• Text Only
Voting History
rated:
Edit to eliminate prior notes, and post link to VW press release (6/28/2016):  http://media.vw.com/release/1214/

Member Summary
Most Recent Posts
lol I had the same thought. I'm looking around and it looks like it's already priced into the market. Make sure you fact... (more)

curtster (Jul. 02, 2016 @ 1:04p) |

Hmmm... Anyone do cashout refinancing on used automobiles?

gatzdon (Aug. 31, 2016 @ 10:13a) |

PenFed

adamc (Sep. 02, 2016 @ 6:54a) |

Quite a few details were provided here. Keep in mind this just covers the 2.0 engines, the 3.0 still has to be decided
Note:All values are based off "NADA Clean Trade In value" from September 2015, prior to the scandal

Emissions fix

  • There is still no approved emissions fix, VW is still working on it and must get CARB and EPA approval prior to starting



Owners

  • Every owner will get "owner restitution" calculated at Value*0.20 + $2,986.73, with a guaranteed minimum of $5,100 
  • All owners will be given the option of selling their vehicle back at the NADA value + restitution, or may keep the car + emissions fix + restitution
  • If you sold your vehicle after September 18, 2015, the seller and the buyer will split the compensation equally
  • These values are in the link, approximately halfway down the page



Loans

  • For owners currently underwater on their loans even after restitution, VW will forgive the entire amount at buyback
  • For 3rd party loans, VW will give up to 130% of the restitution + buyback amount



Lease Termination

  • If you are currently leasing, you may cancel immediately + 1/2 the restitution given to owners, or continue to lease + emissions fix + 1/2 restitution



Other

  • VW has to contribute $2.7B towards an environmental fund whose purpose will be to reduce NOx emissions by at least the same amount they caused
  • VW must spend $2 billion to promote non-polluting cars (“zero emissions vehicles” or “ZEV”, over and above any amount Volkswagen previously planned to spend on such technology
Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.

The real interesting question becomes who is a "customer" is it everybody who has ever owned one of the cars? Is it the person who bought the car new? If it's the former, I think I could make a lot of money "buying" a totaled one from a local junkyard...then junking it.

mwa423 said:   The real interesting question becomes who is a "customer" is it everybody who has ever owned one of the cars? Is it the person who bought the car new? If it's the former, I think I could make a lot of money "buying" a totaled one from a local junkyard...then junking it.
  Seriously: Might have to hit up my local IAAI.

I'm guessing it'll be paid to whomever was the registered owner when the issue became public. Because any owners before or after can't show any damages (real or imaginary).

So what happens when owners go to renew their registration and need a smog check (in CA). Do they have to have modifications to the car decreasing performance to pass?

AbbaZabba said:   So what happens when owners go to renew their registration and need a smog check (in CA). Do they have to have modifications to the car decreasing performance to pass?
  
Maybe yes...

http://blog.caranddriver.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-t...

"if Volkswagen does issue a recall, some states (particularly California and some that follow Partial Zero Emission Vehicle standards) may prevent owners from renewing their registration if they don’t complete the fix."

 

jerosen said:   
AbbaZabba said:   So what happens when owners go to renew their registration and need a smog check (in CA). Do they have to have modifications to the car decreasing performance to pass?
  
Maybe yes...

http://blog.caranddriver.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-t... 

"if Volkswagen does issue a recall, some states (particularly California and some that follow Partial Zero Emission Vehicle standards) may prevent owners from renewing their registration if they don’t complete the fix."

 

  I see some opportunity in CA used car sales

SummerSoFar said:   That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.
  Don't forget the emotional distress caused by knowing you have been polluting the environment for several years by driving your VW... Knowing that your actions have contributed to Global Warming... Knowing that your actions jeopardized the future of our planet. That kind of emotional distress has to be worth something. I don't necessarily believe any of that crap, but I can see a good lawyer making that argument.   

alamo11 said:   
mwa423 said:   The real interesting question becomes who is a "customer" is it everybody who has ever owned one of the cars? Is it the person who bought the car new? If it's the former, I think I could make a lot of money "buying" a totaled one from a local junkyard...then junking it.
  Seriously: Might have to hit up my local IAAI.

  
any audi deals to be had?

