Suing VW over emissions scandal... Mod warning post 313

Water John

Yeah, it's misrepresentation on a grand scale. Could not a 'club' of VW owners not sue? Does it have to be each individual?

Special Circumstances

NiallBoo wrote: »

The US has class action suits, we don't.

That's the big difference in my books.

They also have air quality regulations (particularly in California) that recognise that CO2 isn't the be all and end all of exhaust emissions.

CalamariFritti

So just out of curiosity. I don't own a VW. When people are thinking of suing, what would they be actually suing over? I mean what's the actual damage to a VW owner?

NiallBoo

Special Circumstances wrote: »

They also have air quality regulations (particularly in California) that recognise that CO2 isn't the be all and end all of exhaust emissions.

Sure, and that's huge in terms of them dealing with the government, but they wouldn't be offering consumers anything because of it.

Dial Hard

Water John wrote:

Yeah, it's misrepresentation on a grand scale. Could not a 'club' of VW owners not sue? Does it have to be each individual?

Irish law doesn't allow for class action suits, as mentioned above.

pa990

CalamariFritti wrote: »

So just out of curiosity. I don't own a VW. When people are thinking of suing, what would they be actually suing over? I mean what's the actual damage to a VW owner?

I've asked similar, no-one can say how much they are out of pocket as a result of the emissions issue.


Can someone please tell me how much they intend to sue VW for, and a breakdown of how such a value was calculated.

Sam Russell

CalamariFritti wrote: »

So just out of curiosity. I don't own a VW. When people are thinking of suing, what would they be actually suing over? I mean what's the actual damage to a VW owner?

Reduced residuals.

Higher fuel consumption.

Feeling like a lemon for believing VW are honest.

Having to take the vehicle for upgrade/downgrade.

Uncertainty as to future value of the car (and marque).

That is a short list.

grogi

Sam Russell wrote: »

Reduced residuals.

Higher fuel consumption.

Feeling like a lemon for believing VW are honest.

Having to take the vehicle for upgrade/downgrade.

Uncertainty as to future value of the car (and marque).

That is a short list.

I have been bringing the same question too.

a) Residuals - have we already seen the drop in residuals values? If yes, did the drop happened only for VW cars or all across the board because people realised how unhealthy diesel is?

b) Higher fuel consumption - declared fuel consumption is directly relevant to declared CO2 emission (around 2,6 kg of CO2 per each litre of diesel).

We all know that declared consumption (obtained in NEDC test) does not reflect real-world figures. So even if the real-world consumption increases while the NEDC does not, there are no grounds here to seek compensation for misrepresentation - because if the car emits particular CO2 figure, it still has same official efficiency. And it is the official efficiency that VW represented and advertised.

c) Are we yet in the hurt feelings territory?

d) IIRC that was the only one valid claim territory... Let's take a bit of exaturation and assume a well paid professional - €500/day (that brings us to the €130000 salary). They could be compensated for lost day - €500.

e) Value of the marque - that's more a law suit for shareholders against the board of directors etc, not the car owners against the company.



Out of the five reasons I can only see one that has some ground...

George Dalton

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is a short list.

Let's call a spade a spade here. It's a nonsense list. Acting like the victim is fooling nobody.

To be honest I would have more respect for people who would simply admit that they aren't affected in any way by what has happened and just want to make sure their hand is in the pot for any potential free money.

cfuserkildare

But pretty much everyone who has a recent VAG Diesel is affected,

Once the emissions are brought to legal levels, the car will have lost perhaps 30 BHP, meaning the cars specifications are possibly 2 models lower than the owner paid for.

Which is basically fraudulent behaviour on VWs part.

CalamariFritti

I have to agree it doesn't sound terribly strong/convincing.

It has a bit of an opportunistic smell to it from the outside.

And to tell the truth that's where my question was going. Because I was thinking if I owned one of those it seems nothing has really changed for me.

Jayop

VW conned their customers and acted in a dishonest manner. They deserve a bloody nose from this and if that comes from their customers then so be it.

George Dalton

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Once the emissions are brought to legal levels, the car will have lost perhaps 30 BHP,

Where did you get this information from?

