Volkswagen compensation
Discussion
oop north said:
Not really - the vehicle performance in a test-that-hardly-any-consumers-gave-a-stuff-about-before-last-week was misrepresented, which isn't the same thing - quite a long way from it, actually. It's to meet govt-set limits (which if you wont meet you don't get to sell the car at all), not in itself make it more attractive to a customer. The NOx performance is the main issue in the defeat device (as I understand it)
I don't think the misrepresentation would come from the misrepresentation of emissions test results per se,, but more from potential the loss of real word performance, whether that be power, MPG or drivability, post and VW fix.I have a Octavia vRS 170 Diesel that I bought because of the power, spread of torque and MPG..if any of these are compromised by any potential 'fix' in order to make it so the car meets emissions rules in force at the time of the original sale, then the manufacturer mis-sold me the product from new as all of these aspects were demonstrated to me at the time.
I don't imagine people will get compensation because their car can no longer do 140mph and can only do 120mph now.
People need to get over the willy waving of I bought this car due to its performance etc. and look at the bigger picture. It's not really a that big deal in the great scheme of things. If people only have this to worry about that there 2 year old Audi is potentially going to be worth a grand less or be slightly slower then life is not really that bad. I don't think much of the population will be all that sympathetic tbh.
It's like people at work complaining as our company only lets us save £250 into the share scheme when the limit the government set is £500. I am not sure people are that sympathetic to people not being able to save an extra £250 per month.
I am not affected by this VAG emissions issue but know a few who are and some are worrying about it and some do not care.
I don't imagine it will affect the cars in Europe very much compared to the ones in California which I can't see being able to ever pass the tests. I am curious as to which other manufacturers have been fiddling there tests too though.
People need to get over the willy waving of I bought this car due to its performance etc. and look at the bigger picture. It's not really a that big deal in the great scheme of things. If people only have this to worry about that there 2 year old Audi is potentially going to be worth a grand less or be slightly slower then life is not really that bad. I don't think much of the population will be all that sympathetic tbh.
It's like people at work complaining as our company only lets us save £250 into the share scheme when the limit the government set is £500. I am not sure people are that sympathetic to people not being able to save an extra £250 per month.
I am not affected by this VAG emissions issue but know a few who are and some are worrying about it and some do not care.
I don't imagine it will affect the cars in Europe very much compared to the ones in California which I can't see being able to ever pass the tests. I am curious as to which other manufacturers have been fiddling there tests too though.
As I lease my GTD, I could not give less of a sh*t
If however they do a recall that blunts performance more than the pathetic 'Eco' mode that I'd have hardwired out if I had the choice, THEN I might get upset
The only real issue here is VAG have a premium image
That someone thought they would get away with this forever shows them to be a bunch of arrogant tossers, IMHO
If however they do a recall that blunts performance more than the pathetic 'Eco' mode that I'd have hardwired out if I had the choice, THEN I might get upset
The only real issue here is VAG have a premium image
That someone thought they would get away with this forever shows them to be a bunch of arrogant tossers, IMHO
Soupie69uk said:
I don't imagine people will get compensation because their car can no longer do 140mph and can only do 120mph now.
People need to get over the willy waving of I bought this car due to its performance etc. and look at the bigger picture. It's not really a that big deal in the great scheme of things. If people only have this to worry about that there 2 year old Audi is potentially going to be worth a grand less or be slightly slower then life is not really that bad. I don't think much of the population will be all that sympathetic tbh.
It's nothing to do with 'willy waving' as you so eloquently put it. I simply want my car to perform as it did when I bought it. I'm glad that the prospect of my car being worth a grand less is of no consequence - perhaps if I send you my details, you could send me the cash as you clearly wouldn't miss it. And how much BHP would you deem it acceptable to loose? 10? 20? 50? Where should the line be drawn? I paid over £20000 for a car - I don't want compensation, I just want the performance I paid for. Would it be acceptable for hotpoint to suddenly reduce the spin speed on your washing machine so nothing was as clean or dry, or the kettle made so it didn't boil?People need to get over the willy waving of I bought this car due to its performance etc. and look at the bigger picture. It's not really a that big deal in the great scheme of things. If people only have this to worry about that there 2 year old Audi is potentially going to be worth a grand less or be slightly slower then life is not really that bad. I don't think much of the population will be all that sympathetic tbh.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Reduced MPG could come down to £100/year though assuming 10% or so.
I'd be more concerned about if trade-in values suffer - I have a MK7 which is unaffected but I suspect I'll still end up paying for it come trade-in time, though admittedly that remains to be seen.
I think people will try and reference the originally listed MPG figures, which will be interesting as there have been successful cases in other countries.I'd be more concerned about if trade-in values suffer - I have a MK7 which is unaffected but I suspect I'll still end up paying for it come trade-in time, though admittedly that remains to be seen.
Trade-in value concerns me, too. We just got an EU6 Tiguan and planned to keep it for 3yrs. Its value wouldn't have to be impacted much to completely mess up my decision to purchase rather than lease.
