VW deisel scandal, too late to claim?

Mercdriver

Winning is one thing.  If substantive damages are not proven, then it could be a nominal award.  What if there is a condition of a minimum level of fee payable to the lawyers?  Remember that winning damages doesn't mean that all plaintiff's legal costs are paid.  Anyone signing up to any scheme should check contracts with a fine tooth-comb, and it's best not to rely on said ambulance chasers to give independent advice.  In UK courts, actual loss has to be proven.  

Karlos1544

Thank you so much for all the views everyone. The articulation of loss isn't straight forward - I still have the car so the loss suffered would be additional running costs (no idea if there is or how to quantify) and then when I come to sell the vehicle, does this scandal reduce the value and if so, how to evidence that. So would have to seek legal advice on those issues.
The main gripe is that I was sold something that was not as described by the manufacturer and frankly annoyed at a large corporate taking advantage of consumers. Whether that equates to an proven loss is something I need to investigate.
Thanks again for the views, 

AdrianC

sheramber said:

AdrianC said:

The only extant court case has long since closed to new claimants. Nobody knows whether they will win.

Other organisations may well be offering the opportunity to be part of other claim groups. Nobody knows whether they will get anywhere, even if the main claim wins.

None of Mojo's claimed losses are even remotely tangible, and they are certainly not legally enforceable in any normal circumstance. There is no evidence that VAG breached the rules on the applicable European tests. They were found to have breached the (very different, and far stricter) US tests, but they're not relevant to UK claims.

The German courts do not agree with you 
https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/volkswagen-buy-dieselgate-cars-germany-top-court-200525061920051.html

Did you actually bother to read that?
The German courts (who have no jurisdiction in the UK) amended a previous ruling, in which a court had ordered VW to buy a vehicle back, but allowed for depreciation - to disregard the depreciation.

AdrianC

sheramber said:

AdrianC said:

The only extant court case has long since closed to new claimants. Nobody knows whether they will win.

Other organisations may well be offering the opportunity to be part of other claim groups. Nobody knows whether they will get anywhere, even if the main claim wins.

None of Mojo's claimed losses are even remotely tangible, and they are certainly not legally enforceable in any normal circumstance. There is no evidence that VAG breached the rules on the applicable European tests. They were found to have breached the (very different, and far stricter) US tests, but they're not relevant to UK claims.

The German courts do not agree with you 
https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/volkswagen-buy-dieselgate-cars-germany-top-court-200525061920051.html

Did you actually bother to read that?
The German courts (who have no jurisdiction in the UK) amended a previous ruling, in which a court had ordered VW to buy a vehicle back, but allowed for depreciation - to disregard the depreciation.

neilmcl

Karlos1544 said:

Thank you so much for all the views everyone. The articulation of loss isn't straight forward - I still have the car so the loss suffered would be additional running costs (no idea if there is or how to quantify) and then when I come to sell the vehicle, does this scandal reduce the value and if so, how to evidence that. So would have to seek legal advice on those issues.
The main gripe is that I was sold something that was not as described by the manufacturer and frankly annoyed at a large corporate taking advantage of consumers. Whether that equates to an proven loss is something I need to investigate.
Thanks again for the views, 

What "additional running costs" and it's been proven that overall there has been no adverse affect on used car prices as a direct result of the "scandal".

Taking the "not as described" point further, do you have any documentation to suggest VW has done this. VW UK has never published any information or based any marketing on their cars with regards reduced Nox emissions here in the UK, or Europe for that matter, and I would very much doubt that any customer would've based their purchase of a VW because of this.

AdrianC

Karlos1544 said:

The main gripe is that I ... (am) frankly annoyed at a large corporate taking advantage of consumers. Whether that equates to an proven loss is something I need to investigate.

Very simple. It doesn't.

You can only vote with your feet in future transactions.

As far as depreciation goes, you still have the car now - five years after the news broke, and up to 11 years after the car was built. That is far longer than the typical car ownership in the UK, and would go against any argument that you were dissatisfied with the car.

Obviously, this assumes it's one of the affected vehicles, and that you didn't choose to purchase it after the news broke.

JamoLew

you might find it hard to claim against anything relating to deisel

oldagetraveller1

JamoLew said:

you might find it hard to claim against anything relating to deisel

Or even Diesel, a proper noun as in Dr. Diesel.

sheramber

AdrianC said:

sheramber said:

AdrianC said:

The only extant court case has long since closed to new claimants. Nobody knows whether they will win.

Other organisations may well be offering the opportunity to be part of other claim groups. Nobody knows whether they will get anywhere, even if the main claim wins.

None of Mojo's claimed losses are even remotely tangible, and they are certainly not legally enforceable in any normal circumstance. There is no evidence that VAG breached the rules on the applicable European tests. They were found to have breached the (very different, and far stricter) US tests, but they're not relevant to UK claims.

The German courts do not agree with you 
https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/volkswagen-buy-dieselgate-cars-germany-top-court-200525061920051.html

Did you actually bother to read that?
The German courts (who have no jurisdiction in the UK) amended a previous ruling, in which a court had ordered VW to buy a vehicle back, but allowed for depreciation - to disregard the depreciation.

If they didn't breach any  European rules- as you claim- then why are they having to buy back the car? 

AdrianC

sheramber said:

AdrianC said:

sheramber said:

AdrianC said:

The only extant court case has long since closed to new claimants. Nobody knows whether they will win.

Other organisations may well be offering the opportunity to be part of other claim groups. Nobody knows whether they will get anywhere, even if the main claim wins.

None of Mojo's claimed losses are even remotely tangible, and they are certainly not legally enforceable in any normal circumstance. There is no evidence that VAG breached the rules on the applicable European tests. They were found to have breached the (very different, and far stricter) US tests, but they're not relevant to UK claims.

The German courts do not agree with you 
https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/volkswagen-buy-dieselgate-cars-germany-top-court-200525061920051.html

Did you actually bother to read that?
The German courts (who have no jurisdiction in the UK) amended a previous ruling, in which a court had ordered VW to buy a vehicle back, but allowed for depreciation - to disregard the depreciation.

If they didn't breach any  European rules- as you claim- then why are they having to buy back the car? 

Because a court ordered them to.

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to show us exactly which bit of the relevant NEDC testing protocol and Euro5 standards they breached?