"Any Audi deals to be had?"

Only if CA-smog (+10 states included, like NY and MA) A3's (the only 2.0L I4 TDi Audi included into dieselgate) can pass the other states EPA rules and then they would get cheap fast... (the other smaller Audi models only carry the 3.0L V6 TDi)

My car inspection month is April, so it happens that just yesterday I took my car in for inspection and got my new sticker.  Now I'm good for another year.

It also happens that I live in a region recently announced to be among those having the cleanest air in the USA.

Point of information:  when my car was inspected there was no "smog check" or any other kind of emissions check.  This is nothing new.  It has always been like this here where I live.

So my forecast is for thousands of these "dirty" Volkswagens to be re-sold into regions like mine, where the lack of emissions compliance will never raise a red flag.  California-like rules do not apply everywhere . . . thank goodness.

What's a car inspection, and what is the sticker for? 

Louisiana tags on my cars for as long as militarily possible!

Talking to a guy in NY DMV who had previously registered his car in Georgia.
Asked him about inspections down there. He laugh and said as long as it's got tires and a windshield it passes.
Regulations vary from state to state, unless the feds decide differently.

and I am NOT taking it in to be fixed!!! i like it the way it is,,it runs so much better without all that emission crap on...and i can pass inspection forever !! so cool.

Red55 said:   Talking to a guy in NY DMV who had previously registered his car in Georgia.
Asked him about inspections down there. He laugh and said as long as it's got tires and a windshield it passes..

Lol "pass" here in Michigan there is no inspection. Suckers

From Article said: VW will pay cash compensation to owners who either sell their vehicles back or get them fixed, one of the people briefed on the matter said.

I'm guessing from this line, that you have to be in legal possession of the vehicle AND do something with it in order to get paid.

Now, this is where it could still be huge, frustrating mess for some.  If your vehicle has an issue related to safety or emissions that you have 'ignored', I can see the dealer requiring you to pay for those repairs in order to get the 'fix' from VW and the compensation. 

I can see the buyback value being based on current market value plus a 'premium' set by the court settlement.  There could be a lot of wiggle room in what is the market value.  I'm picturing some insurance adjuster style assessment where they take the bluebook value and subtract the estimated cost of all 'repairs'.

Well, again, in American testing-free venues where compliance is meaningless, these non-compliant cars will retain a large measure of their value.  OTOH, in American venues tough on smog/pollution/etc., these automobiles are most likely unsalable millstones around the owners' necks.

If I owned one of these dogs I'd take my $5,000 and then sell the car straightaway into any one of many regions of the country where its non-compliance is a non-issue.  Having these things "fixed", if they even can be fixed, is a ludicrous idea.

Does anyone know if you are required to submit your car to be "fixed" if you accept the $5k?

It's funny because they don't even know how to fix it yet but they have settled on the payout.

SummerSoFar said:   That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.
  
Anyone who sold one after the scandal has damages.  The value dropped like a stone.
Anyone who has it fixed will have damages.  I say that knowing that a fix hasn't been released.  I base it on physics.  To get better emissions, they'll need to reduce power or MPG, likely both.  And may need to inject DEF (adds more to the cost of ownership).  Owners payed a premium for these cars to get the performance and MPG.

The only reason that people are not screaming bloody murder is that the cheat is good enough to by-pass all current OBD-II / Emissions scans.  If those tests were updated to "catch" VWs, none of us would be able to register, drive, or sell our cars.  They're technically "not legal" now - it's just that they're not being caught.

Also, consumer protection laws in some states allow for "triple" damages in the case of intentional fraud.

The offer to-date has been $500 VISA card.  And $500 of dealer credit (there is a big margin on this) - it has to be used in a year.

Still sound like $5k is a good deal?

A buyback, with depreciated value, almost certainly won't be a good deal.

Look, I paid good money to get a car that can tow, has good torque, and can pull off 40mpg @ 80mph.   I expect it to retain resale value.  I expect to be able to register it.   They sold it as "clean Diesel" technology.    If you take away any of those things, I'm not getting what I paid for.



