View Single Post
Old March 8th, 2018, 15:49   #1291
bizzle
Veteran Member
 
bizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Southern California
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by halbert View Post
Which is a change from the original settlement language. Sigh.
How can I find out if I have to actually surrender the vehicle? Which means paying for a tow to the dealer for no good reason. The letter implies it when it talks about surrendering for buyback...but doesn't really say anything about the restitution payment requirement.
I guess you can interpret it as a change, but some of us were pointing out over a year ago that it was the only reasonable way to interpret the settlement terms. This issue was brought up during the stripping era and the people arguing against it were, like here, predisposed to believe they were right and VW was wrong. The judge ruled back then that cars had to be operable so that's an old change but even under the original black letter text the cars were required to be able to drive under their own power (which non-registered cars can't legally on the streets, which is the logic some of us tried to explain before the stripping modification and the logic the judge used to reach his conclusion).
bizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.05984 seconds with 8 queries
[Output: 15.64 Kb. compressed to 14.11 Kb. by saving 1.54 Kb. (9.81%)]