Was told they are mailing me a letter today

Bought a 2.0 2 months ago, submitted docs and they were accepted and validated. Been sitting for a month now and the 800 number tells me it is because other claims were submitted at the same time as mine. People that were trying to see how much they could get, fake claims but slows up the process. Called today and they told me a letter has been mailed out to me. Any ideas what the letter could be or anyone in a similar situation that has already gotten a letter?

Can you clarify? Owner or dealer? Salvage or clean title? Is your car registered? What step number are you at in the portal? Were you told you'd only receive a letter and not an update to your portal or an email?

I am in the same boat for the car I bought in June. Both with part 2 of the fix and Bosch.

fookin said:

Can you clarify? Owner or dealer? Salvage or clean title? Is your car registered? What step number are you at in the portal? Were you told you'd only receive a letter and not an update to your portal or an email?

Click to expand...

Owner, clean title ,step 15, car is registered. was told they were just auditing my offer letter because of other claims and that was the hold up. Then today was told over the phone they mailed me a letter yesterday, they dont know the contents, and said I would not recieve an update on portal or email. They also said some offer letters are mailed without being put on the portal but I have never heard that before.

And they overnighted it fed ex to me from auburn hills.

Motodude said:

Owner, clean title ,step 15, car is registered. was told they were just auditing my offer letter because of other claims and that was the hold up. Then today was told over the phone they mailed me a letter yesterday, they dont know the contents, and said I would not recieve an update on portal or email. They also said some offer letters are mailed without being put on the portal but I have never heard that before.

Click to expand...

Interestingly, I was told that too - that I'd be getting an offer letter soon without an email or portal update. However, mine is a salvage title that's apparently on hold as per numerous discussions in thread titled "...rejecting non-clean titles". To further confuse, that statement they gave me last week about the letter was contradicted by a call I made yesterday where the woman at the VW settlement line told me that wouldnt' happen. Good luck. Please keep us informed of any ghost letter you get that is outside of any email or portal update. It would be an interesting anecdote.

It was a generic letter saying they are looking into the claims I have made and will be cancelling unfounded claims. Any claims I make now will slow down any claims I have in process. I got multiple letters for each email I have used.

Motodude said:

It was a generic letter saying they are looking into the claims I have made and will be cancelling unfounded claims. Any claims I make now will slow down any claims I have in process. I got multiple letters for each email I have used.

Click to expand...

Hope you didn't lose too much sleep over the letter...

Motodude said:

It was a generic letter saying they are looking into the claims I have made and will be cancelling unfounded claims. Any claims I make now will slow down any claims I have in process. I got multiple letters for each email I have used.

Click to expand...

What does that even mean? I had my first two fly thru no problems. Now, as you have described, over a month and haven't moved. The settlement said 20 days, but that must have meant if they felt like it. How hard is it in this day in age to assess a prior owners claim? This is beyond bull****.

They actually admitted mine might take longer because I have several claims? *** I didn't get a discount when I paid for them. I am contemplating filing an appeal in the settlement court. What class action attorney settles a case with no deadlines on when compliance has to be complete?

Then to add insult to injury, they lift the stop sell, flood the market with Audi owned cars while they delay the fix so the consumer gets stuck holding the bag???Why wouldn't the fix details be public information, after all, we are the consumer. The class action attorneys are either terrible stupid, or just wanted to get their money and get out. What attorney settles a case with no idea when their client is supposed to receive what it is they settled for in the first place?

Maybe we need to start a little organized database of unhappy owners and petition to have the settlement reopened?

I wouldn't actually call the flippers (you seem to be one) consumers. To me "consumers" are those who actually bought the cars for legitimate transportation purposes. Flippers bought them for profit. From my experience with CA suits, they almost never benefit the actual victim, just the Courts, lawyers and maybe the "named plaintiff". It doesn't surprise me at all that the thing is as convoluted and full of holes as it is. My experience (limited) with the legal world hasn't been good, and I try and stay as far from it as possible. I would bet some of this issue with prior owners has been caused by the flippers themselves due to having to enter cars to find if they are eligible and not cancelling the claim when done. A legitimate consumer would have no reason to do this, and normally this would only come into play rarely for them.

