the H441 recall in July 2023 and then I had module #36 take a dump in November 2023. Some sort of issue with the module - described as a "voltage deviation" on the paperwork prevented the car from charging beyond 72% and the car thought it was "fully charged" at this point.

With the H484 campaign JLR is recommending customers only charge to 75% as a precaution due to the risk of thermal overload, and not keep it inside or near any structures for the same reason. There is a difference there and I don't believe it is semantics. I learned about H484 on Good Friday. My car had been plugged in on Thursday night, it charged to 100% and was plugged in all day just sitting there because I hadn't bothered to unplug it. It still charges to 100% and I expect it to if I were to plug it in tonight.

 

My farthings worth of thoughts.

Don't bug your dealer about H484 until you get the official notice from JLR coming later this month. There's no doc on NHTSA yet that JLR has issued to dealers for how to resolve this recall.

You should check TOPIx or NHTSA site for whether H484 is outstanding for your car. If you don't find it, move on to other topics because your car is not impacted.

If your car does show up with H484 bear in mind this text to dealers:

"Retailers are reminded that for 2019 to 2020 model year vehicles the H441, H459 or H471 software update is to be completed using TOPIx Cloud Diagnostics as a retailer repair as part of the these Recall Action bulletins and claimed for following the instructions in those Recall Action bulletins."
and
"Vehicles already modified through safety recall H441 are less likely to experience thermal overload but to remove all doubt for this population, this safety recall is being undertaken. "

So make sure your car has the software update via the car's Software Updates display for BECS value starting with BS, BT, BU or BV. If your display doesn't show a value, I'd push for a TCU update that allows it to be seen.

The remedy recommended by LGES:

"On 27 February 2024, the PSCC was presented with a request from LGES to replace complete battery packs from vehicles where a fault had been detected with one or more module(s) on vehicles with battery packs manufactured from 1 March 2018 and 31 May 2018 supplied for use in I-PACE vehicles."

It isn't enough that the pack be manufactured in the specified timeframe, but it has to have at least 1 detected faulty module. (The original H441 recall said 7 or more are required to replace an entire pack.)

If your car got one of these packs and already had at least 1 module replaced, I'd still expect your car to be subject to H484 even if no fault is currently detected. I'd request a new pack if I owned a subject car even if it had been repaired.

The impacted cars will have a new battery pack installed regardless of whether the car is in or out of a B2B warranty or exceeds the 8 year/100,000 mile/160,000 km battery warranty.

JLR may be prepared to do a buyback if pushed by an owner that no longer wants the car. I don't expect the buyback offer to be very much. The used car market value for the car is fairly low. It is lower than the retail cost of a new battery pack. JLR "wins" if an owner accepts a low offer to buy back the car. Owner "wins" if a new battery pack is installed (could add value for a private sale).

This is not a big recall. 258 vehicles in US and 84 in Canada.

 

The impacted cars will have a new battery pack installed regardless of whether the car is in or out of a B2B warranty or exceeds the 8 year/100,000 mile/160,000 km battery warranty.

Just a reminder, the battery warranty is only in effect if the capacity (health) falls below 70%.

Edit: The H4xx recalls cover the cost of repairs regardless of warranty status.

 

Does anyone know this recall is also carried out in Europe? My car seems to fall in the vin range but i am in the Netherlands

 

Go here:

Home | TOPIx

topix.jaguar.jlrext.com

And put your VIN there and check is it really affected. MAny i-pace in on that vin-range but only few of them is really affected on H484

 

Hi guys, I'm keeping a close look into this since this raises high concerns about car safety.
Mine was also sourced over the Netherlands (exported to Portugal) and has the H484 recall listed over TOPix.
Currently, the local Jaguar dealership is still waiting for instructions on how to deal with this and they seem less informed about this than me, which raises even more concerns (they just realised what was at stake from the concerns I raised, and not from something they are aware and notifying customers for proactively).

From my point of view, this recall should lead to a full battery replacement.
The current approach shows that won't completely fix the problem, hurts brand awareness, and probably be more expensive from labour and parts doing this multiple times also takes down customer confidence over the car's reliability and even market value.

With the recall recommendation actions without a serious fix, we are stuck with a radioactive asset since I do not see anyone in their right mind wanting to buy a car that due to safety reasons has a forced limited charge, park and drive concerns.
So JLR needs to make a strong decision here, to protect their brand and customer asset value that is being deprecated every day

Not sure why they are stalling on this unless there's a supply concern that could raise the customer support pressure.

 

Hi guys, I'm keeping a close look into this since this raises high concerns about car safety.
Mine was also sourced over the Netherlands (exported to Portugal) and has the H484 recall listed over TOPix.
Currently, the local Jaguar dealership is still waiting for instructions on how to deal with this and they seem less informed about this than me, which raises even more concerns (they just realised what was at stake from the concerns I raised, and not from something they are aware and notifying customers for proactively).

