Diesel Cayenne and VW emission issue
02-27-2017, 06:37 PM
#3196
Rennlist Member
Still hard to see where the shift in strategy from the 2.0L settlement to the now 3.0L went from VAG carrying the burden of their actions, to now the burden being distributed among VAG and the owners that purchased their product that they misrepresented to us.
If there was a clear end in sight, I may feel differently. The fact that we get to wait another year, maybe more, is very unsettling.
If there was a clear end in sight, I may feel differently. The fact that we get to wait another year, maybe more, is very unsettling.
From the Amended 3.0L Class-Action Settlement Agreement (also referenced in the DOJ 2nd Partial Consent Decree) 7.5. Reduced Performance. Defendants represent that the Emissions Compliant Repair shall not result in “Reduced Performance.” In the event that the Emissions Compliant Repair causes Reduced Performance of the Eligible Vehicle, Volkswagen shall make an additional payment of $500 for each affected Eligible Vehicle.
This was not made in the 2.0L case and as such, it would be (was) difficult not to allow VAG et al an opportunity to fix their problem. If they fail, then the plaintiffs case for a buy back gets immeasurably stronger.
02-27-2017, 06:41 PM
#3197
Three Wheelin'
I don't think the chance is too high that they will though. Unless they got another CD or are an enthusiast who is active on forums, they probably won't even know or care to think that they might be eligible for compensation.
That being said, I registered as a former lessee for my 13 I had.
02-27-2017, 06:59 PM
#3198
Rennlist Member
PJ Cayenne: You are correct, without an approved repair, they can't be sold or exported.
Approved repair, what does that mean? If they can be brought into compliance or not, as long as the repair is approved by EPA/CARB (which could be a reduced emissions repair) we don't have any remedy than to take the repair or opt out. This is important distinction because if I was VAG, I would be shooting for this much less lofty goal than an approved emission complaint repair if that is too difficult to achieve. Also, why the $500 payment for reduced performance as a result of the repair? This is most likely because VAG knows that for them to get these cars into compliance, the vehicles will be impacted in one way or another that will degrade their performance.
Approved repair, what does that mean? If they can be brought into compliance or not, as long as the repair is approved by EPA/CARB (which could be a reduced emissions repair) we don't have any remedy than to take the repair or opt out. This is important distinction because if I was VAG, I would be shooting for this much less lofty goal than an approved emission complaint repair if that is too difficult to achieve. Also, why the $500 payment for reduced performance as a result of the repair? This is most likely because VAG knows that for them to get these cars into compliance, the vehicles will be impacted in one way or another that will degrade their performance.
If there is a repair approved that is less than to original spec, it triggers the buyback or reparation option. The $500 doesn't apply to that option. The "lesser" repair might also reduce performance, but the settlement is higher and includes the buyback. You can't get the restitution and another $500 because it lowers performance; that makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes, the $500/vehicle would be a cheap way out if performance is reduced, but it wouldn't be so if everyone balks at the fix that neuters the vehicles and goes back to court.
DOES ANYONE HAVE A COPY OF THE NADA Values as of Sept 2015? Would like to confirm that the following paragraph adequately address CD options?
When I called NADA about the value of my car and went online, saw that many of the Porsche options were not available to show the value of my car, a 2014 CD.
When I brought this up to the attorney, they responded that they understand and allowances would be made to address NADA lack of information.
Reading this in the amended decree:
"22. Options Adjustments. The options adjustments to Base Clean Trade and Base Clean Retail Values made to derive the Vehicle Clean Trade and Vehicle Clean Retail Values for MY 2013-2015 Eligible Vehicles are based only on Volkswagen, Audi, or Porsche OEM-installed options that are valued in the September 2015 NADA Used Car Guide or, for some MY 2015 vehicle options, later editions of the NADA Used Car Guide, using the NADA “Clean Trade-In” and “Clean Retail” values of those"
"options, respectively."
When I called NADA about the value of my car and went online, saw that many of the Porsche options were not available to show the value of my car, a 2014 CD.
When I brought this up to the attorney, they responded that they understand and allowances would be made to address NADA lack of information.