I won't apologize for capitalism, it kind of why you had any choice of what you were going to buy to start with. Ever been to a country without capitalism? Great cars, right? More importantly, how hard do you think it would be to administer this settlement more efficiently if there was any incentive to do so? In this day and age with the computer systems and software available and each car having its own Vin #, really?

I would be very reluctant to blame anyone but VAG, I was always taught to make the bed I slept in. From my experience with the law, a settlement is supposed to contain a solution, and that solution is spelled out in the court document as a remedy. Then the time frame for the receipt of the remedy (which is often more important then the remedy itself). The idea of a written settlement is that everyone knows what they are to do, and what they can expect. Anyone purchasing a car after the signed settlement has been more betrayed than the original consumer because they have detrimentally relied on the court to enforce the settlement, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, VAG to do whatever is necessary to expedite the relief to which it agreed. Somehow you would rather blame an honest car enthusiast than the company that created their own mess and is reluctant to put enough effort into finally cleaning it up? One of those two groups has lied to you several times, now, but that's the group telling you its not their fault and they are now telling you its so difficult to administer what they agreed to, and you believe them.....again? How about they are stalling the process to sell the stop sell cars before the public can? How about staling the process because there are a few hundred dealers, and 80,000 cars to repair? But you think its the flippers that might account for a total of 150 cars all together that are causing the delay? You are not the least bit surprised VAG can design and produce an R8, but not a computer program capable of checking a Vin number without getting confused as to whether an actual claim was filed? I have sent them scanned copies of an original title and the car is personally registered to me and the claim deadline was SIX months ago? Does any of their reasoning really make sense to you? Before you answer, don't forget that past performance is the best indication of repeat performance. I personally would trust and believe and flipper on this forum before I believed the non sensical excuses that continue to flow from VAG. Buts thats just me.

I am not blaming anyone, just drawing some distinctions between consumers and the flippers. I also have nothing against the flippers, they are allowed to make a legal profit as is anyone else. The courts and the lawyers dreamed this thing up and it is their fault the wording is the way it is. If you draw up garbage for a document with gaping holes in it, it is the fault of those who crafted it. Your current beef is with the courts and lawyers, they are the ones holding you up.

I actually think VW and Audi are "pacing" the claims process for three reasons:

1. To allow the Q7 that were on dealers lots to be sold.
2. Not have dealers overwhelmed with the labor to do the fix
3. They don't have enough hardware produced to meet the demand yet.

I do agree with you the courts and attorneys did a horrific job (especially since I have been an atty for nearly 30 years). But now, the SUV fix is decided and just needs to be implemented with no involvement from the attorneys or court system, and I will not accept the claims process is so laborious as to take this long. It is impossible. Several years from now the truth will come out (again - it always does) and I firmly believe VAG will be shown to have intentiaonally delayed the claim process. [in the sake of full disclosure, I believe JFK was shot from the front, by a second shooter, so I am a bit of a conspiracy theorist anyway]...

VW can only delay as long as the courts and lawyers allow it to happen. VW lost. The winner gets to dictate the terms unless they are incompetent and allow it to happen. You can't tell me that the US legal system with its unlimited power and funds can't dictate terms to the loser and have them complied with.

Lightflyer1 said:

VW can only delay as long as the courts and lawyers allow it to happen. VW lost. The winner gets to dictate the terms unless they are incompetent and allow it to happen. You can't tell me that the US legal system with its unlimited power and funds can't dictate terms to the loser and have them complied with.

Click to expand...

Can and will mean two different things.

Maybe so, I am no grammar expert. Everyone but you probably understands what I meant.

What is involved in the software fix.

I sent in my information and received a letter that details a fix that will happen in stages but doesn't really explain what they intend to do to the car other than the software update. Has anyone been through the complete fix yet?

Lightflyer1 said:

Maybe so, I am no grammar expert. Everyone but you probably understands what I meant.

Click to expand...

I don't think he is referring to the grammar, but instead I think what psd1 is implying is that there is always an expectation that the litigants will apply common sense and decency in the implementation of the settlement. Its just showing respect for the process and other party. Instead, Volkswagen/Audi is again choosing a path that is doing all parties more harm than good. So he is saying the written word of the settlement would be sufficient and adequate if VW/Audi, respected their loyal customers and actually learned from the situation, and was genuinely attempting to make it right as quickly as they could. It is their choice. They are obviously not putting a great deal of effort, thought, or resource into wrapping this up.

