Online Forum for the 2012 Rav4 EV

After resetting the charging error code, the car was able to be charged normally again at the dealership. This suggests something is wrong with my EVSE, so I will look to replace it.

I'm planning to get this:
https://store.openevse.com/collections/ ... le-station

However, it doesn't seem like this product comes with a NEMA 10-30 adapter. Will I need to build one myself or hire an electrician to convert my 10-30 outlet to support this EVSE? I read the link below, but the suggestions are beyond my expertise.

https://openev.freshdesk.com/support/di ... 6000033612

Update: never mind, I found this - https://www.homedepot.com/p/AC-WORKS-1- ... /301636644

That "portable" model is not different from the non-portable model, except it has no display. I recommend springing for the one with the display, as even with visible feedback setting up the wi-fi does not always go smoothly IME.

As for the 14-50 to 10-30P adapter, HD's price is pretty high IMO; you might scan some of these alternatives (watch out for the variety of different 10-30P plugs, though).

Questions to my understanding. I understand correctly that you are categorically refused to tell you which code (from the "CHG_ ..." series) was read?
Was "charged normally again at the dealership" with their charger or yours?

External symptom of malfunction (stop charging) simultaneous blinking of both charging mode indicators for 10 seconds (19 times) or do they just go out (off)?

For dealerships in the US, it is common to give them money for diagnostics and for them to refuse to, in return, furnish any codes. This is not unusual.

I will repeat myself. The Doctor (Technician) did tests on the patient (Car) and refuses to inform* the patient (client/owner) of their documentary results?
And this situation* is also normal/common?

* Especially if it's for money

You can rail at the situation as many times as you wish, but it will not change the situation: the dealerships here will take your money -- insist on payment -- and not divulge how they achieve their diagnosis.

They are not required to, either. There's no legal reason to require them.

OK. Thanks for clarification.

And then what to do if their diagnosis turns out to be wrong?
Who will take the loss in such a situation?

Note. I do not rail the situation, but only ask questions.
And I'm not asking HOW the diagnosis was obtained, I am asking about access to the results of the "analyzes".

I can only regret that it is not always (not for everyone) customary to inform the client and confirm conclusions, for example, with such information in case of HV Charge failure ((in this case, due to a malfunction of the external charger aka CCID)

[/quote]Thanks for the pictures.
What were the symptoms of a fuse malfunction on this car?[/quote]

I went to use the car and realized it did not charge. I reconnected the charger and started a charge. It tried to start charging a couple of (few?) times but was not successful. I tried a different charger with similar results.

I have not replaced these fuses before. My car has about 85k miles.

"Behavior" of the two side indicators in this case? Or did they not respond at all when the charging cable was plugged in?
And if they did, how exactly?

The dealership system in the US is generally corrupt. Now that proprietary tools -- beyond legal requirement of the OBDII legislation -- are required to perform diagnostics, and again proprietary equipment to encode/flash/marry new or used replacement parts to work with a vehicle's other systems, this bottleneck/stranglehold has gotten much worse in the past two decades.

Even Tesla participates in this system, requiring USD$100/day for access to online parts/service information, and they only allowed even that because of legislation in Massachusetts.

Twenty years ago, I was very much of the philosophy that, "if you use the software, pay for the software". Times have changed, and bless the hackers that make these proprietary, expensive, or unavailable software tools now available for my personal use. Frankly, I feel better paying a hacker "crook" for a tool to allow me to repair my own vehicle, than paying a corrupt system to do the same.