Reading this in the amended decree:
"22. Options Adjustments. The options adjustments to Base Clean Trade and Base Clean Retail Values made to derive the Vehicle Clean Trade and Vehicle Clean Retail Values for MY 2013-2015 Eligible Vehicles are based only on Volkswagen, Audi, or Porsche OEM-installed options that are valued in the September 2015 NADA Used Car Guide or, for some MY 2015 vehicle options, later editions of the NADA Used Car Guide, using the NADA “Clean Trade-In” and “Clean Retail” values of those"
"options, respectively."
For a buyback/reparation option, it addresses options in the settlement.
Here is my correspondence asking about this specifically this morning:
The answer to your question is yes:
we can move for a buyback and/or other appropriate remedies ( more money etc) if there is timely regulator approval, but reduced performance beyond the metrics.
Elizabeth Cabraser
LIEFF CABRASER
ecabraser@lchb.com<mailto:ecabraser@lchb.com>
mobile:415-806-2100
On Feb 27, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Michael wrote:
Elizabeth,
If you could answer another concern I have, I would appreciate it.
If defendants submit in a timely manner and get EPA/CARB approval for a reduced emission modification, what will happen then? What happens if the performance is reduced beyond what is covered by the $500 payment a 3% reduction? Is there any language in the decree that covers this area, like triggering a buyback or something to us owners that don’t accept keeping a vehicle that clearly wasn’t what we thought we were buying? Any degradation in the vehicles performance or other adverse effects will also lower it’s marketability, again, placing us in a difficult situation.
Seems like this is a huge win for the defendants, all things considered.
In your last email you wrote:
"In terms of overall environmental impact, they determined instead to allow and require an emissions complaint repair effort to proceed first , as more environmentally responsible.”
How could NOT removing these cars from the road be the most environmentally responsible thing to do? Wouldn’t we be replacing them with cars that we found later that are emission’s compliant? If defendants took the cars, held them until they could repair them to make them compliant, they could cycle them back into the market as emissions compliant vehicles.
Still hard to see where the shift in strategy from the 2.0L settlement to the now 3.0L went from VAG carrying the burden of their actions, to now the burden being distributed among VAG and the owners that purchased their product that they misrepresented to us.
If there was a clear end in sight, I may feel differently. The fact that we get to wait another year, maybe more, is very unsettling.
The answer to your question is yes:
we can move for a buyback and/or other appropriate remedies ( more money etc) if there is timely regulator approval, but reduced performance beyond the metrics.
Elizabeth Cabraser
LIEFF CABRASER
ecabraser@lchb.com<mailto:ecabraser@lchb.com>
mobile:415-806-2100
On Feb 27, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Michael wrote:
Elizabeth,
If you could answer another concern I have, I would appreciate it.
If defendants submit in a timely manner and get EPA/CARB approval for a reduced emission modification, what will happen then? What happens if the performance is reduced beyond what is covered by the $500 payment a 3% reduction? Is there any language in the decree that covers this area, like triggering a buyback or something to us owners that don’t accept keeping a vehicle that clearly wasn’t what we thought we were buying? Any degradation in the vehicles performance or other adverse effects will also lower it’s marketability, again, placing us in a difficult situation.
Seems like this is a huge win for the defendants, all things considered.
In your last email you wrote:
"In terms of overall environmental impact, they determined instead to allow and require an emissions complaint repair effort to proceed first , as more environmentally responsible.”
How could NOT removing these cars from the road be the most environmentally responsible thing to do? Wouldn’t we be replacing them with cars that we found later that are emission’s compliant? If defendants took the cars, held them until they could repair them to make them compliant, they could cycle them back into the market as emissions compliant vehicles.
Still hard to see where the shift in strategy from the 2.0L settlement to the now 3.0L went from VAG carrying the burden of their actions, to now the burden being distributed among VAG and the owners that purchased their product that they misrepresented to us.
If there was a clear end in sight, I may feel differently. The fact that we get to wait another year, maybe more, is very unsettling.
02-27-2017, 07:37 PM
#3199
I think you're mixing up the options.