 

I don't own a TDI. But, I breathe in the polluted air - don't I have damages as well? New FW way - breathe...profit!!

Just a little Thursday sarcasm - laugh a little.

wilesmt said:   Does anyone know if you are required to submit your car to be "fixed" if you accept the $5k?

It's funny because they don't even know how to fix it yet but they have settled on the payout.

  I'm drawing analogies from the Ford/Firestone fiasco, but Ford did not pay the customers without some proof that the tires were replaced.  If you didn't have a dealer replace the tires, you had to cut out the physical DOT numbers from the Firestone tires and have a dealership mail in your claim to get reimbursed.

I would think that whatever VW does, it would be administered through their dealership network and would require the car to physically be 'fixed' or to get compensated.

examiner44 said:   
SummerSoFar said:   That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.
  Don't forget the emotional distress caused by knowing you have been polluting the environment for several years by driving your VW... Knowing that your actions have contributed to Global Warming... Knowing that your actions jeopardized the future of our planet. That kind of emotional distress has to be worth something. I don't necessarily believe any of that crap, but I can see a good lawyer making that argument.   

  
I know someone who bought a brand new TDI ~4 weeks before the scandal became public.  He actively avoids driving it for exactly this reason -- a fervently held belief that he is personally ruining the environment.  Real or imagined, these people exist.  At last check, his brand new car has sub-2000 miles on it months after purchase.

mwa423 said:   The real interesting question becomes who is a "customer" is it everybody who has ever owned one of the cars? Is it the person who bought the car new? If it's the former, I think I could make a lot of money "buying" a totaled one from a local junkyard...then junking it.
The first "goodwill" $1000 package was specifically offered to people who owned the car on the date that the scandal became public, though I don't recall what that date is right now.  Sometime in September 2015, IIRC.

I can only assume that if real, this will be structured similarly.

As for the 'contributing to global warming', the VWs don't any more than any other car. The gasses (nitrogen oxides) that are being over-emitted are not greenhouse gasses. They are gasses that build up in urban environments and affect human breathing, create 'smog', acid rain, etc. In rural environments they break down and are not an issue.

http://www.icopal-noxite.co.uk/nox-problem/nox-pollution.aspx

SpeedingLunatic said:   As for the 'contributing to global warming', the VWs don't any more than any other car. The gasses (nitrogen oxides) that are being over-emitted are not greenhouse gasses. They are gasses that build up in urban environments and affect human breathing, create 'smog', acid rain, etc. In rural environments they break down and are not an issue.

http://www.icopal-noxite.co.uk/nox-problem/nox-pollution.aspx

  It will just turn us all into giggling clowns ?  ( nitrous oxide )

kb2120 said:     It will just turn us all into giggling clowns ?  ( nitrous oxide )
  
Nitrous Oxide is N2O. Oxides of nitrogen (or nitrogen oxides) are NO and NO2. 

N2O is a greenhouse gas NO2 and NO contribute to ozone. 

It is worth keeping some perspective. These cars are cleaner than their predecessors (2008 and older), which are still on the road.

Further, they definitely have a fix... it was just rejected by California. Look at the Passat, for instance. Compared to all other pre-2015 VW diesels of interest, the Passat emits about half of the NO gases. Why? The DEF treatment. All of the 2015 vehicles have this now. So, they could very easily double the cycles on the exhaust system and the problem should largely be solved (give or take); to the driver/maintainer... it would mean filling up the DEF reservoir every ~5k miles instead of every ~10k. Many stations that carry Diesel are beginning to have DEF available at the pump now, so this will be rather easy to fix and many of the Diesel vehicles (not sure on the newer VWs... since we didn't get to see the 2016 models) have the DEF fill valve adjacent to the fuel fill valve.

Further, the 2015 and newer models had another improvement in HP and fuel economy due to reduced friction in the camshaft by reducing the contact points. So, these things can be done. My hope would be that if diesels stay in the market, we get some hybrid Diesel electric models (the Cross Blue was supposed to be that... but this scandal put the brakes on it, at least for now... it was supposed to be ready for a late 2017 model). Heck, if the would at least add the Bluemotion enhancements that they have as options in Europe, that would be great (stop-start... which would reduce emissions in stop and go city traffic and regenerative braking to help reduce the load on the alternator, thus less fuel needed to power electronics).

