Restitution values updated 15 NOV?

rbreding

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Location
Oklahoma City
TDI
2015 JSEL (buyback) 2015 PSEL (buyback) 2016 328d (keeper)
Yep mine went up also on the one that had a previous owner (we purchased second on 7/17). Seems to have gone up for the previous owners restitution that didn't register. was about a 4k jump. Printed a copy....lol
 

DSIre

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2004
Location
Dumont NJ
TDI
2004 Golf TDI (sold), 2011 A3 TDI, 2015 A3 TDI (Returned)
I am curious if $ is equally divided across all years/models?

Or grouped by year or by VW or by audi or something?
 

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
Are we the only ones seeing this??? Can't believe no one else is saying anything.
Well, it's only going to affect owners who bought their cars after 9/18/15--based on who's entered that information in the spreadsheet, that would appear to be about 11% of owners. Of those, it would only affect those who had at least one car (bought after 9/18/15) in an "undecided" status in the portal--once you've gone down the road of submitting documents, it doesn't show you dollar figures any more. So it's going to be a pretty small number of people who will see it.
 

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
Well, it's only going to affect owners who bought their cars after 9/18/15--based on who's entered that information in the spreadsheet, that would appear to be about 11% of owners. Of those, it would only affect those who had at least one car (bought after 9/18/15) in an "undecided" status in the portal--once you've gone down the road of submitting documents, it doesn't show you dollar figures any more. So it's going to be a pretty small number of people who will see it.

Ok fair enough. I'll give you that one. Maybe more people should check hint hint!
 

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
owners who bought their cars after 9/18/15--based on who's entered that information in the spreadsheet, that would appear to be about 11% of owners.
Now that I think about it, this is reasonably consistent with other things we've heard so far. At the approval hearing on 18 Oct, we heard that about 18k people had registered as Eligible Sellers. If this 11% number is representative of the whole population, that would mean that there are about 45k post-9/18/15 owners. That would mean that about 40% of Eligible Sellers had registered and claimed, which would result in us getting about 60% of the remaining compensation--which is about what we're seeing.
 

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
I am curious if $ is equally divided across all years/models?
If the difference we're seeing is actually reflecting the "Post September 2015 Owner Adjustment" (to use the FTC Order's term)*, we should see one of two things:

1. All post-9/18/15 buyers see an equal, and greater than previously shown, but not 100%, percentage of the restitution; or

2. Owners who bought between 9/18/15 and 6/28/16 will see an equal, and greater, but less than 100%, percentage of the restitution; and owners who bought after 6/28/16 will see 100% of the restitution.

There shouldn't be any case where different owners are seeing different, non-100%, portions of the restitution. However, some in either this thread or a different one are suggesting that this is the case.

* I'd like to think this is the case. It would mean they're continuing to move things along smartly (even if not as quickly as we'd hope), and it would also mean good things for my own finances. But I'm skeptical. My A3, bought on 7 Oct 16, is showing very different results in my "main" claims portal account (78% restitution for buyback, 50% for fix) compared to a second account I just set up (100% for both). In the main account, it's showing a different result for the buyback than for the fix. If I change the expected mileage by one mile/month, the fix calculation changes to 78%. But if I change it back to where it was and tell the portal to recalculate, the "fix" restitution goes back to where it was, at 50%.
 

Jimmy Coconuts

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2015
Location
Henderson NV
TDI
2009 JSW, 2010 Jetta, 2011 Q7 Prestige, 2012 A3 Premium, 2013 A3 Premium Plus, 2014 Beetle, 2015 Jetta
So I created a fake login and entered a VIN I saw on craigslist from a couple months ago. I also played around with original date of purchase (9/1/2015, 6/1/2016, and 9/1/2016).

Owner restitution for the 6/1/2016 purchase date = 78.14105745%.

Owner restitution for both 9/1/2015 and 9/1/2016 purchase dates = 100%.

As stated, I'll believe that when I see it.
 

