Should I join the VW Class action - Slater & Gordon - January 2017

[QUOTE=suzi_singer;72720859]Hi, I don't want to appear greedy, however it feels as though the legal firms handling the group actions in this case against VW are being greedy themselves. 30% is a 1/3 of any potential pay out times over 40,000 claimants. The legal firm I approached indicated that I risked losing out by not joining their action as VW could argue that the sum awarded (should the claimants win) would represent the full sum and an end to the matter. This neither seems fair nor does it ring true and I wanted to ask, where do people like us go for fair and proper advice in this? I feel inclined to let the group action go ahead and take on VW as a small claims case by myself but it seems overwhelming to think I could possibly take on a corporate of this size myself.[/QUOTE]

I've highlighted the important bit for you - 30% of nothing is nothing - assuming you're in the UK what's the basis of your claim ?

Crag30 wrote: »

So you think having the update to our Audi's doesn't come at a cost? It's just cost me over£400 to get mine sorted, ie have the update removed. (not by Audi)
There was a chance that a new DPF could have been fitted at a cost of over £1000, to fix the problem, but then the new DPF could have to be replaced next year, and so forth. So removing the software is the cheapest option.
This problem is becoming quite common on a lot of VAG cars.
Non VAG car owners may whinge about owners asking for compensation, claiming they bought the cars for 'saving the planet', but did we really deserve this expense and trouble that the manufacturer created? If removing the cheat software worked then fine, but it's created another problem for a lot of people

Read what K3lvc wrote properly before you put both feet into your very wide mouth.

K3lvc was referring to the percentage to be paid to the lawyers from any payout. He was saying 70% of something is better than 100% of nothing. (there is a more colloquial way of putting this but I suspect '!!!!!! all' will be picked up by the anti-swear filter).

The reason why the litigators are charging 30% is because they are taking the financial risk of undertaking the action. Civil litigation is neither trivial or risk free.

My wife and I have been suing our surveyor for negligence in (not) spotting over £100k of repairs needed to a house. The action has been going on for 8 years and legal fees are at 80k. The defendants (his insurance company) have offered a third of what we were asking for plus our costs. We could take the risk of going to court but the other side would then put in a section 36 offer which would mean that if we were not to get a higher offer at court, then costs could be awarded against us. We've been reluctantly pragmatic and settled and are hoping that the assessed costs will still leave us with money coming from the defendant. It's not guaranteed.

That is the real risk of court action. S+G are taking the percentage because they are taking the financial risk.

There is absolutely nothing stopping you from suing VAG yourself. But you will have to pay your legal fees in advance, pay the court fees, pay your expert witnesses, and hope you succeed. You NEVER get back all you spend even if costs are awarded in your favour. You will not be suing them, but likely their insurance company.