I think some of you might also be on one of the other threads about this subject but I put a bit more info on the other post so here it is on this one...
As something of another follow-up to this post it seems there is something of an increase in the number of Indepenent JLR service centres that have Autologic that are working out the fix. I've got to have the timing belt on my XF changed imminently and I'm looking to see where the best place to do it will be. If I take it to my local Jaguar main dealer I know they'll try and rinse me for the official fix when the security module inevitably fails as a consequence of disconnecting the battery!
As such I was doing some more digging to find alternative solutions to this and came across a thread on another owners club forum which showed a way of buying a cable with an 'unofficial copy' of the JLR SSD software which would allow you to reset the immobiliser module which appears to temporarily resolve the issue (the only long-term fix is the replacement of two junction boxes at great expense!).
https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/xf-xfr-x250-44/central-locking-not-working-after-battery-re-connect-192543/page2/
If you look for the post from Viyasan7 from November 2019 he describes the fix and the kit that's needed. This might be a better solution for those of you that aren't near an Autologic-capable Indy. There were some caveats about clone cables and I haven't done this myself so it's very much up to you as to whether you go ahead with it.
There was mention of a TSB and indeed there is, but the only one I could find was for the North American market so perhaps that's the reason why the UK/EU/RoW dealers look blankly when we describe the problem. The TSB number is JTB00545NAS1 and here's a link to what it shows:
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2019/MC-10159478-9999.pdf
It's interesting how the TSB suggests reprogramming the immobiliser module as part of the fix, but only after the two junction boxes have been replaced. It would seem that this step, if done on its own, would be a temporary fix but perhaps JLR aren't prepared to only offer this step. I think it's a !Removed!-take that this issue, which is clearly a systemic failure of a part that should last longer than it has, is being ignored and the high costs being passed to us.
Good luck all!
Incidentally the fix that Jimbob described is the same as the one in the other forum that I've quoted so it seems that it's becoming more widely known about.