Sample Letter to Object - Send Yours By 9/16

I have read this forum occasionally - when researching the TDI before purchasing one, when looking for people with experience with towing, and occasionally since the scandal broke.

I joined recently so I could post a sample letter for people who want to object to the settlement. It can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IitkDWZ-g_utPu0Juahm490JHnQgHDF3Qolb7zouIxw/edit?usp=sharing

I thought this might be useful to people because it contains what the court requires, which can be found on page 22 of the booklet they sent us. Your letter might not be accepted if it does not contain what the court requires. Specifically, they require:

- name, address, and telephone numnber
- a specific statement that you are objecting
- your reasons for objecting, along with supporting materials
- The VIN of your vehicle and the dates you owned or leased it
- Your signature and date.

I am not a lawyer, but I think my letter contains all of this and is in a format that the court will expect. The part before "I still own the vehicle" is the part that will be most useful to you. Just put your name, address, phone, VIN, and dates in.

The part after are my specific objections. You might have your own that are different. From what I read in these forums, some of you will disagree with mine. So be it, put your own reasons in. I do recommend that you be as specific as possible with facts and speak to your own loss. That is why I left my reasons in for this sample - so you can see the detail as an example. If you agree with my reasons, you are free to use my exact language, but I'd recommend adding your own dollar values to replace mine.

You must send three copies of this letter, postmarked by September 16, one to each of the addresses listed in the address block of the letter.

I hope this helps someone - the more letters they get, they more likely the settlement will be enhanced!

Well written response.

no thanks

willie
on the low-tolerance for whiners Gulf of Mexico

For many '15s the value IS BASED ON MSRP. Your letter is not right. The factor of .717 has been picked out of someone's butt. It is .717 x MSRP. Does a new car depreciate 28% out of the box? The .717 is absurd. Yes, NADA values have been used for some. But you should address both cases.

Airpizz6 said:

For many '15s the value IS BASED ON MSRP. Your letter is not right. The factor of .717 has been picked out of someone's butt. It is .717 x MSRP. Does a new car depreciate 28% out of the box? The .717 is absurd. Yes, NADA values have been used for some. But you should address both cases.

Click to expand...

Airpizz6, my letter is factually correct. For my vehicle, a 2015 Passat, the value was based on NADA trade-in value, not MSRP.
My understanding from reading the documents and talking to a friend who is an attorney and class member is that the most persuasive objections will detail how the class member (in this case, me) objecting is personally harmed or not made whole. General criticisms of the settlement will not have much weight. That is why I specifically detailed my case.
The factor of .717 is not arbitrary. They looked at the average NADA trade-in value for 2015 models where NADA had enough data to determine a value (for example, the Passats), relative to MSRP. That was .717. Then they applied that to models where NADA did not have enough data for a value. I agree that is not a solid method, for reasons similar to why I think even the NADA retail value being insufficient for the 2015 model year. However, this method is not relevant to my situation.

Let's try this again. You don't want NADA values used for 2015 models. You'd rather use MSRP. If you win that argument, the .717 factor will be used. A '15 Passat TDI SEL stickered just under $35K. The resultant value would still be under $25K. You'd win the argument but gain nothing.
What I don't understand is how your buyback offer (incl restitution) was $4100 less than your out the door total. I bought the same car in August '15 and the buyback figure is $4500 more than my total outlay. And I did no negotiating whatever.

Thank you for posting this, I may borrow your format. I am the owner of a high mileage '13 Passat and have been on the fence about whether to object or not.

Although many do not fall into my same situation and may not agree, I feel strongly that it is unfair for VW to adjust our compensation based on a "standard mileage" when their marketing clearly indicated that the car was expected to provide "long range without sacrifice." I agree that the car has provide me with the range advertised, but disagree with the idea that I should now be penalized for doing what I was told the car was capable of and reasonably expected to do (drive further than the 'standard').

My participation/acceptance in the CAS may be largely affected by the reduction in compensation once we get to that point, as I am not in a position to park the car and have an 80mile/day commute.

tdiDreaming said:

Thank you for posting this, I may borrow your format. I am the owner of a high mileage '13 Passat and have been on the fence about whether to object or not.

Although many do not fall into my same situation and may not agree, I feel strongly that it is unfair for VW to adjust our compensation based on a "standard mileage" when their marketing clearly indicated that the car was expected to provide "long range without sacrifice." I agree that the car has provide me with the range advertised, but disagree with the idea that I should now be penalized for doing what I was told the car was capable of and reasonably expected to do (drive further than the 'standard').

My participation/acceptance in the CAS may be largely affected by the reduction in compensation once we get to that point, as I am not in a position to park the car and have an 80mile/day commute.

Click to expand...

You can always object, and stay in the CAS. It's not an oject and get out, or not object and stay in thing. I'm objecting, but want the fix and cash, not a buyback, which is the core of my objection, I'm being asked to accept a settlement that may not happen, leaving an option that is unacceptable to me as the only relief in the CAS. The opt out date occurs before adequate information to make a decision is available, so throw darts at a board and make the decision.

autdi said:

You can always object, and stay in the CAS.

Click to expand...

In fact, in order to object, you must stay in the CAS. If you opt out, you aren't able to also submit an objection.