That was actually my entire point, but psd1 made it more clearly and succinctly, in a single sentence.

It is that VW/Audi most certainly have all the necessary tools to (labor, ability to process claims timely, produce replacement parts, support and support immediate service department scheduling for fixes) to make this whole situation become a bad memory, in a short amount of time. HOWEVER, THEY ARE CHOOSING how it is being implemented. Its not the fault of the lawyers, the courts, the "true consumer", the flippers, or the scary German boogeyman hiding under their bed. The fix was approved October 23rd, soon it will be two months ago. How can a few cars with multiple claims ( I agree with you that the majority of Vin #s are likely one or maybe two owner cars as nobody was buying during the scandal), be holding up the process? The mere suggestion of this by VW/Audi should be an affront to anyone's common sense.

The settlement is merely a framework, what VW/Audi decides to do with it, and how they implement it, is entirely up to their choosing. So the difference between "can" and "will" is not grammar at all. Rather, as psd1 is pointing out, it is a clear corporate mandate continuing to express their attitude and lack of respect for their customer. Its way more telling than just grammar.

911c4fan said:

I don't think he is referring to the grammar, but instead I think what psd1 is implying is that there is always an expectation that the litigants will apply common sense and decency in the implementation of the settlement. Its just showing respect for the process and other party. Instead, Volkswagen/Audi is again choosing a path that is doing all parties more harm than good. So he is saying the written word of the settlement would be sufficient and adequate if VW/Audi, respected their loyal customers and actually learned from the situation, and was genuinely attempting to make it right as quickly as they could. It is their choice. They are obviously not putting a great deal of effort, thought, or resource into wrapping this up.
That was actually my entire point, but psd1 made it more clearly and succinctly, in a single sentence.
It is that VW/Audi most certainly have all the necessary tools to (labor, ability to process claims timely, produce replacement parts, support and support immediate service department scheduling for fixes) to make this whole situation become a bad memory, in a short amount of time. HOWEVER, THEY ARE CHOOSING how it is being implemented. Its not the fault of the lawyers, the courts, the "true consumer", the flippers, or the scary German boogeyman hiding under their bed. The fix was approved October 23rd, soon it will be two months ago. How can a few cars with multiple claims ( I agree with you that the majority of Vin #s are likely one or maybe two owner cars as nobody was buying during the scandal), be holding up the process? The mere suggestion of this by VW/Audi should be an affront to anyone's common sense.
The settlement is merely a framework, what VW/Audi decides to do with it, and how they implement it, is entirely up to their choosing. So the difference between "can" and "will" is not grammar at all. Rather, as psd1 is pointing out, it is a clear corporate mandate continuing to express their attitude and lack of respect for their customer. Its way more telling than just grammar.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

VW has shown what they are all about, and it isn't the customer!

Well it wasn't clear to me at all, so psd1 failed in the attempt to make me understand. You tried better but I don't agree with your reasoning.

"I don't think he is referring to the grammar, but instead I think what psd1 is implying is that there is always an expectation that the litigants will apply common sense and decency in the implementation of the settlement. Its just showing respect for the process and other party."

I have to laugh at this statement. In an adversarial legal situation I don't think I have ever seen this happen. The opposite is closer to the truth from what I have seen and/or experienced. VW is entitled to exercise every legal avenue open to them, just like anyone else. Sending claims to the review board is one of them. If they were doing something wrong why isn't the judge holding their feet to the fire?

"The settlement is merely a framework, what VW/Audi decides to do with it, and how they implement it, is entirely up to their choosing. So the difference between "can" and "will" is not grammar at all. Rather, as psd1 is pointing out, it is a clear corporate mandate continuing to express their attitude and lack of respect for their customer."

This isn't true. Nothing in the agreement is "entirely up to their choosing". If it were why would an agreement be needed? They could just do what they want without it. It is the judges responsibility to see that the agreement is adhered to and that they are operating in good faith to complete it. You claim it is merely a "framework" and others claim the exact "letter of the law". It can't be both ways. The judge has some discretion on how things are supposed to be implemented, when there is a difference of opinion.

I would bet money the judge won't touch this again unless VW stops paying the money or makes some huge fiasco of a mistake. The claims review board will handle everything from here on out and be final, unless another legal mess gets started.