There is a simple solution anyway, just don't get the "fix" done at all. Anyone with half a brain would know that.

Water John

Recent run of ads from VW have run on the key of loyalty of the customer to them over the generations.
Sadly, VW on the other hand were not loyal to their customers and misled them.

Special Circumstances

VAG owners in the EU have many examples of poor engineering that they could seek redress for but woeful nox emissions are practically encouraged in the EU and that isn't going to change.

CalamariFritti

Jayop wrote: »

VW conned their customers and acted in a dishonest manner. They deserve a bloody nose from this and if that comes from their customers then so be it.

Not sure that's true. VW conned regulatory and certification authorities but not really conned their customers.

Customers are still paying the same road tax rate. Cars are still certified to be on Irish roads. Don't seem to have lost value either.

Jayop

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Not sure that's true. VW conned regulatory and certification authorities but not really conned their customers.

Customers are still paying the same road tax rate. Cars are still certified to be on Irish roads. Don't seem to have lost value either.

They sold a product that was designed to cheat tests that the owners had to put it through for it to be road legal. They were conned. They may not be out of pocket but I don't really care about that.

VW deserve to get hit where it hurts for their cheating.I'd rather that hit goes to it's customers than in the form of fines to government bodies.

grogi

Jayop wrote: »

VW deserve to get hit where it hurts for their cheating.I'd rather that hit goes to it's customers than in the form of fines to government bodies.

Absolutely. But not by the customers/owners.

CalamariFritti

I agree with that but it's the customers suing. They can hardly sue arguing it's them wanting to punish VW. An actual damage has to be presented, does it not?

Jayop

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I agree with that but it's the customers suing. They can hardly sue arguing it's them wanting to punish VW. An actual damage has to be presented, does it not?

I'm sure they'll be able to come up with something. I've not really looked into the whole thing too much since it came out so I don't know where the damage would be but a good solicitor will come up with it.

FWIW, I'm not someone who would normally recommend suing, I hate insurance fraud and the likes.

Water John

Yes the customer was misled. The customer, had they access to true figures, may have made the choice to buy from a diff maker. They are now stuck with a car that is polluting more than they wished.
As a person who cares for the environment and that of others, the owner was not only sold a pup but that pup continues to pollute at a much higher rate than he bargained for, every time he drives it.

I am amazed how many posters see nothing wrong with taking this behaviour by a multi national,lying down.
Jayop, this is fraud on a grand scale.

Jayop

Big time. Now I wouldn't like to see VW get punished to the point of collapse but like I said they deserve a very bloody nose from this. Both to punish them and to prevent any other firm thinking it's worth the risk.

JohnBoy26

Water John wrote: »

Yes the customer was misled. The customer, had they access to true figures, may have made the choice to buy from a diff maker. They are now stuck with a car that is polluting more than they wished.
As a person who cares for the environment and that of others, the owner was not only sold a pup but that pup continues to pollute at a much higher rate than he bargained for, every time he drives it.

I am amazed how many posters see nothing wrong with taking this behaviour by a multi national,lying down.
Jayop, this is fraud on a grand scale.

Duncan Stewart maybe. The majority of customers only care about the cheap tax and how many mpg the car can do.

CalamariFritti

Yes it is I agree. All I'm saying is that it's not really the customer who is damaged.

That's far from saying nothing is wrong.

Let's be honest here. 99.9% of the customers don't really give a toss about co2 emissions unless it affects their tax rate.

pa990

I'll ask again..

What's the € value that VW customers are out of pocket ?

JohnBoy26

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Yes it is I agree. All I'm saying is that it's not really the customer who is damaged.

That's far from saying nothing is wrong.

Let's be honest here. 99.9% of the customers don't really give a toss about co2 emissions unless it affects their tax rate.

Co2 isn't the problem. Nox emissions are the issue.

pa990

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Co2 isn't the problem. Nox emissions are the issue.

And nox aren't measured at the nct.

Shefwedfan

Seems to be a lot of people here working for VW?

