Trading Standards

Dear all,

We are pleased to announce that Trading Standards are completely satisfied with the content of our web site, including the power figures quoted for the RICA ECU upgrades.

Regards,
Hamish.

[sholtby]

Hamish,

How did they come to that conclusion? Did they take a chipped car away and run it on an independant dyno?
How did they become involved did someone report you to them?

Thanks
Simon

[bobcat]

I too would be interested in knowing, but im guessing that rica just have a well worded disclaimer about the figures thats approved by trading standards.

bit like, breakfast cereals that say you can loose upto a stone in a week, but then have a disclaimer saying only as part of a balanced diet etc.

edit

here is the rica disclaimer:

http://www.rica.nl/index.php?phmu=1&psmu=74&pctt=67

basically says figure are for entertainment use only and rica dont guarantee the power figures, so i would say thats how they got round trading standards.

But you cant blaim rica as everyone with knackered t5's not making 304bhp etc would be coming back to rica moaning, but the disclaimer does also mean rica can also publish anything it likes really!!!!

[adieu]

It would seem that VT have also added a disclaimer:

Quote:
"Please note that the power figures quoted above are taken from the time of development of the software for the cars. Actual power figures for your car may vary depending on the vehicle condition and age."

So whats the point of even listing possible gains when what rica and vt are saying is you won't get those figures unless your car is "THE" car the software was developed on.

Makes me want to laugh.

Regards

Iain

[sholtby]

Iain,

The disclaimer from VT seems quite reasonable to me. True they could say 'We would expect the average car to produce 275 bhp' which maybe more acceptable to you but most companies tend to try and impress potential customers with their highest gains.
What makes me laugh is the vendetta you and several other people on this site have with Volvotuning.

Simon

[adieu]

>Iain,
>
>The disclaimer from VT seems quite reasonable to me. True they
>could say 'We would expect the average car to produce 275 bhp'
>which maybe more acceptable to you but most companies tend to
>try and impress potential customers with their highest gains.
>What makes me laugh is the vendetta you and several other
>people on this site have with Volvotuning.
>
>Simon


I have never said it's not reasonable. It is a good disclaimer and will get them out of lots of problems with cars not reaching claimed power levels.

Regards

Iain

[steventoon]

I am also getting a bit sick of the slagging Volvo Tuning have been getting on here over the last few months.
Its clear what a few members think of the RICA upgrade, so can we please stop going over old ground.

[Simon Linton]

Hear hear, innocent until proven guilty is the best policy for all.

Following yet another complaint to the Trading Standards, we have seeked further advice regarding the content of our web site. As a result, the necessary alterations have been made as recommended by Trading Standards, and the matter is now considered closed.

Regards,
Hamish.

I've been away for ages and this is STILL going on?

OK, so figures are for "optimum conditions". Well what does anyone expect? Aren't "Official" fuel consumption figures based on "optimum conditions" too? Of course they are. How else is a fair comparison going to take place?

So called official fuel consumption figures are complete crap, and anyone who sees figures similar to the claimed official figures is either lying or driving everywhere at speeds so slow it takes them forever.

If RICA can prove that they have achieved xxx bhp from a vehicle after this mod and that then so be it, it's an official figure. Live with it.

There seem to be plenty of people satisfied with the results. Just like there are plenty of people satisfied with the results of the many other remaps available.

Regards

Andy