Evidence Methodology

Why methodology matters

Forum posts and social media anecdotes are easy for manufacturers to dismiss as unrepresentative, emotionally charged, or unverifiable. Structured, consistently collected, transparently methodologised data is different. It is harder to dismiss, and it forms the foundation of credible advocacy.

This page explains exactly how we collect, verify, and publish data so that owners, JLR, the media, and consumer rights bodies can understand and trust our evidence.

How data is collected

Owners submit data voluntarily through the vehicle data form. The form is structured to capture:

• Vehicle details and identification
• Battery State of Health measurements (with source and date)
• HV battery work history (type, dates, duration, outcome)
• Recall status (H570, H571, H572)
• Warranty and additional cover details
• Work experience, delays, and difficulties
• Loan car provision
• Payments, goodwill, and expenses
• Responsibility disputes
• Evidence documents (future feature)
• Consent options

All fields are clearly labelled. Where exact information is not known, owners can indicate uncertainty rather than guessing. This is important: we prefer an honest "unsure" over a fabricated figure.

Verification levels

Each submission is assigned one of the following verification levels:

Level	Description
Self-reported	Owner's own statement; no supporting documents supplied
Document supplied	Owner has uploaded supporting documentation (dealer report, invoice, etc.)
Reviewed	An organiser has reviewed the submission and any documents
Duplicate-checked	Entry confirmed not to be a duplicate of another submission
Excluded from public statistics	Flagged as incomplete, inconsistent, or a suspected duplicate

Self-reported data is included in aggregate statistics but clearly labelled as such. Entries excluded from public statistics are retained internally for review but not counted in public figures.

What is published

The public evidence dashboard shows:

• Aggregate counts and percentages
• Distribution charts (SoH, model year, work type, recall status, etc.)
• Average figures (days off road, etc.)
• Comparative breakdowns

All published data is anonymised. No individual entry, name, email, full VIN, or registration is published.

What is not published

• Individual owner identities
• Full VINs or registrations
• Email addresses
• Uploaded documents (without explicit individual consent)
• Data marked as excluded from public statistics

Known limitations

• Self-reported data is not independently verified. We make this clear on all published output.
• Sample bias. Owners who have experienced problems are more likely to submit data. The dashboard may over-represent negative experiences relative to the total fleet.
• Measurement uncertainty. SoH figures may come from different tools and methods. We capture source information to allow for this.
• Recall status may be out of date. Owners submit a snapshot at a point in time.

We publish these limitations clearly so that our evidence is not overstated.

Why structured data is more credible than forum anecdotes

Manufacturers routinely cite forum posts as "a small vocal minority." Structured data with:

• Consistent field definitions
• Stated data sources
• Uncertainty flags
• Verification levels
• Transparent methodology
• Anonymised aggregate publication

…is qualitatively different. It demonstrates scale, consistency, and methodological rigour. It is the kind of evidence that senior management, consumer bodies, and media can engage with seriously.

Privacy commitment

We do not publish full VINs, email addresses, owner names, registrations, or uploaded documents publicly, without explicit individual consent. See our Privacy Policy for full details.