Here's to hoping something positive comes from this.

mwa423 said:   The real interesting question becomes who is a "customer" is it everybody who has ever owned one of the cars? Is it the person who bought the car new? If it's the former, I think I could make a lot of money "buying" a totaled one from a local junkyard...then junking it.
  If a car changes hand couple times, they will end up with more "customers" than cars.  I bet it is for people who still own the car.  But I heard that car dealership usually check your title to make sure that it's not salvage/rebuilt title before doing recall.  So I guess they would use the same tactic here.

shinobi1 said:   Well, again, in American testing-free venues where compliance is meaningless, these non-compliant cars will retain a large measure of their value.  OTOH, in American venues tough on smog/pollution/etc., these automobiles are most likely unsalable millstones around the owners' necks.

If I owned one of these dogs I'd take my $5,000 and then sell the car straightaway into any one of many regions of the country where its non-compliance is a non-issue.  Having these things "fixed", if they even can be fixed, is a ludicrous idea.

  

As I understand it, the difference here is only a few MPG efficiency and a little bit of performance loss.

People aren't going to export 1000's of cars from CA or other markets just because they now get 48 MPG instead of 51MPG.    Cars will retain most of their value.

As others speculated, I think its very likely the $5000 payment will be only after the car is fixed.   It would be silly to do otherwise or it won't fix the problem as there would be nothing forcing people to fix the cars and I assume most people would like to get $5k and better MPG  at the expense of their car polluting more.

 

After the cars have been fixed??  As I wrote earlier, it is questionable whether these cars can be "fixed" . . . and still remain usable for their intended purpose.  The problem is inherent in the design of the engines.  The factory "fix" was in the now-discovered and disallowed firmware.  I suppose a total engine replacement would fix the cars . . if there exists a drop-in substitute for the existing mal-designed powerplants.  No, I think the answer is to get these cars to regions of the USA where there is a far lower level of scrutiny . . . . or else simply to break them up for parts or to junk them. 

shinobi1 said:   After the cars have been fixed??  As I wrote earlier, it is questionable whether these cars can be "fixed" . . . and still remain usable for their intended purpose.  The problem is inherent in the design of the engines.  The factory "fix" was in the now-discovered and disallowed firmware.  I suppose a total engine replacement would fix the cars . . if there exists a drop-in substitute for the existing mal-designed powerplants.  No, I think the answer is to get these cars to regions of the USA where there is a far lower level of scrutiny . . . . or else simply to break them up for parts or to junk them. 
  
They can be fixed.   Its just a matter of cost and how much needs to be changed.   No they don't have to scrap them all.     The fact that they are talking about fixing them implies that its practical.  Otherwise they'd be talking about scrapping them not fixing them.


http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-qa-volkswagen-scanda... are some solutions?

One is to retrofit the cars with the urea system; urea is ammonia, and they inject it into the combustion process and it cleans up the NOx, which is a component of smog. They also may have to refit them with new catalytic converters and other trap-type converters that will trap a lot of these gases and allow them to be burned off. There also is the software element."

I don't know what this would cost.   $1-2k max?   Just a guess.

 

examiner44 said:   
SummerSoFar said:   That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.
  Don't forget the emotional distress caused by knowing you have been polluting the environment for several years by driving your VW... Knowing that your actions have contributed to Global Warming... Knowing that your actions jeopardized the future of our planet. That kind of emotional distress has to be worth something. I don't necessarily believe any of that crap, but I can see a good lawyer making that argument.   


  Clearly the "emotional distress" is not stressful enough for these owners to find alternative transportation.  Most of these owners are more concerned about getting money without any realized damages, and complaining about if they will reduce the power on their car to fix this issue.

treasurebeacon said:   
examiner44 said:   
SummerSoFar said:   That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.
  Don't forget the emotional distress caused by knowing you have been polluting the environment for several years by driving your VW... Knowing that your actions have contributed to Global Warming... Knowing that your actions jeopardized the future of our planet. That kind of emotional distress has to be worth something. I don't necessarily believe any of that crap, but I can see a good lawyer making that argument.   