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
If the difference we're seeing is actually reflecting the "Post September 2015 Owner Adjustment" (to use the FTC Order's term)*, we should see one of two things:

1. All post-9/18/15 buyers see an equal, and greater than previously shown, but not 100%, percentage of the restitution; or

2. Owners who bought between 9/18/15 and 6/28/16 will see an equal, and greater, but less than 100%, percentage of the restitution; and owners who bought after 6/28/16 will see 100% of the restitution.

There shouldn't be any case where different owners are seeing different, non-100%, portions of the restitution. However, some in either this thread or a different one are suggesting that this is the case.

* I'd like to think this is the case. It would mean they're continuing to move things along smartly (even if not as quickly as we'd hope), and it would also mean good things for my own finances. But I'm skeptical. My A3, bought on 7 Oct 16, is showing very different results in my "main" claims portal account (78% restitution for buyback, 50% for fix) compared to a second account I just set up (100% for both). In the main account, it's showing a different result for the buyback than for the fix. If I change the expected mileage by one mile/month, the fix calculation changes to 78%. But if I change it back to where it was and tell the portal to recalculate, the "fix" restitution goes back to where it was, at 50%.

While I am not saying you are wrong, what is the business case to not have two clearly defined brackets of people instead of three? To me, it seems you should either be an owner before OR after 9/15. The thought that the middle group are treated differently than the extreme ends seems rather odd. But yet, I checked all six of my cars and they are all now at 100% restitution. I know this has to be the case because my original restitution amounts would have all been 50%. And they all doubled to within a dollar...
 

speedrye

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Location
Central NC
TDI
13 JSW DSG, 14 JSW DSG
I don't think it has to do with business, otherwise this whole mess would've gotten swept under the rug. I think this is the way to make VW pay the full amount for each car. Pre-09/18/15 owners should get 100% obviously. 09/18/15-6/28/16 owners have to split their money with the eligible sellers, so they get shortchanged a little since VW won't pay more than 100% for any car. Post 06/28/16 cars should get 100% again since they're not splitting the money with anyone.

Obviously, the 09/18/15 - 06/28/16 bracket will have stragglers on either end with and without eligible sellers, but in the end, they probably average out pretty closely.
 

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
While I am not saying you are wrong, what is the business case to not have two clearly defined brackets of people instead of three?
I don't know of any business reason one way or the other, but the FTC Consent Order clearly specifies that post-6/28/16 buyers are treated differently than 9/18/15-6/28/16 buyers (and appears to require, though admittedly with some ambiguity, that the post-6/28/16 buyers be treated the same as pre-9/18/15 buyers). This is not consistent with the CAS, which treats all post-9/18/15 buyers the same.
 

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
I don't think it has to do with business, otherwise this whole mess would've gotten swept under the rug. I think this is the way to make VW pay the full amount for each car. Pre-09/18/15 owners should get 100% obviously. 09/18/15-6/28/16 owners have to split their money with the eligible sellers, so they get shortchanged a little since VW won't pay more than 100% for any car. Post 06/28/16 cars should get 100% again since they're not splitting the money with anyone.

Obviously, the 09/18/15 - 06/28/16 bracket will have stragglers on either end with and without eligible sellers, but in the end, they probably average out pretty closely.
Wow. Lightbulb just went off. I never ever thought of it that way. But you know what, it makes complete sense.


Oh my god. That makes the whole 100% restitution thing completely true. Its not a glitch. I was saying this to my wife two months ago not realizing what I was saying. If you bought after 6/28/16, the seller lost everything, thinking that individual car would not have to share. In reality, the whole pool doesn't have to share...
 

speedrye

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Location
Central NC
TDI
13 JSW DSG, 14 JSW DSG
This is not consistent with the CAS, which treats all post-9/18/15 buyers the same.
I know a number of us filed complaints about this discrepancy, so maybe someone listened and realized that the way the CAS was worded, VW would be getting away with not paying as much per vehicle. Hopefully, in the end, the FTC wording is followed and they ignore the wording on the FTC charts excluding their use for post-09/18/15 buyers.

