Dieselgate, The Canadian Edition

[Rod B]

I'm in no hurry to part with my Golf. If VW offer a decent amount of $$$$ on the buy back & a good price on trade for a new VW I will take it.

As things stand I don't foresee anything happen until at least next month. By then I might be tempted to wait until I have a chance to look at the 2018 models.

 

[uchu]

I'm not ready to quit on VW either. A newer Passat TDI (2015) would caught my attention, once they start selling them again. Other than that, nothing in the horizon from them. Not fan of their SUVs (like the Atlas) and Golfs or Jettas are not practical for us either.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

Only compact affordable manual wagon is VW so I'm not ready to dump them yet. Yes, I am pissed off at them, but what I need is a vehicle that meets our needs and only VW has that, at the moment.

Let's hope it will be all over soon. Our replacement is supposed to drive at the dealer on April 21st. We need the buyback cash to purchase it. We don't want to take out a loan for it. We paid cash for our TDI and we'll pay cash for our TSI wagon.

 

[dwfdiesel]

Yep that Atlas looks roomy and big but 19 mpg is a deal breaker.

 

[Smokin_Joe]

Allot of opinions about what will happen, and when. Frustrating I am sure to all. Because of the HPFP failures, and the needless stress they cause, we look forward to our buyback option. Hopefully this won't take too long to decide. I hope it is finished before our extended warranty runs out in Dec 2017. We don't like the way that VW operates it's business. Good Luck everyone ...

 

[DRfez]

I am waiting for my new red Golf comfortline to come in which I will lease for the next 4 years. I will be parking the 2012 Golf TDI and waiting for a buy out. After all the black book says my car is only worth 4K, so why worry about something you can't control. What will be will be.

 

[Pachena]

Certainly there's enough people to think that they will get a full purchase price back, let say after driving a vehicle for 7 years .... I am not sure what logic or precedence supports that.

I don't know if I should get the full amount back, even though mine was purchased in Oct 2012 (2013 Model).
For me to be made whole, I AM owed a heck of a lot more than simple wholesale value backdated to Sept 2015 (the date they were caught). I was defrauded the day I bought the car - Sept 2015 means nothing to me.
I'd have been willing to turn my car over in Sept 2015, for a full refund. I was at the dealer that week. VW dragged out this process. I didn't ASK to keep driving this thing. (I have 35K on mine).
I used to love my Passat. After the date the crime was reported, I hate this piece of crap. It's in new condition. When I eventually turn it in, unless I get extra, I'm going to do my best to make sure it's NOT put back on the road.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

I don't know if I should get the full amount back, even though mine was purchased in Oct 2012 (2013 Model).
For me to be made whole, I AM owed a heck of a lot more than simple wholesale value backdated to Sept 2015 (the date they were caught). I was defrauded the day I bought the car - Sept 2015 means nothing to me.
I'd have been willing to turn my car over in Sept 2015, for a full refund. I was at the dealer that week. VW dragged out this process. I didn't ASK to keep driving this thing. (I have 35K on mine).
I used to love my Passat. After the date the crime was reported, I hate this piece of crap. It's in new condition. When I eventually turn it in, unless I get extra, I'm going to do my best to make sure it's NOT put back on the road.

You WILL get more than the value backdated to Sept. 2015 with the agreement as it now stands.

For a 2013 model you will get that value PLUS $5500. We also have a 2013 Golf Wagon. The CBB estimator gives $15337. Add $5500 to that and we come up with $20837. A new Trendline wagon with Connectivity Plus will be $23835.

Three grand, for over 4 years and 90 km of driving, isn't so bad. Of course taxes have to be added to that.

Still not a bad deal.

People have to be realistic in their expectations. You were defrauded on the emissions specifications but still had a working car for all that time. It's unrealistic to expect all of your money back. This isn't useless magic hair growth formula you were defrauded on. You were still provided with a functional vehicle for 4+ years.