From my point of view, this recall should lead to a full battery replacement.
The current approach shows that won't completely fix the problem, hurts brand awareness, and probably be more expensive from labour and parts doing this multiple times also takes down customer confidence over the car's reliability and even market value.

With the recall recommendation actions without a serious fix, we are stuck with a radioactive asset since I do not see anyone in their right mind wanting to buy a car that due to safety reasons has a forced limited charge, park and drive concerns.
So JLR needs to make a strong decision here, to protect their brand and customer asset value that is being deprecated every day

Not sure why they are stalling on this unless there's a supply concern that could raise the customer support pressure.

I agree with most of what you are suggesting. It seems like common sense from an owner's perspective. To be clear, the documentation posted earlier in this thread suggests owners caught by the H484 recall have only two options: buyback of the vehicle or complete high-voltage battery replacement. At this point it is not clear if this information has trickled down to the dealer but these options likely didn't come out of thin air, so I would suggest the Jaguar mothership has made this determination but has not yet disseminated this information to the dealers and the rest of us on ground level. The recall document was issued by the NHTSA on March 21, 2024, so my thought is they are likely working with LG on the logistics and don't yet have any useful information to share yet. We owners and members of this board have a side door with advanced knowledge of this unfolding situation as well as access to this information which should protect us when we have to interact with the dealers on this piece. I have my appointment this coming Monday but after thinking it through I'm going to wait for the recall notice and I will re-book my appointment and take the notice with me. The options should be stated there in black and white, and none of the suggested fixes are "run a software update and see what happens," which is what I was told. I plan on holding firm on the available options and will try to redirect them re: the complete high voltage battery replacement, and nothing else, is a suitable solution.

I have no interest in the buyback so I share your concern about the supply of batteries and the delay getting them as 258 units worldwide doesn't seem like a lot compared to the rest of the production run. This also doesn't consider other manufacturers either. A simple google search of the I-Pace confirms much of the other aspects of your message: the bad look for the brand, the customer support piece and all the rest, which are connected to the reporting of the car's issues and technical gremlins that have plagued it over time. I am hoping for a speedy resolution but at this point I know better than to hold my breath and get my hopes up. It is going to take time but hopefully they do this right.

 

It is probably similar to the Takata airbag issue of a few years ago. Jaguar isn't the only customer of LG batteries it would appear and I don't know how quickly LG can scale replacement battery packs. In my airbag issue with my XF, it took almost a year and hurt my trade in value as the dealer was not allowed to resell the vehicle with an outstanding recall campaign. Or at least that's what they claimed.

I'm here because I love the car and personally would take the new battery pack instead of a buy back option...

 

Hi guys, my VIN is in the list for H484, is the message related to this problem ?

 

I am sure JLR have pulled this data and know which batteries were fitted to what VIN, what modules were fitted to each battery and what cell went into each module.

LG would be manufacturing Cells on a massive scale that saw then going into JAG and other manufacturers Modules.

 

I am sure that you are right, however, I was not clear enough with my question: Can we as ordinary mortals find out the date of the manufacture of the pack (made in Poland), without going through JLR, i.e. is there a publicly available VIN/battery lookup?

 

I think we have 2 data bases here. JLR battery fitted to VIN, modules fitted to battery and LG cells fitted to modules. Probably cars will be identified with a safety buffer.

Big question is that when you get a new battery will the warranty be 8 years from its manufacture?

Battery label does not show date. Corrected Well spotted by @Ayepace - 20190320 = 1019 Mar-20.

 

I think we have 2 data bases here. JLR battery fitted to VIN, modules fitted to battery and LG cells fitted to modules. Probably cars will be identified with a safety buffer.

Big question is that when you get a new battery will the warranty be 8 years from its manufacture?

Battery label does not show date.
View attachment 8363

Your comment on warranty: normally (in Europe and UK) a replacement [of a component] under warranty is only covered for the balance of the original warranty period. We can hope, with crossed fingers, that JLR secure some form of goodwill gesture from LG to cover the new batteries for a full eight years. After all, this battery issue has caused huge damage to Jaguar’s brand, particularly EVs, just as the brand transitions to an all EV range! Jaguar needs to shore up its reputation quickly; where are all the future customers for their new models coming from, if they fail to keep existing customers?!

 

You cannot tell from the VIN.

The sample label above shows date 20190320. That is 20 March 2019. That label is on top of the battery so you can't see it without removing the battery from the car.

 

Thanks. I will await the repair on mine, due in July, and ask the techs to read the date

 

@Ayepace ref the label I snapped the pic off the YouTube video it was on the rear back face and the battery has to be out.

 

I sit corrected of a faulty memory. One can see its position in a picture posted in https://www.i-paceforum.com/threads/battery-replacement.4973/

 

@suburban_gorilla That is 258 cars in the US. 84 in Canada. Probably a lot more in Europe and other parts of the world.