I know I'd written letters about the discrepancy, but also about the CAS calculations of the second half of post-09/18/15 restitution and how one reading of that wasn't feasible while an alternate reading of it would relieve VW from a lot of financial responsibility. I recommended the FTC method be used as it wasn't ambiguous, but my jaded, self-serving self didn't think there was any way in hell they'd go through with it.

Oh my god. That makes the whole 100% restitution thing completely true. Its not a glitch.
I'm still not trusting anything until I have $$ in hand, but the numbers are starting to add up.
 

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
Post 06/28/16 cars should get 100% again since they're not splitting the money with anyone.
But what if there is an Eligible Seller on a post-6/28/16 car? Consider this scenario:

  • Joe buys a 2014 Jetta TDI, brand new, on 1 Jul 14
  • After the scandal breaks, Joe can't stand to drive that polluting piece of crap any more, so he sells the car to Jim on 1 Oct 15
  • Jim drives the car for about a year and sells it to Fred on 1 Sep 16
Joe is an Eligible Seller. If he timely filed a complete claim, he'll get his 50% of the restitution. Jim gets nothing. But what does Fred get? The CAS says Fred gets 50% of the restitution plus a share of the ESR pool, just like Jim would have gotten if he hadn't sold the car. The FTC Consent Order isn't clear. If you just look at the sections dealing with the buyback restitution, they'd tell you that Fred gets 100% of the restitution. But the section on Eligible Seller Restitution has a paragraph that says, in short, that you can't double-dip on any given VIN. A reasonable result would be that Fred gets the other half of the restitution if Joe claims, and 100% of the restitution if Joe doesn't claim, but the Order never actually says that.
 
Last edited:

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
But what if there is an Eligible Seller on a post-6/28/16 car? Consider this scenario:

  • Joe buys a 2014 Jetta TDI, brand new, on 1 Jul 14
  • After the scandal breaks, Joe can't stand to drive that polluting piece of crap any more, so he sells the car to Jim on 1 Oct 15
  • Jim drives the car for about a year and sells it to Fred on 1 Sep 16
Joe is an Eligible Seller. If he timely filed a complete claim, he'll get his 50% of the restitution. Joe gets nothing. But what does Fred get? The CAS says Fred gets 50% of the restitution plus a share of the ESR pool, just like Jim would have gotten if he hadn't sold the car. The FTC Consent Order isn't clear. If you just look at the sections dealing with the buyback restitution, they'd tell you that Fred gets 100% of the restitution. But the section on Eligible Seller Restitution has a paragraph that says, in short, that you can't double-dip on any given VIN. A reasonable result would be that Fred gets the other half of the restitution if Joe claims, and 100% of the restitution if Joe doesn't claim, but the Order never actually says that.

I see what you are saying...hmmm. Let me read on this one a minute.
 
Last edited:

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
I know a number of us filed complaints about this discrepancy, so maybe someone listened and realized that the way the CAS was worded, VW would be getting away with not paying as much per vehicle. Hopefully, in the end, the FTC wording is followed and they ignore the wording on the FTC charts excluding their use for post-09/18/15 buyers.

I know I'd written letters about the discrepancy, but also about the CAS calculations of the second half of post-09/18/15 restitution and how one reading of that wasn't feasible while an alternate reading of it would relieve VW from a lot of financial responsibility. I recommended the FTC method be used as it wasn't ambiguous, but my jaded, self-serving self didn't think there was any way in hell they'd go through with it.