 

[uchu]

I don't know if I should get the full amount back, even though mine was purchased in Oct 2012 (2013 Model).
For me to be made whole, I AM owed a heck of a lot more than simple wholesale value backdated to Sept 2015 (the date they were caught). I was defrauded the day I bought the car - Sept 2015 means nothing to me.
I'd have been willing to turn my car over in Sept 2015, for a full refund. I was at the dealer that week. VW dragged out this process. I didn't ASK to keep driving this thing. (I have 35K on mine).
I used to love my Passat. After the date the crime was reported, I hate this piece of crap. It's in new condition. When I eventually turn it in, unless I get extra, I'm going to do my best to make sure it's NOT put back on the road.

I'm not sure what you meant by "make sure it is not put back on the road". If you accept money from VW as buyback, you are transferring ownership to them. Nothing you can do about it.

Unless you are talking about maliciously do something to the vehicle, which would be liable against you.

 

[FreshBlather]

People have to be realistic in their expectations. You were defrauded on the emissions specifications but still had a working car for all that time. It's unrealistic to expect all of your money back. This isn't useless magic hair growth formula you were defrauded on. You were still provided with a functional vehicle for 4+ years.

There are two sides this argument. Here's the other one. It is very realistic to expect ALL your money back. First, the law provides consumers protection from scofflaws and scoundrels. And that law that protects us from those scofflaws provides that we can have ALL your money back. And more in the form of punitive damages. Under that law we, the owners/leasors of Diesel Volkswagen are entitled to reach back in time to the instance of the fraud (when we bought our cars) and simply rescind or cancel your contract. It matters not the object or subject of the contract. Whether for a car, a boat, a house, or a ham sandwich.
Secondly, had VW told us up front, rather than hiding their deceit, we would not likely have purchased that car four years ago. We wouldn't be polluting the atmosphere and we wouldn't be involved in this endless litigation. Our cash would be happily tied up in some other vehicle, motoring happily into the sunset. By polluting at a rate that is almost forty times the allowable rate are we really able to say that we have enjoyed the fully functionality that we were promised?

Under the Federal Environmental Protection laws, VW can be held to account many times over the full price of each and every car.

 

[shak911]

I was not glued to the TV today, any news from today, did the lawyers submit the documents to the judge, anything ?

 

[GoFaster]

Dreamers, dream on. Ain't gonna happen the way you're dreaming of. Punitive damages don't go to you, they go to Environment Canada. It's not you, personally, that was wronged; it is considered to be the collective "everyone", because it's not just you, personally, that was affected (however much nor little is another matter) by the extra emissions - it was "everyone". You're not "entitled" to anything more than the car's fair market value and that, presumably, is what the various lawyers have been hammering out for months.

If you didn't like that, your deadline for opting out and filing independent lawsuit has long since passed. It's water under the bridge.

I'd love to see every one of these people who thinks they're somehow entitled to more than the next guy, slapped down in court and told that there is nothing that makes them any more special than anyone else. Here's your standard award, the same amount that everyone else is getting for that car, and oh, by the way, here's your lawyer's bill, too.

 

[tobianogreg]

You can hardly blame people for running with it Brian. It was the judge who pointed out the applicable law that entitles full restitution. Personally I think this is appropriate, it discourages fraudulent behaviour.

You might recall earlier reports that VW initially expected a minor slap on the wrist for their deception.

 

[GoFaster]

Owners weren't individually defrauded. Society as a whole was. Owner gets fair market value, VW pays a big fine.

 

[uchu]

I was not glued to the TV today, any news from today, did the lawyers submit the documents to the judge, anything ?

This from O'Shea, the Global TV Toronto reporter who was in court on the 31st:

https://twitter.com/ConsumerSOS/status/850709812937674752

 

[tobianogreg]

Owners weren't individually defrauded. Society as a whole was. Owner gets fair market value, VW pays a big fine.

Absolutely owners were defrauded, we were sold something advertized and certified as emissions compliant, which TDI's are not and never will be.