Maybe it might be worth leaving this thread to actual VW/Audi owners that want information about the legal suit been brought against VW(etc)? Seeing as that is what the actual thread was started about

if the rest of you want to argue the grounds of the case why not start a thread about that and you can discuss the point to death there.

Shefwedfan

Let get this straight. You can argue all you want about the finer details.

I work in a sales organization and I sell a product that would be classed as Premium, so more expensive than other brands because you are paying for XYZ and we charge customers a premium because of that...every customer of mine is entitled to buy cheaper stuff but if they want top quality they know they pay for it.......

If I lied to a customer, faked a product and sold it to them I can tell you 100% now if the customer found out I was doing something as underhanded as that I would have to take the product back, give them a full refund or replace the product with a new product without any issues at no cost to the customer, in fact I would probably need to give them something extra for the inconvenience.

If I did not do that I would be standing in a court room along with my company.

So if it is one rule for me how is it different for VW?

For Forks Sake

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Co2 isn't the problem. Nox emissions are the issue.

Most Irish motorists wouldn't know what nox was if it walked up and headbutted them. Not related to tax, don't care seems to be the prevailing attitude

Special Circumstances

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Duncan Stewart maybe. The majority of customers only care about the cheap tax and how many mpg the car can do.

Even the greenies don't care about nox or pm. They wouldn't have set up the incentives for diesel / penalties for petrol hybrids the way they did otherwise.

Toyotafanboi

Sam Russell wrote: »

Reduced residuals.

Higher fuel consumption.

Feeling like a lemon for believing VW are honest.

Having to take the vehicle for upgrade/downgrade.

Uncertainty as to future value of the car (and marque).

That is a short list.

Ah stop. That's a fair attempt ato clutching at straws, why don't you just throw in a soft tissue injury from when you opened the envelope too.

Is there anything concrete anywhere to support the idea of reduced power or fuel consumption? VW will cover your costs of bringing the car for the remedial works at present. I think if you ask anyone with any level of industry experience in the local Irish car market they can tell you VW brand residuals are as strong, if not stronger than ever overy a year later, surely any drop in residuals would be beginning to show by now?

George Dalton wrote: »

Let's call a spade a spade here. It's a nonsense list. Acting like the victim is fooling nobody.

To be honest I would have more respect for people who would simply admit that they aren't affected in any way by what has happened and just want to make sure their hand is in the pot for any potential free money.

One of the best posts on thread. From a real world point of view 99% of owners do not give a toss and would not give a toss if they didn'the think there was a few yoyos in it for themselves. It takes a much more honest character right now to stand up and say, "hang on lads, I actually do not care, one way or the other".

cfuserkildare wrote: »

But pretty much everyone who has a recent VAG Diesel is affected,

Once the emissions are brought to legal levels, the car will have lost perhaps 30 BHP, meaning the cars specifications are possibly 2 models lower than the owner paid for.

Which is basically fraudulent behaviour on VWs part.

Where on earth did you pull that figure from?

Shefwedfan

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

VW will cover your costs of bringing the car for the remedial works at present.

VW are not covering the cost. I do not live beside a garage. So the cost of fuel to and from garage is not covered. Also the time I have to take out of my day to go to VW because they have f**ked up.....

So no they are not covering the costs

As mentioned before the most annoying thing is there is no recognition or apology for what they have done.....

More or less a "f**k you loyal driver we got caught so can you jump to attention and do what we tell you like a good little muppet"

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

From a real world point of view 99% of owners do not give a toss and would not give a toss if they didn'the think there was a few yoyos in it for themselves. It takes a much more honest character right now to stand up and say, "hang on lads, I actually do not care, one way or the other".

So you have done a poll and you know 99% of drivers don't give a toss? or as you say yourself "Where on earth did you pull that figure from? "

Also insulting people by calling them dishonest? so explain to me now how I am dishonest?

Just out of interest do you own a car affected?

Toyotafanboi

Shefwedfan wrote: »

VW are not covering the cost. I do not live beside a garage. So the cost of fuel to and from garage is not covered. Also the time I have to take out of my day to go to VW because they have f**ked up.....

So no they are not covering the costs

As mentioned before the most annoying thing is there is no recognition or apology for what they have done.....