If there is a repair approved that is less than to original spec, it triggers the buyback or reparation option. The $500 doesn't apply to that option. The "lesser" repair might also reduce performance, but the settlement is higher and includes the buyback. You can't get the restitution and another $500 because it lowers performance; that makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes, the $500/vehicle would be a cheap way out if performance is reduced, but it wouldn't be so if everyone balks at the fix that neuters the vehicles and goes back to court.
If there is a repair approved that is less than to original spec, it triggers the buyback or reparation option. The $500 doesn't apply to that option. The "lesser" repair might also reduce performance, but the settlement is higher and includes the buyback. You can't get the restitution and another $500 because it lowers performance; that makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes, the $500/vehicle would be a cheap way out if performance is reduced, but it wouldn't be so if everyone balks at the fix that neuters the vehicles and goes back to court.
As far as anyone balking at whatever that fix is, I think it would have to be pretty severe for that to really impact the outcome of this decree. They probably already know the stats better than any of us what impact we as a group a willing to endure.
Please read her response again, it says we can move, it doesn't say it will happen. They have had more than enough time to come up with a decree that didn't leave so many unknowns and risks for future litigation or people opting out of class but they didn't. The reason? Who knows but they are obviously moving this along and working cooperatively with VAG to give them more time to fix these vehicles. They closed all the unknowns on the 2.0L decree, why not do the same for the 3.0L?
02-27-2017, 10:00 PM
#3200
Rennlist Member
PJ, that is part of the problem here. It would make sense that if it was only a partial fix, you would expect a buyback, but that isn't the case. As long as CARB/EPA ok the repair (even if it doesn't bring them into compliance), they can still proceed with the recall and repair without having to give us an option of a buyback.
Worst case, it is just a reduced emission repair that gets approval and really messes with the performance of the vehicles. Best we can do at that point is return to the court for ask for additional remedies that weren't include in the decree (why was this left out? make no sense unless you are VAG). Then maybe we get something, you can bet VAG will fight it to the end and try to avoid having to give up anything more.
Worst case, it is just a reduced emission repair that gets approval and really messes with the performance of the vehicles. Best we can do at that point is return to the court for ask for additional remedies that weren't include in the decree (why was this left out? make no sense unless you are VAG). Then maybe we get something, you can bet VAG will fight it to the end and try to avoid having to give up anything more.
02-28-2017, 01:45 AM
#3202
Rennlist Member
Your statement is clearly wrong. If an approved repair doesn't meet specs, there is no buyback or any other reparations other than $500 written into the decent decree. Also, a repair could also be a reduced emissions repair that doesn't meet specs but was approved, so back to the first sentence. Only time or non approval have any bearing on buyback.
As far as anyone balking at whatever that fix is, I think it would have to be pretty severe for that to really impact the outcome of this decree. They probably already know the stats better than any of us what impact we as a group a willing to endure.
This quote has nothing to do with repair or fix, it is relevant to buy back values only. It also is from the amended decree on the Court's site, see sec 22. It doesn't cover the options relative to buyback, you can read the doc here:http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/propose...uments-3-liter
I don't have it mixed up unfortunately, it is as it reads and is why I specifically asked it the way I did. Your whole repair non complaint approved fix is confusing, not sure where you got that.
Please read her response again, it says we can move, it doesn't say it will happen. They have had more than enough time to come up with a decree that didn't leave so many unknowns and risks for future litigation or people opting out of class but they didn't. The reason? Who knows but they are obviously moving this along and working cooperatively with VAG to give them more time to fix these vehicles. They closed all the unknowns on the 2.0L decree, why not do the same for the 3.0L?
As far as anyone balking at whatever that fix is, I think it would have to be pretty severe for that to really impact the outcome of this decree. They probably already know the stats better than any of us what impact we as a group a willing to endure.
This quote has nothing to do with repair or fix, it is relevant to buy back values only. It also is from the amended decree on the Court's site, see sec 22. It doesn't cover the options relative to buyback, you can read the doc here:http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/propose...uments-3-liter
I don't have it mixed up unfortunately, it is as it reads and is why I specifically asked it the way I did. Your whole repair non complaint approved fix is confusing, not sure where you got that.