I'm still not trusting anything until I have $$ in hand, but the numbers are starting to add up.
Well yes of course, I didn't swipe my card yet but my replacement options list just got longer:D
 

speedrye

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Location
Central NC
TDI
13 JSW DSG, 14 JSW DSG
But what if there is an Eligible Seller on a post-6/28/16 car? Consider this scenario:

  • Joe buys a 2014 Jetta TDI, brand new, on 1 Jul 14
  • After the scandal breaks, Joe can't stand to drive that polluting piece of crap any more, so he sells the car to Jim on 1 Oct 15
  • Jim drives the car for about a year and sells it to Fred on 1 Sep 16
Joe is an Eligible Seller. If he timely filed a complete claim, he'll get his 50% of the restitution. Joe gets nothing. But what does Fred get? The CAS says Fred gets 50% of the restitution plus a share of the ESR pool, just like Jim would have gotten if he hadn't sold the car. The FTC Consent Order isn't clear. If you just look at the sections dealing with the buyback restitution, they'd tell you that Fred gets 100% of the restitution. But the section on Eligible Seller Restitution has a paragraph that says, in short, that you can't double-dip on any given VIN. A reasonable result would be that Fred gets the other half of the restitution if Joe claims, and 100% of the restitution if Joe doesn't claim, but the Order never actually says that.

I think you meant that Jim gets nothing, not Joe gets nothing, but I understand where you're going--

I think that scenario is offset by the number of reverse scenarios. As an example:

  • Jimmy bought his car new, but sold it a week before the scandal broke. He gets nothing additional.
  • Bob bought Jimmy's old car on 09/20/16, so he's only eligible for 78% restitution.
There's money left on the table, and I think that is what is paying the remaining amount due in your scenario.
 
Last edited:

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
I think that scenario is offset by the number of reverse scenarios. As an example:

  • Jimmy bought his car new, but sold it a week before the scandal broke. He gets nothing additional.
  • Bob bought Jimmy's old car on 09/20/16, so he's only eligible for 78% restitution.
There's money left on the table, and I think that is what is paying the remaining amount due in your scenario.
But if we are indeed being treated differently as post 6/28 buyers, then doesn't it stand to reason that 24% of the eligible sellers claimed their money?

Maybe I'm getting myself confused at this point. Just as long as my restitution doesn't change lol.
 

Airpizz6

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Location
Bel Air, MD
TDI
Now TDI-free, but there now is a 15 MB E250 BT in the driveway
But what if there is an Eligible Seller on a post-6/28/16 car? Consider this scenario:

Joe is an Eligible Seller. If he timely filed a complete claim, he'll get his 50% of the restitution. Joe gets nothing. But what does Fred get?
My '11 Jetta follows that scenario. An individual traded it in at a used car dealer in March 16 where it sat till I bought it in August. The individual would qualify as an eligible seller. The dealer does not.
 
Last edited:

speedrye

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Location
Central NC
TDI
13 JSW DSG, 14 JSW DSG
Where is the part about double dipping in the CAS? I can't find it again. I remember thinking the wording was screwy and that the original seller (Joe) wouldn't get his money in the scenario you described.
 

Jimmy Coconuts

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2015
Location
Henderson NV
TDI
2009 JSW, 2010 Jetta, 2011 Q7 Prestige, 2012 A3 Premium, 2013 A3 Premium Plus, 2014 Beetle, 2015 Jetta
Oh my god. That makes the whole 100% restitution thing completely true. Its not a glitch. I was saying this to my wife two months ago not realizing what I was saying. If you bought after 6/28/16, the seller lost everything, thinking that individual car would not have to share. In reality, the whole pool doesn't have to share...
If true this would almost double my profit....
 

speedrye

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Location
Central NC
TDI
13 JSW DSG, 14 JSW DSG
Found what I was looking for in the FTC document actually:

C. In no event will Defendant pay more for a single vehicle than the amount allocated to that vehicle for a Buyback, if the Eligible Owner chooses a Buyback, or an Approved Emissions Modification, if the Eligible Owner chooses an Approved Emissions Modification. No additional funds will be made available by Defendant to compensate Eligible Sellers.

Based on that, I would say the Owner would get paid the 100%, but the eligible seller in your scenario wouldn't get paid anything... Jim gets nothing, Joe gets nothing, Fred gets 100%.
 