More or less a "f**k you loyal driver we got caught so can you jump to attention and do what we tell you like a good little muppet"



So you have done a poll and you know 99% of drivers don't give a toss? or as you say yourself "Where on earth did you pull that figure from? "

Also insulting people by calling them dishonest? so explain to me now how I am dishonest?

Just out of interest do you own a car affected?

Look, I'm not calling you dishonest, but in the letter they post out, VW state that they will offer you a fully fuelled courtesy vehicle, they will provide you with a taxi, or if you wish, they will arrange for collection and delivery of the car from your home address to the nearest dealership.

I do own an effected car and tbh it has had zero impact on my life. But I could certainly see how it could impact me more if I thought there was a small lottery win in it for me.

Shefwedfan

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

I do own an effected car and tbh it has had zero impact on my life. But I could certainly see how it could impact me more if I thought there was a small lottery win in it for me.

You must add that car to your signature with the other 2 non-VW brand cars

I do refer back to previous post where I explain that if I work for a company and can't lie & cheat with the products I sell, why do you think it is ok for VW to do that?

druid prazsky

i've said it before and i'll say it again

the last good car vw built was the '97 vento


since then imo they are a gathering of over-engineered

Toyotafanboi

Shefwedfan wrote: »

You must add that car to your signature with the other 2 non-VW brand cars

I do refer back to previous post where I explain that if I work for a company and can't lie & cheat with the products I sell, why do you think it is ok for VW to do that?

Damn, foiled by my signature.

I dont think I said anywhere that I think what they did was ok?

CalamariFritti

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Co2 isn't the problem. Nox emissions are the issue.

But nox has nothing to do with the cheat afaik. All diesels have them.

Not specifically directed at you...

Look, all I'm saying is it smells a bit opportunistic, jumping on the bandwagon for the possibility of a payout of sorts, while there really is no damage to the customer, fincanially or otherwise. Whatever state body it is that regulates operating permissions in the country would have a much more credible claim.

But Shefwedfan has a point, no horse in this race, so why be the miser. I'll leave you to it. Good luck.

JohnBoy26

CalamariFritti wrote: »

But nox has nothing to do with the cheat afaik. All diesels have them.

Not specifically directed at you...

Look, all I'm saying is it smells a bit opportunistic, jumping on the bandwagon for the possibility of a payout of sorts, while there really is no damage to the customer, fincanially or otherwise. Whatever state body it is that regulates operating permissions in the country would have a much more credible claim.

But Shefwedfan has a point, no horse in this race, so why be the miser. I'll leave you to it. Good luck.

Isn't that what they were cheating though?

JohnBoy26

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Even the greenies don't care about nox or pm. They wouldn't have set up the incentives for diesel / penalties for petrol hybrids the way they did otherwise.

All the Greens cared about was implementing there idealistic policies.

RedorDead

Water John wrote: »

Yes the customer was misled. The customer, had they access to true figures, may have made the choice to buy from a diff maker.

The truth is they probably wouldnt because it has been unveiled that every manufacturer bar none falsifies figures in many subsequent tests

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Yes it is I agree. All I'm saying is that it's not really the customer who is damaged.

That's far from saying nothing is wrong.

Let's be honest here. 99.9% of the customers don't really give a toss about co2 emissions unless it affects their tax rate.

News broke today that VW became the worlds highest selling car brand in 2016 confirming this point.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-vehicleregistrations-idUSKBN14U1G0

CalamariFritti

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Isn't that what they were cheating though?

Oh I didnt realise that. I thought they were cheating on emissions in general by dialling everything back a bit when detecting a test scenario. I thought everyone talks about NOx simply 'cos thats now the new devil as opposed to CO2.

Whats the story in Ireland btw? Do we have a state body that tests cars and issues permissions to sell and register and operate? Or do we piggy back on some EU body/permission?

I simply assumed because all motor tax matters are about CO2 that this was the relevant bit here.

