#1561
|
||||
|
||||
I hear you and at the same time think there is another way to look at this.
I paid for a product that I was told would do one thing and instead it did another. It was a "bait and switch" of sorts. So my having use of a car that wasn't what I paid for in the first place is worth very little to me. I bought car A and they gave me car B so 'free' use of car B is meaningless. The original crime still exists - I bought one thing and they gave me something else. Because we were deceived and given B when we were told we were getting A I think there may be a strong case to be made for a full refund. But I doubt that will happen and the whole thing is muddied by the fact that many bought these cars used and it's hard to tell how much VW should give those people - what they paid for it used in full? I don't know. In the end I suspect that they will offer a buy back of less then retail value and my hope is that they will offer some serious incentives to buy gas Golf wagon so that I shell out little to no cash.....I've set aside my Bribery cards to put toward a new car when the time comes to lessen the blow. We'll see. I paid cash for the car so it's not like I've only paid X amount so far in payments so I'll be on the hook for the full deal. dave Quote:
|
#1562
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#1563
|
||||
|
||||
I did say if I was forced to sell and wasn't offered what I paid I would sue. I also just don't think I'll be forced to sell.
|
#1564
|
||||
|
||||
OT: VW cheating emissions on TDI vehicles
I am in the same situation as bulldogge. My wife just wants to be rid of the car. Luckily, I will be starting s new job soon, so she will get her wish. Would love to be bought out first, though, as we only want and need one car and I don't want to sell the Jetta and get the current depressed price.
|
#1565
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1566
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I don't know how to balance any of this but I was sold one thing and given another. The fact that they let me use a car that does the exact opposite I was told it was going to do sucks all round. I bought a clean car and they let me use a polluter for free......I don't feel like I made out very well on that. dave |
#1567
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Lots of people posting here that have said they are perfectly willing to avoid any recall to bring their cars into emissions compliance if it is going to have any impact on their cars mileage, driveabily, performance, upkeep, etc. whatsoever. No question, loss in resale value impacts the owner, if there are future costs to owning the vehicle, that impacts the owner. |
#1568
|
||||
|
||||
The EPA will get compensated for harm to the environment. The end user will not, unless you can prove material harm to yourself or someone else.
|
#1569
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I don't expect to be compensated for pain and suffering.......I don't expect to be compensated for anything. I expect to be given the car I paid for and if they can't give me that I'd like my money back. I suspect that the EPA fine would be VW's payment in part for the pollution we are all breathing but I doubt the EPA will be sending either of a check. I too would accept a drop in performance to get the emissions in line with regs. That wouldn't make me excited but it would be fine. If when I was shopping for the car if the stated mileage was slightly lower I would have still bought the car and it seems like a good compromise compared to buying my car back and crushing it - which is such a bad deal environmentally. If a buy-back pays blue-book price then I will be left holding the bag due to depreciation as most of the value lost happens as you drive it off the lot.......and my plan was to keep the car for a few hundred thousand miles the same way I did the Passat I owned before my Jetta. I would never have dreamed of selling a two year old car with only 30,000 miles on it because that is the worst thing I could do financially. So I'd like my car fixed to bring it inline with what I put down my money for or I'd like my money back. I seriously doubt either of those things will happen. Do you feel that paying owners the blue book value of the car (before the outing) is a fair way to go? dave |
#1570
|
|||
|
|||
But honestly, if you were still driving the car you bought in 1994 for the past 35,000 miles you would have been perfectly fine from a legal and regulatory perspective, but your harmful emissions would have been many times worse.
|
#1571
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1572
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Almost exactly. And I suspect many tdi owners here share these feelings about the fiasco and its resolution.
__________________
Old... and in the way. |
#1573
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I think you are wrong there. The mileage of the new TDi was better than my gas Passat but the gas Passat had lower emissions than the TDi. I only sold the Passat because it was so badly damaged by hail that the paint was falling off it. I'd probably still be driving it otherwise. dave |
#1574
|
|||
|
|||
Yep. I think that would be fair and not unreasonable. Anything beyond that would be a bonus. And less you would justified in being unsatisfied/angry etc.
|
#1575
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I of course don't agree but that's the way life works. Do you own one of the affected cars? dave |
Tags |
autoscam, boring threads |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|