Please read her response again, it says we can move, it doesn't say it will happen. They have had more than enough time to come up with a decree that didn't leave so many unknowns and risks for future litigation or people opting out of class but they didn't. The reason? Who knows but they are obviously moving this along and working cooperatively with VAG to give them more time to fix these vehicles. They closed all the unknowns on the 2.0L decree, why not do the same for the 3.0L?
Repair Payment refers to the amount class members get if a "Compliant" repair is "timely made available."
Restitution Payment refers to the amount class members get, with or without buyback (but you can also sell it back or trade it) if there is no compliant fix timely made available. But if a reduced fix is approved by CARB/EPA, you can accept that, keep your vehicle and still get the higher Restitution Payment.
Originally Posted by 3.0L Amended Class Action Settlement Agreement and Release Paragraph 6.7.8
Eligible Owners of Generation Two vehicles for which an Emissions Compliant Repair is not timely available will be entitled to Owner Restitution in addition to a Buyback, Trade-In, or, if available, Approved Emissions Modification, as set forth in Exhibit 1B.
Originally Posted by 3.0L Amended Class Action Settlement Agreement and Release Page 2, Lines 4-7
For Generation Two vehicles, it is anticipated that Defendants will develop an engine modification that brings the emissions from Generation
Two vehicles into compliance with the emissions standards to which the vehicles were originally certified. This is called an Emissions Compliant Repair.
Two vehicles into compliance with the emissions standards to which the vehicles were originally certified. This is called an Emissions Compliant Repair.
Buyback and restitution is triggered if and when a COMPLIANT repair is not made timely available. That means they have until the deadlines specified in the agreement to submit a repair that brings our vehicles back to the standards to which they were originally certified. The caveat here is that if performance is degraded beyond the specified limits, they have to pay another $500 per vehicle. Big whop. They're going to test the fix with the same folks who found the cheating in the first place. If it neuters the vehicle, don't take the fix and opt out (and pay back the initial payment). Or just don't take the fix and keep the half payment and be done.
Once buyback is triggered, VW can still get a fix approved to less than original spec. This the reduced emissions fix and it becomes an option other than buyback, but with the full restitution payment based on Trade value, Retail value, options, mileage, etc. This is where all that comes into play.
Originally Posted by Exhibit 1B Paragraph 6.
6. Emissions Compliant Repair Not Timely Available. In the alternative to paragraph 3, if an Emissions Compliant Repair is not timely made available for a particular Sub-Generation or part of a Sub-Generation (including, but not limited to, test groups or model years) of Generation Two Eligible Vehicles, Class Members who own, owned, lease, or leased an Eligible Vehicle belonging to that Sub-Generation or part thereof shall be entitled to benefits as follows:
i. Eligible Owners shall be offered a choice among three options:
(1) a Buyback plus Owner Restitution, including Loan Forgiveness as set forth in paragraph 29 below;
(2) a Trade-In plus Owner Restitution, including Loan Forgiveness as set forth in paragraph 29 below; or
(3) if available, a Reduced Emissions Modification (or Emissions Compliant Repair) plus Owner Restitution.
i. Eligible Owners shall be offered a choice among three options:
(1) a Buyback plus Owner Restitution, including Loan Forgiveness as set forth in paragraph 29 below;
(2) a Trade-In plus Owner Restitution, including Loan Forgiveness as set forth in paragraph 29 below; or
(3) if available, a Reduced Emissions Modification (or Emissions Compliant Repair) plus Owner Restitution.
Originally Posted by Exhibit 1B, Page 4, Para. 8
the Owner Repair Payment will be 10% of the Base Vehicle Retail Value of the Eligible Vehicle, adjusted for options but not mileage, plus $3,596.74.
Last edited by skiahh; 02-28-2017 at 02:31 AM.
02-28-2017, 07:08 AM
#3204
Basic Questions
Hello,
I have been reviewing the comprehensive (and sometimes confusing) data and comments presented on this excellent forum – especially "Exhibit 4B Class Claims Program and Administration for Owners and Lessees of Generation Two 3.0-Liter Class Vehicles (Model Years 2013-2016)"
I am original owner of my 2013 Cayenne Diesel (I have driven about 30,000 miles since new) – I intend to keep driving it until I can get maximum buyback (or payback/restitution)
Here are my very basic questions:
I want to AVOID being bombarded by hungry compensation attorneys….Is the website https://www.vwcourtsettlement.com/en/3-0-models/ the official website I should go to, or is this an attorney predator link?