Water John

I think when the Attorney General of the USA throws the book at you, your in trouble.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/11/six-volkswagen-executives-charged-with-over-emissions-cheating

grogi

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Oh I didnt realise that. I thought they were cheating on emissions in general by dialling everything back a bit when detecting a test scenario. I thought everyone talks about NOx simply 'cos thats now the new devil as opposed to CO2.

Whats the story in Ireland btw? Do we have a state body that tests cars and issues permissions to sell and register and operate? Or do we piggy back on some EU body/permission?

The type approval harmonisation rules within EU mean that a type approved anywhere in EU is recognised across the Union. Because our motor industry is so strong, Ireland just recognises German and French approvals most of the time.

I simply assumed because all motor tax matters are about CO2 that this was the relevant bit here.

Many people don't understand the issue at all. And that's why new issues arise...

Del2005

I wonder how many owners clamoring for compensation for the cheat have smashed out their DPF or remapped the car? Both are on the same league of the cheat.

Special Circumstances

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Whats the story in Ireland btw? Do we have a state body that tests cars and issues permissions to sell and register and operate? Or do we piggy back on some EU body/permission?

I simply assumed because all motor tax matters are about CO2 that this was the relevant bit here.

When the Germans say jump our government say how high.

Tax is about CO2 because the greenies have the scientific and environmental credibility of Donald Trump. And the EU air quality regulations were gerrymandered to suit EU car manufacturers rather than the health of the EU population.

blackwhite

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

thats unbelievable what they get in the us.

I got my 2011 passat fixed here and they wouldnt even call me a taxi when I dropped it in (to my own expense as its way out of the way),

I know that the uk are looking for £3,000 each in recompense and they'll probably get it.

Is there anything we can do here?

Dial Hard wrote: »

Irish law doesn't allow for class action suits, as mentioned above.

Class actions aren't even the big issue - it's down to how sizeable damages can be awarded in the US.

The Irish (and UK, which we are modelled on) legal systems only provides for damages to be awarded based on actual losses. This means that the limit of what VW could be hit for by court action is the actual loss in value suffered by owners - and that value would have to be proven in court.

In pretty much every US state, the legal systems allow for punitive damages. This means that the judge or jury (we only try civil cases by judge here - another thing that makes an unusually large award unlikely) can award damages significantly higher than the actual loss in value, just to "punish" VW. This means that there's effectively no upper limit, which is why VW are doing everything in their power to appease US consumers.

suitseir

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Look, I'm not calling you dishonest, but in the letter they post out, VW state that they will offer you a fully fuelled courtesy vehicle, they will provide you with a taxi, or if you wish, they will arrange for collection and delivery of the car from your home address to the nearest dealership.

I do own an effected car and tbh it has had zero impact on my life. But I could certainly see how it could impact me more if I thought there was a small lottery win in it for me.

Out of interest, did have the software upgrade remedial work done to the car by VW? My car has been recalled but just want to make sure that this upgrade does not affect the performance. Not bothered with all the comings and goings on this post about recompense, just don't want to be chugging on the Motorway!!!

George Dalton

suitseir wrote: »

Out of interest, did have the software upgrade remedial work done to the car by VW? My car has been recalled but just want to make sure that this upgrade does not affect the performance. Not bothered with all the comings and goings on this post about recompense, just don't want to be chugging on the Motorway!!!

In my opinion there is absolutely no argument whatsoever to be made for having the recall done.

The absolute best case outcome would be that you notice no difference afterwards. So why bother?

CalamariFritti

Special Circumstances wrote: »

When the Germans say jump our government say how high.

Tax is about CO2 because the greenies have the scientific and environmental credibility of Donald Trump. And the EU air quality regulations were gerrymandered to suit EU car manufacturers rather than the health of the EU population.

That kind of reply indicates to me some sort of chip on your shoulder. Hard to take anything seriously after that.

In any case. Why would 'the Germans' push any kind of diesel favourable regulation? Traditionally diesel cars are not popular at all in Germany. The German drivers disliked the CO2 based tax reform just as much as the Irish drivers. And the manufacturers don't care what kind of car they sell as long as they're selling cars.
Also I'm sure now that petrol will become more popular again advances will be made on petrol engines to become cleaner. Which will. be easier to begin with as petrol is cleaner anyways.