 

I left that out on purpose but you are correct as usual.

 

Note that what ever happens ref battery replacement H441 will still be there in case any cells fail for whatever reason.

 

Yes, a new battery pack comes with a new BECM and BEM. Tech has to use TOPIx Cloud to finish the job and that will install the latest BECM software (currently BV version).

 

I think we have 2 data bases here. JLR battery fitted to VIN, modules fitted to battery and LG cells fitted to modules. Probably cars will be identified with a safety buffer.

Big question is that when you get a new battery will the warranty be 8 years from its manufacture?

Battery label does not show date.
View attachment 8363

Your comment on warranty: normally (in Europe and UK) a replacement [of a component] under warranty is only covered for the balance of the original warranty period. We can hope, with crossed fingers, that JLR secure some form of goodwill gesture from LG to cover the new batteries for a full eight years. After all, this battery issue has caused huge damage to Jaguar’s brand, particularly EVs, just as the brand transitions to an all EV range! Jaguar needs to shore up its reputation quickly; where are all the future customers for their new models coming from, if they fail to keep existing customers?!

JLR has done nothing to try to salvage their brand, particularly for EVs. My car ha been in the shop over 5 months. JLR is aware of this since their techs are working with the local techs to get the car working again. You'd think that someone from customer retention would reach out to see if I am happy or if they can do anything to make this less of a disaster. Not a peep. The have no new cars on the horizon yet they have stopped production of most of their cars. I think they have nothing in the pipeline and are afraid to say it now, but the show will hit the floor eventually.

 

If your ICE had a replacement Engine / Gearbox under a safety recall I would imagine it would have the same warranty as new. If new batteries are supplied and fitted we need to make sure that we get paperwork to show the battery is new and some statement about warranty. You might want to sell / trade the car. For an event this size the dealer and JLR just having it on file is not good enough.

 

If we look at GM and the Bolt EV, the battery swap came with a reset of the warranty. Can’t be GM’s sole decision since ultimately LG will honour the warranty.

 

During my investigation on CanBus, I never saw a date of battery manufacturing (or any other parts in the car). The only date I found was the manufacturing date of the car in every single ECU. I never understood why instead of a simple date, that date is stored in 1/10 of second since manufacturing date, so when you read the value it constantly changes.

 

Kind of like the time since last startup on the computer clock.

 

So here is some information that might help determine the manufacturing date of your battery. My 2019 FE was built in July 2018 and the manufacturing date for my traction battery was June 13, 2018. My I-Pace is listed in Topix and NHTSA for the H484 recall even though the battery was manufactured 2 weeks after the specific dates March 1, 2018 - May 31, 2018. It will be interesting in about 2-3 weeks if I get a letter from JLR about the options available for recall H484.

 

It will be interesting to find out what that battery manufactured date means. Manufactured in Poland on June 13th, using pouches made in S.Korea at least a few weeks earlier. Unless they were using express air to ship the pouches. My build date is June 2018. Haven't bothered to check my battery date, but assume it will be in the range.

 

Given the problem with overheating I wonder if it’s actually the manufacturing date of the cells rather than the assembly of the battery (modules) that matter?

 

I think they have drilled down to identify the Cells(pouches) that are at risk, the modules that one or more of the 12 were installed and what batteries got the modules and what cars got the batteries. They will only get one go at this so they have to get it right.

 

Checking your battery date is a bother…… you would have to remove it to look at the label.

 

Well, following up the topic of battery date, this week I asked JLR Client Relationship Centre here in the UK if they could tell me the battery assembly date (or any relevant date) by looking up that link to my VIN in their database. The CRC person said, yes that could be done and contacted the engineering team, who responded by saying that the battery serial number would be needed before a date could be looked up.
Today I received the following message:
"Good afternoon Mr ----,
Thank you for contacting Jaguar Land Rover Client Relationship Centre dated 11th April.
I can confirm we wouldn't be able to identify this through the VIN number and would need the serial number. If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get back to me.
Yours sincerely,
UK Customer Experience Centre"
So, it appears that JLR cannot tell when the battery was made/assembled if only the VIN is known. This seems absurd, as it implies that JLR cannot decide which of the 2018-2019 cars are vulnerable to defective packs if there is no means of associating the VIN with the HV pack date.

 

Read this with a critical eye. The battery serial number is needed to get the build date. The battery serial number will be on file with JLR and associated with the vin#. So yes, the build date is not available to owners based on the vin#.

They are not lying, but are not being very helpful either. I'm sure they don't want to be giving out serial numbers on all components to every owner.

 

I am sure there are build assembly records for each car manufactured and in this case they will be identifying serial numbers of a batch of batteries fitted to the VINs. There is probably a reverse look up but that will be at the factory. Is your VIN on H484?