Last edited:

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
But if we are indeed being treated differently as post 6/28 buyers, then doesn't it stand to reason that 24% of the eligible sellers claimed their money?
If what we're seeing on the claims portal represents the adjustment that we think it does, it would stand to reason that 44% of the ESR pool was claimed by Eligible Sellers, which would probably mean that pretty close to 44% of the Eligible Sellers filed claims. Here's how I got that number:

We're seeing some 9/18/15-6/28/16 owners (including myself) report that their restitution payment is how showing up as 78% of the total restitution for that car. Under the terms of the FTC order, these owners are eligible for 50% of the restitution plus an adjustment. The adjustment is calculated by taking that same 50% of the restitution and multiplying it by the percentage of the ESR pool remaining after all Eligible Sellers filed claims. To get to the 78% overall number, the adjustment has to be 56% (56% of 50% is 28%). If the adjustment is 56%, that means 56% of the ESR pool was unclaimed, which means that (100% - 56%) 44% of the pool was claimed.
 

DanB36

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Location
Savannah, GA
TDI
2014 Q5 Prestige TDI, Monsoon Gray
Based on that, I would say the Owner would get paid the 100%, but the eligible seller in your scenario wouldn't get paid anything... Jim gets nothing, Joe gets nothing, Fred gets 100%.
But that can't be the right answer either--Joe had to have filed his claim two months ago, while Fred has nearly two years left to file. They can't simply hold up Joe's claim for two years waiting to see if Fred files. That's why I think the paragraph you quoted means that Fred gets 50% of the restitution if Joe files--but if that's the case, they really should have said so in the buyback section as well.
 

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
If what we're seeing on the claims portal represents the adjustment that we think it does, it would stand to reason that 44% of the ESR pool was claimed by Eligible Sellers, which would probably mean that pretty close to 44% of the Eligible Sellers filed claims. Here's how I got that number:

We're seeing some 9/18/15-6/28/16 owners (including myself) report that their restitution payment is how showing up as 78% of the total restitution for that car. Under the terms of the FTC order, these owners are eligible for 50% of the restitution plus an adjustment. The adjustment is calculated by taking that same 50% of the restitution and multiplying it by the percentage of the ESR pool remaining after all Eligible Sellers filed claims. To get to the 78% overall number, the adjustment has to be 56% (56% of 50% is 28%). If the adjustment is 56%, that means 56% of the ESR pool was unclaimed, which means that (100% - 56%) 44% of the pool was claimed.

Well, perhaps your math is correct. See what I had posted back here...
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=469668&page=3

I had calculated a 56% increase to one of my restitution amounts between two different but nearly identically optioned out cars. I think you are right on this...
 

purduecrew

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
TN
TDI
Passat
But that can't be the right answer either--Joe had to have filed his claim two months ago, while Fred has nearly two years left to file. They can't simply hold up Joe's claim for two years waiting to see if Fred files. That's why I think the paragraph you quoted means that Fred gets 50% of the restitution if Joe files--but if that's the case, they really should have said so in the buyback section as well.
I got to agree to this to because you couldn't possibly think they would drag out this section that long. If for no other reason, it just wouldn't be efficient.
 

speedrye

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Location
Central NC
TDI
13 JSW DSG, 14 JSW DSG
But that can't be the right answer either--Joe had to have filed his claim two months ago, while Fred has nearly two years left to file. They can't simply hold up Joe's claim for two years waiting to see if Fred files. That's why I think the paragraph you quoted means that Fred gets 50% of the restitution if Joe files--but if that's the case, they really should have said so in the buyback section as well.
Yeah, completely agree as it simply doesn't work. So, there is no right answer and that likely explains the processing delay on late buyers. I'm guessing the Settlement Master has been working with all parties to come up with a solution and we're starting to see the results of that. Hopefully offers start going out now that it seems like a compromise has been reached.
 
Top