Should I register or contact Porsche now, or do they know about me and will find me – in other words, I do not want to miss any deadlines – however, I prefer not to identify myself if this is not required
I REALLY need new tires…I’ve driving on very worn OEM tires (about 30,000 miles since new) – Should I buy tires now? The reason I ask is that May 2017 is the date for “Anticipated roll out of Settlement Program (pending court approval)” - However, I recall reading that nothing happens until Fall 2017 or even later
Thanks!!
I have been reviewing the comprehensive (and sometimes confusing) data and comments presented on this excellent forum – especially "Exhibit 4B Class Claims Program and Administration for Owners and Lessees of Generation Two 3.0-Liter Class Vehicles (Model Years 2013-2016)"
I am original owner of my 2013 Cayenne Diesel (I have driven about 30,000 miles since new) – I intend to keep driving it until I can get maximum buyback (or payback/restitution)
Here are my very basic questions:
I want to AVOID being bombarded by hungry compensation attorneys….Is the website https://www.vwcourtsettlement.com/en/3-0-models/ the official website I should go to, or is this an attorney predator link?
Should I register or contact Porsche now, or do they know about me and will find me – in other words, I do not want to miss any deadlines – however, I prefer not to identify myself if this is not required
I REALLY need new tires…I’ve driving on very worn OEM tires (about 30,000 miles since new) – Should I buy tires now? The reason I ask is that May 2017 is the date for “Anticipated roll out of Settlement Program (pending court approval)” - However, I recall reading that nothing happens until Fall 2017 or even later
Thanks!!
02-28-2017, 09:23 AM
#3206
ENOUGH. when will this end . My wife and I are completely happy and satisfied with our dispel Cayennes. What is making me mad is the constant emails and regular mailings asking me to join this or that law suit . Porsche was proper and provided extended warranties and I appreciate that . Now I just want to be left alone to enjoy these great vehicles sorry I'm just old and don't feel I'm owed anything
02-28-2017, 10:56 AM
#3207
Skiahh,
There 90 days only kicks in with 30 day increments once the final decision date is met. They can either pay 500 per vehicle per 30 days per extension, up to 90 days even if the court finds there is not good cause for the extension. Language that was never used nor given in the 2.0L case.
Also, seems to be a lot of confusion with words put in front of repair. Technically, we have 2 possible repairs, one that brings them into full compliance and one that brings them close enough for EPA and CARB to say that is good enough. Once one of the two are meet within in the allotted time, it becomes a approved repair as far as I can tell from the decree - With no buyback option! While we can get another $500 if they reduced performance and or restitution payments, pretty sure that once they have an approved repair within the timeframe that we won't be given an option for buyback. We can return to court, but the outcome when that happens is unknown. They left so many wholes in this decree and uncertainty that this could easily take another year and a half if not more to come to the end of this mess.
F4 plt, Most likely we won't really know the outcome for probably a year or more, VAG has been given a gift by the court with additional time to come up with a fix for the cars.
Guards Car Red,
Both the VW site you listed and the court site are the best sources for info.
There 90 days only kicks in with 30 day increments once the final decision date is met. They can either pay 500 per vehicle per 30 days per extension, up to 90 days even if the court finds there is not good cause for the extension. Language that was never used nor given in the 2.0L case.
Also, seems to be a lot of confusion with words put in front of repair. Technically, we have 2 possible repairs, one that brings them into full compliance and one that brings them close enough for EPA and CARB to say that is good enough. Once one of the two are meet within in the allotted time, it becomes a approved repair as far as I can tell from the decree - With no buyback option! While we can get another $500 if they reduced performance and or restitution payments, pretty sure that once they have an approved repair within the timeframe that we won't be given an option for buyback. We can return to court, but the outcome when that happens is unknown. They left so many wholes in this decree and uncertainty that this could easily take another year and a half if not more to come to the end of this mess.
F4 plt, Most likely we won't really know the outcome for probably a year or more, VAG has been given a gift by the court with additional time to come up with a fix for the cars.
Guards Car Red,
Both the VW site you listed and the court site are the best sources for info.
02-28-2017, 11:42 AM
#3208
Rennlist Member
Skiahh,
Also, seems to be a lot of confusion with words put in front of repair. Technically, we have 2 possible repairs, one that brings them into full compliance and one that brings them close enough for EPA and CARB to say that is good enough.
Agreed.
Once one of the two are meet within in the allotted time, it becomes a approved repair as far as I can tell from the decree - With no buyback option!
Disagree. If the compliant repair is met and approved, it triggers the "Repair Payment". If they don't get that done, it triggers Restitution and buyback/trade-in/reduced fix, if available.
While we can get another $500 if they reduced performance [from a Compliant fix]and or restitution payments if they don't meet the deadlines for a Compliant Fix, pretty sure that once they have an approved repair within the timeframe that we won't be given an option for buyback.
Again, disagree. It's pretty black and white: No Timely available compliant fix = buyback option (or reduced fix with Restitution payment, which is significantly higher than Repair Payment). Timely Compliant Fix = lower Repair Payment and no buyback.
We can return to court, but the outcome when that happens is unknown. They left so many wholes in this decree and uncertainty that this could easily take another year and a half if not more to come to the end of this mess.
I don't see many holes in here at all. They even addressed the trade-in option that was missing from the 2.0l settlement and that if you strip your vehicle before a buyback return, they can decline to buy your vehicle back.
Also, seems to be a lot of confusion with words put in front of repair. Technically, we have 2 possible repairs, one that brings them into full compliance and one that brings them close enough for EPA and CARB to say that is good enough.
Agreed.
Once one of the two are meet within in the allotted time, it becomes a approved repair as far as I can tell from the decree - With no buyback option!
Disagree. If the compliant repair is met and approved, it triggers the "Repair Payment". If they don't get that done, it triggers Restitution and buyback/trade-in/reduced fix, if available.
While we can get another $500 if they reduced performance [from a Compliant fix]and or restitution payments if they don't meet the deadlines for a Compliant Fix, pretty sure that once they have an approved repair within the timeframe that we won't be given an option for buyback.
Again, disagree. It's pretty black and white: No Timely available compliant fix = buyback option (or reduced fix with Restitution payment, which is significantly higher than Repair Payment). Timely Compliant Fix = lower Repair Payment and no buyback.
We can return to court, but the outcome when that happens is unknown. They left so many wholes in this decree and uncertainty that this could easily take another year and a half if not more to come to the end of this mess.
I don't see many holes in here at all. They even addressed the trade-in option that was missing from the 2.0l settlement and that if you strip your vehicle before a buyback return, they can decline to buy your vehicle back.
Yes, it could take another year and a half or so to "end" it, because they still have to get 85% of us to sign on to the class and then get the repairs made. There are more fines if they miss these deadlines, too, though they all go to the government and not us.
And it basically tells VW, OK, we'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you can fix them and only make you pay a "little" amount if you can. But if you're lying again, its gonna hurt! A LOT.
Last edited by skiahh; 02-28-2017 at 12:50 PM.
02-28-2017, 12:12 PM
#3209
Rennlist Member
How many of us have already received the huge one page post card from VW? If I interpret the front bar code correctly, I am somewhere in the mid 200,000 claims area.
As an aside, lucky me, never received any solicitations from the *chasers
As an aside, lucky me, never received any solicitations from the *chasers
02-28-2017, 12:14 PM
#3210
Rennlist Member
THIS is what makes me mad about our dieselgate:
Japanese auto parts maker Takata Corp. pleaded guilty to fraud Monday and agreed to pay $1 billion in penalties for concealing an air bag defect blamed for at least 16 deaths, most of them in the U.S.
Japanese auto parts maker Takata Corp. pleaded guilty to fraud Monday and agreed to pay $1 billion in penalties for concealing an air bag defect blamed for at least 16 deaths, most of them in the U.S.