  Clearly the "emotional distress" is not stressful enough for these owners to find alternative transportation.  Most of these owners are more concerned about getting money without any realized damages, and complaining about if they will reduce the power on their car to fix this issue.

  

The reality is that the little "dirty" 2.0L motor likely emits much less than the legal 2016 6.7L Ram turbo Diesel.    Until we go to zero emissions (ignoring the environmental impact of batteries) - ALL internal combustion motors are contributing to pollution in one form or another.  Choosing not to drive the VW is a bit silly, IMHO, unless you're really considering the bigger picture. 

dcg9381 said:   
treasurebeacon said:   
examiner44 said:   
SummerSoFar said: SummerSoFar


  

The reality is that the little "dirty" 2.0L motor likely emits much less than the legal 2016 6.7L Ram turbo Diesel


  That's a really really really really good point.

If it was true that is.  But don't let the facts get in the way.

 

wilesmt said:   
If it was true that is.  But don't let the facts get in the way. 

 

Ahh.. Called out. Fair enough, but without any data provided. Did you have anything to contribute other than a challenge?

Here's some facts, at least as close as I can get
* EPA 2010 standards for HD Diesel (NOx) higher than .2 g/bhp-hr. So for a 6.7L Dodge, 350hp HO Diesel, that's 70g/hr
* EPA regulations for passenger car NOx emissions .05g/mi (newer Diesel ). They don't factor in HP



So, say, traveling at 60 miles/hr:
* The dodge truck is allowed to output 70g .
* The VW and Audi cars identified as violators had been certified to meet either the US EPA Tier 2 / Bin 5, which is .05g/mi. That's 3g allowed.


Now, lets factor in that VW was cheating:
Apparently the test that busted VW had an 1.5 grams per mile, over 60 miles in non ideal-hilly conditions. Thats 90g of N0x, so technically you're right, it does pollute more than a modern DEF-equipped 6.7L dodge under non-ideal conditions..

Technically, it's about the same as driving 1.28 6.7L 2010+ spec turbo Diesel trucks, if we test under non-ideal conditions.

I'm not sure that the level of pollution is environment-tragic, especially when we consider that the requirements for passenger-duty diesels have been tightened by a factor of 20x since 2006.

And look, I'm not defending VW, but if you were to scrap vehicles that are killing the environment, you probably shouldn't start with the 2.0L TDIs, even though they are cheating...
 

examiner44 said:   
SummerSoFar said:   That's a nice payday for having zero realized damages.
  Don't forget the emotional distress caused by knowing you have been polluting the environment for several years by driving your VW... Knowing that your actions have contributed to Global Warming... Knowing that your actions jeopardized the future of our planet. That kind of emotional distress has to be worth something. I don't necessarily believe any of that crap, but I can see a good lawyer making that argument.   

  
It could be the case. I remember reading CNN article regarding allergist who was promoting himself (sort of to speak) by driving clean Diesel VW. If I were him I would feel pretty bummed out knowing 1000 of patients might laugh at me now.

is the 5k for orig. owners only?? 

AbbaZabba said:   So what happens when owners go to renew their registration and need a smog check (in CA). Do they have to have modifications to the car decreasing performance to pass?
No worries there, CA doesn't test tailpipe emissions any more for vehicles with OBDII, they just scan for trouble codes (no reference except personal communication with a smog technician, take it as you wish). Even if they did test emissions, the TDIs are programmed to pass by cheating. I smogged my 2009 in November last year with no problem. The car is one grade above a piece of crap economy- and quality-wise and I'm only hanging onto it until VW makes their buyback offer... but passing smog check shouldn't be a problem.

Skipping 92 Messages...
gatzdon said:   Czechmeout said:   
.......

Loans

  • For owners currently underwater on their loans even after restitution, VW will forgive the entire amount at buyback
  • For 3rd party loans, VW will give up to 130% of the restitution + buyback amount

..........

 

  
Hmmm... Anyone do cashout refinancing on used automobiles?


PenFed



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017