Sheepshanks said:
I doubt there would be any sympathy for reduced performance.
However, what's likely to go hand-in-hand with that is reduced MPG and that is likely to produce demands for compensation.
Sympathy from whom? I think the sale of goods act, or whatever it was renamed last week, would include a car being sold as 170BHP actually ending up with 160BHP under the description of misleading advertising or misrepresentation!However, what's likely to go hand-in-hand with that is reduced MPG and that is likely to produce demands for compensation.
The only people who could/should go for them BIG-Time are their competitors, they lied to the purchaser to attract them thus taking away honest competition.
That would make some large figures/interesting market results if you can work out by how much companies like PSA (well known for oilers) have been effected.
That would make some large figures/interesting market results if you can work out by how much companies like PSA (well known for oilers) have been effected.
Mistrale said:
Sympathy from whom? I think the sale of goods act, or whatever it was renamed last week, would include a car being sold as 170BHP actually ending up with 160BHP under the description of misleading advertising or misrepresentation!
How could you ever prove this beyond reasonable doubt?Rolling roads tend to provide the results the punter wants to see and you won't notice a 10% in power in real world driving.
Mistrale said:
Sheepshanks said:
I doubt there would be any sympathy for reduced performance.
However, what's likely to go hand-in-hand with that is reduced MPG and that is likely to produce demands for compensation.
Sympathy from whom? I think the sale of goods act, or whatever it was renamed last week, would include a car being sold as 170BHP actually ending up with 160BHP under the description of misleading advertising or misrepresentation!However, what's likely to go hand-in-hand with that is reduced MPG and that is likely to produce demands for compensation.
This is where it gets grey. If you wanted to counter-argue, you could say that the ONLY thing that constitutes mis-selling, was if you were promised a certain level of NOx and in actual fact that was not the true value. All other figures were accurate at point of sale.
It's the post-sale change that (in this example) affects the BHP output and that makes it tougher to argue mis-selling on that one point alone.
In this instance any change to the car as a result of the fix to get round the original cheat, is going to really have to be argued as not mis-selling, but rather something else. Hypothetical - when I bought my car, I bought it because the road tax was £X. Now things have changed and its £Y. In that example, an external factor impacted the costs associated with my car. I cannot blame the manufacturer. In this case, something might change as a result of a fix that is in place as the result of an earlier cheat. Post hoc ergo proctor hoc.
In short, unless you can prove that you bought the car because of the NOx output and that was laid out at point of sale as being ABC, then you cannot really argue mis-selling. You will have to argue something else.
Mistrale said:
Sheepshanks said:
I doubt there would be any sympathy for reduced performance.
However, what's likely to go hand-in-hand with that is reduced MPG and that is likely to produce demands for compensation.
Sympathy from whom? I think the sale of goods act, or whatever it was renamed last week, would include a car being sold as 170BHP actually ending up with 160BHP under the description of misleading advertising or misrepresentation!However, what's likely to go hand-in-hand with that is reduced MPG and that is likely to produce demands for compensation.
I think people would have a better chance if MPG is affected, as you'd be able to demonstrate the extra cost.
Soupie69uk said:
I don't imagine people will get compensation because their car can no longer do 140mph and can only do 120mph now.
People need to get over the willy waving of I bought this car due to its performance etc. and look at the bigger picture. It's not really a that big deal in the great scheme of things. If people only have this to worry about that there 2 year old Audi is potentially going to be worth a grand less or be slightly slower then life is not really that bad. I don't think much of the population will be all that sympathetic tbh.
It's like people at work complaining as our company only lets us save £250 into the share scheme when the limit the government set is £500. I am not sure people are that sympathetic to people not being able to save an extra £250 per month.
I am not affected by this VAG emissions issue but know a few who are and some are worrying about it and some do not care.
I don't imagine it will affect the cars in Europe very much compared to the ones in California which I can't see being able to ever pass the tests. I am curious as to which other manufacturers have been fiddling there tests too though.
What a ridiculous comment! The market place for these types of vehicles is incredibly competitive, most EU5 buyers are doing so because of the blend of practicality, frugality and performance they offer. I absolutely have a right to be annoyed if Audi drop the power of my car by 10-20% without me having a choice in it. The vehicle is NOT as advertised in that condition.People need to get over the willy waving of I bought this car due to its performance etc. and look at the bigger picture. It's not really a that big deal in the great scheme of things. If people only have this to worry about that there 2 year old Audi is potentially going to be worth a grand less or be slightly slower then life is not really that bad. I don't think much of the population will be all that sympathetic tbh.
It's like people at work complaining as our company only lets us save £250 into the share scheme when the limit the government set is £500. I am not sure people are that sympathetic to people not being able to save an extra £250 per month.
I am not affected by this VAG emissions issue but know a few who are and some are worrying about it and some do not care.
I don't imagine it will affect the cars in Europe very much compared to the ones in California which I can't see being able to ever pass the tests. I am curious as to which other manufacturers have been fiddling there tests too though.
Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
Duncan McKay said:
What a ridiculous comment! The market place for these types of vehicles is incredibly competitive, most EU5 buyers are doing so because of the blend of practicality, frugality and performance they offer. I absolutely have a right to be annoyed if Audi drop the power of my car by 10-20% without me having a choice in it. The vehicle is NOT as advertised in that condition.
Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
How do you know the car is even running the stated power. Do you think you use 100% of the power enough to miss 10%?Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
Plenty cars will have more or less power and they will never know. I don't know of many RS4 owners who managed to sue Audi because they lost power with the coking issue on the FSI engines. And that is a car they will have genuinely bought for the performance.
I think if there is a recall you will be asked to go in to get the changes made. So just don't go in or put it off as long as you can? Chances are if you own your car you won't know what the trade in/ private sale value will be anyway so you won't ever be aware of the lost £1000.
Some people get in such a tizz over not a lot. It's a car and not going to change you're life. If someone owns an affected car and is relaxed about it they will maybe still enjoy the car. But if they get worked up about it it is going to taint it and probably not going to want to keep it as long.
Soupie69uk said:
Duncan McKay said:
What a ridiculous comment! The market place for these types of vehicles is incredibly competitive, most EU5 buyers are doing so because of the blend of practicality, frugality and performance they offer. I absolutely have a right to be annoyed if Audi drop the power of my car by 10-20% without me having a choice in it. The vehicle is NOT as advertised in that condition.
Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
How do you know the car is even running the stated power. Do you think you use 100% of the power enough to miss 10%?Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
Plenty cars will have more or less power and they will never know. I don't know of many RS4 owners who managed to sue Audi because they lost power with the coking issue on the FSI engines. And that is a car they will have genuinely bought for the performance.
I think if there is a recall you will be asked to go in to get the changes made. So just don't go in or put it off as long as you can? Chances are if you own your car you won't know what the trade in/ private sale value will be anyway so you won't ever be aware of the lost £1000.
Some people get in such a tizz over not a lot. It's a car and not going to change you're life. If someone owns an affected car and is relaxed about it they will maybe still enjoy the car. But if they get worked up about it it is going to taint it and probably not going to want to keep it as long.
Soupie69uk said:
Duncan McKay said:
What a ridiculous comment! The market place for these types of vehicles is incredibly competitive, most EU5 buyers are doing so because of the blend of practicality, frugality and performance they offer. I absolutely have a right to be annoyed if Audi drop the power of my car by 10-20% without me having a choice in it. The vehicle is NOT as advertised in that condition.
Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
How do you know the car is even running the stated power. Do you think you use 100% of the power enough to miss 10%?Your point as to it not being "that" bad is ridiculous as well. If I have lost out by £1000 or so in the value of my car because of the deceit of the manufacturer, how on earth do you suggest that that isn't really an issue? Unless of course you are so well off that the grand doesn't touch the sides, but then I would suggest that you wouldn't be using a vehicle with an EU5 engine!
Plenty cars will have more or less power and they will never know. I don't know of many RS4 owners who managed to sue Audi because they lost power with the coking issue on the FSI engines. And that is a car they will have genuinely bought for the performance.
I think if there is a recall you will be asked to go in to get the changes made. So just don't go in or put it off as long as you can? Chances are if you own your car you won't know what the trade in/ private sale value will be anyway so you won't ever be aware of the lost £1000.
Some people get in such a tizz over not a lot. It's a car and not going to change you're life. If someone owns an affected car and is relaxed about it they will maybe still enjoy the car. But if they get worked up about it it is going to taint it and probably not going to want to keep it as long.
As for your other point that most folks wont know the value of their car, that is besides the point. Personally, I do know the value of my car, but just because I might be ignorant about it doesn't mean that the value dropping isn't an issue. That's a bit like saying If you are self employed and do not know exactly what your salary is, that it wouldn't matter if someone stole a bit because you weren't sure about the total anyway!
Hahahhahaah
This is a funny thread.
Who actually cares about nox emissions.. no-one.
So many people on the news "I bought my vw tdi because of the emissions".
no you f**king didn't.
Move along.
Like vultures at a corpse in the desert.
this was america pushing out European diesel competition. because the vag TDI's are good economical and powerful engines
the american ones are terrible.
if "VW" was replaced with "gm" this would not be a story and would have been buried.
This is a funny thread.
Who actually cares about nox emissions.. no-one.
So many people on the news "I bought my vw tdi because of the emissions".
no you f**king didn't.
Move along.
Like vultures at a corpse in the desert.
this was america pushing out European diesel competition. because the vag TDI's are good economical and powerful engines
the american ones are terrible.
if "VW" was replaced with "gm" this would not be a story and would have been buried.
xjay1337 said:
So many people on the news "I bought my vw tdi because of the emissions".
no you f**king didn't.
Most people will have done, but perhaps without thinking about it.no you f**king didn't.
They'll have been attracted by MPG. MPG directly relates to CO2 emissions. VW has got better CO2 emissions / MPG by fiddling the NOx figures.
Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff