Does anyone understand the adverts for compensation if you owned a diesel car? Why would owning a car that runs on diesel have disadvantaged someone? Personally I hate this compensation culture.
It’s probably due to manufacturers cheating emissions tests. BTW I too hate the culture of claiming mis - selling etc. So for years we knew people who got PPI compensation and were a bit nonplussed. Our response was always ‘we’ve never taken out PPI, so we couldn’t possibly be owed anything. Except, despite having a guaranteed income and ALWAYS refusing any kind of payment insurance, when we looked into it (mostly out of curiosity) we had been charged over £10k for services we actually believed we’d refused. Turns out we hated compensation culture because we believed banks could be trusted, and we were wrong.
From Moneysavingexpert: This issue began when Audi and Volkswagen (VW), which are both part of the VW Group, faced regulatory action over some of their diesel cars in the US in 2015. The controversy, which became known as 'Dieselgate', has since grown to include other vehicle manufacturers. The group legal claims allege, broadly, that the carmakers used illegal 'defeat devices' in their diesel vehicles to cheat the tests done by regulators to check their emissions levels, before approving vehicles for sale. Law firms argue that affected cars and vans produce more harmful nitrogen oxide (NOx) pollution than advertised – and were therefore mis-sold to consumers. In other words, you could be due money back because: You'd never have bought the vehicle had you known about the alleged emissions flaws. You paid more for it than you otherwise would have. If the car or van had to be fixed to comply with emissions standards, the fix itself may have led to worse fuel efficiency or worse performance – potentially lowering its value or creating added costs, for which you may be able to claim damages.
So how by owning the diesel car has the owner been financially disadvantaged. A crime against the environment maybe but not the owner.
No idea, honestly. Every time we were asked, we refused. With hindsight there were possibly times we weren’t asked, and at least one bank acct, where the ‘extras’ included PPI
If you bought a diesel car expecting £x depreciation, then VW were found to have cheated their emissions test, your car just dropped x pls £5k in value, so that £5k is the fault of VW.
Over the last 30 years I’ve owned several VW diesels and one Audi. At no stage do I feel I was taken advantage of - can’t remember any recall or remedial action being needed to any of them.
If you’re happy that’s all that matters (to you). However, you should appreciate that VAG are guilty of a massive fraud, and it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that people were left out of pocket by that fraud
Similar situation with Mercedes …. A firm ( PSM or something ) are handling a block claim on behalf of several owners / lessees between 2009 and 2020.
My Skoda Yeti was one of the specific engines impacted and I had a recall to 'fix' the problem which involved time and money (albeit anominal taking it to the nearest authorised Skoda dealership) The fix caused a problem of the vehicle frequently going into 'limp mode' and at least once a week the heat cycle burning off excess build up of particulates in the DPF. Due to the short journeys I was making that usually meant the cooling fan ran for several minutes after the journey completed and the smell of burning was noticeable. I had to book another visit to the garage to 'fix' the 'fix' which meant spending most of the entire morning hanging around the repairers which was pretty much in the middle of nowhere. As someone retired it was not particularly a problem but anyone working would have been considerable inconvenienced. Have I claimed for compensation?. No, for a number of reasons. Joining the 'class action' would likely line the pockets of the legal team driving it and any compensation (at least a sizeable proportion) would likely be swallowed up in legal fees. Furthermore, the small print I was told by someone suggested any losses incurred should the case against the manufacturers fail could be passed to the plaintiffs. The legal team had everything to gain and little to lose on that basis. The case will drag on for years anyway. Since I bought the car from new, I have had trouble free experience (apart from the two visits mentioned) and servicing over 10 years has been routine with no hidden extra costs and since I do little mileage I anticipate many more years of use (by which time I will probably be too old to be driving around anyway). Depreciation in my case for whatever reason is therefore irrelevant. The main reason though, is that although VAG and many other manufacturers basically committed fraud they have already incurred huge costs. A massive hit in terms of a compensation fund (albeit US buyers got a deal whereas UK EU have not) would probably be passed on to future purchasers in terms of higher prices. Whenever companies fall foul of the law the fines always seem to end up in Govt coffers rather than the people who lost out, be it gas, phone, internet,water or electric consumers. EDIT... Caveat.. Some engineers state the fix could shorten the life of the Catalytic Convertor which would be expensive, IF that were the situation and mine failed early then I would be looking at some form of compo for that specifically, not general depreciation etc
My understanding is that the proportion of damages taken by the lawyers is limited to a specific proportion and will be offset in any event by the costs recovery from the manufacturer which will almost certainly follow in the event of a successful claim. Additionally insurance will be in place so the claimants are not on the hook for manufacturer's costs if the claim does not succeed. I have a car which is potentially claimable, however I won't claim because I have had no problems and can't honestly say that if I had known I would have done anything differently, and certainly wouldn't be willing to sign a witness statement to that effect.
My original post was after seeing an advert from a legal firm during the Madrid/City game. Just can`t get over the feeling that it`s greedy Solicitors moving on from PPI/Medical/Accident claims who are trying to get rich(er) and appeal to desperate people.
We get it; you disapprove. But that doesn’t mean that absolutely no one has a genuine claim due to them being out of pocket from what the whole world knows is an actual massive case of fraud. It stands to reason - if there was fraud, then someone has ‘lost’ something. Just because you believe your loss to be non existent, doesn’t mean everyone else would reach the same conclusion.
Some undoubtedly benefitted from road tax though my previous car a BMW 520 Efficient Dynamics qualified for a £30 per year road tax just squeezing in under the threshold. BMW fiddled the emmisions but I think in a legal way as the car always started in efficient dynamics mode which is how it would do any CO2 test. You could drive it in this mode which had dampened throttle response, reduced Aircon and various other fuel saving tricks but I doubt many did - my first act after stating the engine was to turn it into sport mode there was a comfort mode in between which I think is what most would use I think the fact it was perfectly possible to drive in ED mode made BMW stat within the law and it saved me a fortune in road tax- and I still got almost 50mpg out of the car - real figure over 110 000 miles of driving but not the theoretical 60mpg - but I didnt believe that was ever realistic anyway. I think the VW/AG and others had a different approach which wasn't available in normal driving which is why they broke the law - still got people better road tax though
What is the situation if you happen to have Disraeli Gears? Mine keep doing random things TBH. One minute we are firing on all cylinders & then we seem to go a bit random. The car has a solid rhythm section TBH. Just puzzled?
I can assure you Helen, having worked in the PPI complaints industry as a contractor for a major bank for nearly ten years until the arse fell out of it at the end of 2020 (job searching in covid times was fun…); never wanting it and never signing for it is not a particularly strong indicator that someone wouldn’t have had it! Also, thinking you never paid for it wasn’t always the case either (I’m sure you did thoroughly check, I’m not talking about you personally). The banks have got away with it somewhat (from a reputational point of view) as ppi became something that was ridiculed. The claims management companies and their adverts, phone calls; they got very annoying to people and deflected the focus away from what was actually arguably a national scandal. The banks don’t compensate to the tune of billions - each - for no reason. They arguably should have been given absolute pelters over it. It cost them a lot of money but in terms of customer loss, reputational damage, I’m not aware of any that suffered that. In the interest of balance I should point out that my professional experience in the field pointed out that not all ppi was missold at all - and in fact in many cases was a solid and good value for money product. Not everyone got compensated. For what it’s worth I liked the cmc’s. Every time I saw an ad for someone like Gladstone Brooks I figured that would be another three months on my contract!
I remember them. You probably picked that up in a bargain bin at EGS. I thing PMG are shopping for an equivalent bargain.
I was going to reply to a couple of posts but I picked yours for a particular reason I'll come on to. We have been subject to a hidden agenda not to claim for compensation and I take an opposite view. The PPi issue was a case of greedy corporations pulling the wool over our eyes on an industrial scale and for many years. When I get the chance to do it I will hold them to account. Its worth a special mention to Yorkshire bank who were among others who even when the scandal broke lied about having charged it to people and were fined by the FCA. I actually enjoy my chance to hold these people's feet to the fire, even if its only in a small way. I bought a brand new BMW in 2009 and have a qualifying claim. That is IF there can be a claim. The arguments are novel and unproven. There are a couple of no win no fee solicitors giving it a go. Since 2013 this means that the client (us) pays over up to 30% of the claim for the privilige of legal representation. Cars were fitted with a "cheat mode" whereby they realised they were on a fuel test and operated in a way to maximise the results. This deluded people into thinking their cars were greener than they actually were. It seems the financial loss is two fold. First your car did not do what you thought it would to the gallon and never could. Second when all this broke, the desirability on the second hand market went down To Farnhams BMW, of which I currently have the same car, complete with its F11 engine which has plastic tensioners for the timing chain which collapse and trash the engine. Mine went on start up so the engine was repairable at a hell of a price but most are turned into instant junk. BMW have been aware of this for many years and in some smaller markets (eg Ireland) have had a recall. In the UK and USA they refused on cost grounds. In the USA, guess what? class action and a compensation scheme. Here? Nix. I get that engineers get it wrong it's the cover up and stuff the consumer attitude that bugs me. Congrats on sticking with my longest ever post
