OT: VW cheating emissions on TDI vehicles

[David Kirk]

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

Originally Posted by Mark McM

To be made whole is to be returned to the original state before damage was done. In this case, you had full use of your vehicle before it was forced to be bought back. Therefore the only damage you have suffered is the loss of a used car with whatever mileage it had when it was bought back. To be made whole would be to given the value of your used car, which is surely less than the price paid.

Let's say that the whole emission cheating scandal never happened. What would happen if you brought your several year old car in to the dealer for servicing, and while it was in their care the car was lost (maybe the dealers building collapsed or caught on fire or some other calamity)? Would you expect the dealer to re-imburse you for the full price that you paid several years and many thousands of miles earlier? Or would it be more fair to re-imburse you for the cost of replacing it with a similar car of the same age and mileage?

A case could be made for the return of full price if the car had only recently been purchased, but not after the car has been substantially used, and if during that time had given the owner full utility.

[shovelhd]

Originally Posted by grawk

I want to keep my car. They don't make a car that is at all comparable to my car any longer. If my car were a lemon, they'd buy it back for purchase price. This is a comparable situation. I am perfectly happy to keep driving my car until it dies of natural causes. That or a lemon law equivalent are in my opinion the only reasonable alternatives. The only way I was ever going to sell this car was going to be when it was 10 years old with 400k miles on it.

See option 2.

[grawk]

Originally Posted by shovelhd

See option 2.

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.

[flydhest]

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.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

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

But how were you harmed? Did you get full utility out of the car since the time of purchase? Other than the inconvenience of the buy back, how have you suffered? And how has that suffering earned you both the full purchase price back AND the use of a new car for several years?

[David Kirk]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

But how were you harmed? Did you get full utility out of the car since the time of purchase? Other than the inconvenience of the buy back, how have you suffered? And how has that suffering earned you both the full purchase price back AND the use of a new car for several years?

That's a good question. I have been inconvenienced but that is a very small thing. The big thing is that I have been polluting our air for the past 35,000 miles. I honestly feel bad about this but don't know how I or we should be compensated for this. Now I use the car much, much less than I had before the outing because I know it's doing something I paid for it NOT to do and i don't enjoy its use.

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

[Rusty Luggs]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

That's a good question. I have been inconvenienced but that is a very small thing. The big thing is that I have been polluting our air for the past 35,000 miles. I honestly feel bad about this but don't know how I or we should be compensated for this. Now I use the car much, much less than I had before the outing because I know it's doing something I paid for it NOT to do and i don't enjoy its use.

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

Not picking on you, honestly, but, with respect to emissions, everyone breathing air was impacted. So, are you expecting to be compensated because you feel bad about that? Like in "pain and suffering" compensation...? I'm not thrilled either - where's my check?

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.

[shovelhd]

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.

[David Kirk]

Originally Posted by Rusty Luggs

Not picking on you, honestly, but, with respect to emissions, everyone breathing air was impacted. So, are you expecting to be compensated because you feel bad about that? Like in "pain and suffering" compensation...? I'm not thrilled either - where's my check?

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.

I hear you.

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

[palincss]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

That's a good question. I have been inconvenienced but that is a very small thing. The big thing is that I have been polluting our air for the past 35,000 miles. I honestly feel bad about this but don't know how I or we should be compensated for this.

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.

[krhea]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

I hear you.

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

Dave, I'm in the exact same situation as you and feel exactly as you do. Thanks so much for articulating how "I" and a whole lot of "I's" feel.

[thwart]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

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 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 (or fairly close to) what I put down my money for or I'd like my money back.

This.

Almost exactly.

And I suspect many tdi owners here share these feelings about the fiasco and its resolution.

[David Kirk]

Originally Posted by palincss

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.

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

[Rusty Luggs]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

I hear you.


Do you feel that paying owners the blue book value of the car (before the outing) is a fair way to go?

dave

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.

[David Kirk]

Originally Posted by Rusty Luggs

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.

Interesting.

I of course don't agree but that's the way life works.

Do you own one of the affected cars?


dave