VW has not paid any big fine in Canada. $15 million to the Competition Bureau and that's it. Canadian society has not rectified their portion of this fraud and I'm willing to bet never will.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

By polluting at a rate that is almost forty times the allowable rate are we really able to say that we have enjoyed the fully functionality that we were promised?

Up to 40 times, at high load. Not 40 times all the time. And for one parameter only, NOx. For others, in particular CO2, TDIs do very well.

Moreover owners had a car that saved them a significant sum on fuel costs and in fact for most of us, delivered better than EPA/NRC estimates for fuel consumption. We love our TDI and are reluctant to part with it. We do so as part of a cold business decision recognizing that a brand new wagon for a relatively modest amount of money makes sense.

Absolutely owners were defrauded, we were sold something advertized and certified as emissions compliant, which TDI's are not and never will be.

We do not know that. There is a fix for the newer generation cars. There may yet be one for first-generation cars. If the fix reduces performance, some restitution is called for. If it doesn't, then it's like any other emissions recall.

Hyundai and others had to give full refunds for mis-stating fuel consumption numbers. Owners got something equivalent to the extra amount of fuel they consumed.

This is what VW is offering much more here. They are freezing resale value to pre-scandal levels; and they are offering a substantial cash payout whether you choose the fix or to sell back the car. We stand to get over $20,000 for a car that would be worth, at best, about $15k on the market today. We are going to get a brand-new car with the warranty reset to zero for $3k + tax. A base model that will be better equipped than our 2013 Comfortline.

For those opting for a fix, they get the cash payout, plus a greatly extended warranty on emissions components.

Meanwhile those arguing (in court) for a full refund are merely gumming up the works for the majority of reasonable people who recognize that we still got up to 8 years usage out of their cars (4 years of absolutely trouble-free motoring in our case).

I never did and never will buy the "full refund" thesis. As I mentioned, Hyundai was dinged for understating fuel consumption. Canadian owners of a 2012 Elantra get $361 lump sum payment:

Hyundai fuel consumption fraud settlement.

The precedent has been set in the courts. Those holding out for a more generous offer than the already generous proposal, are just impeding those of us who recognize that this is an unprecedentedly generous settlement well beyond previous precedents for similar automotive mis-stating of specifications. We just want to get on with it before something happens to our cars that will disqualify us.

 

[Pachena]

You WILL get more than the value backdated to Sept. 2015 with the agreement as it now stands.

Not enough for what they've put me through.

For a 2013 model you will get that value PLUS $5500. We also have a 2013 Golf Wagon. The CBB estimator gives $15337. Add $5500 to that and we come up with $20837. A new Trendline wagon with Connectivity Plus will be $23835.

The cost of a new/replacement VW model is irrelevant to me. Even more irrelevant when there's some sort of shareholder profit included in that amount.
The only way I'd ever own another VW would be even more unreasonable than me getting back what I paid for the car.

Three grand, for over 4 years and 90 km of driving, isn't so bad. Of course taxes have to be added to that.
Still not a bad deal.

I've never looked for "not a bad deal". I want a "fair" deal.
I would never have purchased this car, at any price, if VW was honest about it.
I also purchased snow tires on winter mags -- that I'll have to deal with and also lose money on.
The "probable deal" will not make me whole.

People have to be realistic in their expectations. You were defrauded on the emissions specifications but still had a working car for all that time. It's unrealistic to expect all of your money back. This isn't useless magic hair growth formula you were defrauded on. You were still provided with a functional vehicle for 4+ years.

Yes, I had a "working" car (I guesss that depends on the definition of "working"). One that spewed extra NOx, and contributed to who know how much extra respiratory issues for folks that had nothing to do with either side of the settlement.
I didn't get the car that I was sold!! Period. Give me that car, or give me my money back! As for the years of use of driving this polluting fraud, should I pay VW, or should VW pay me?
And this isn't just money that I paid to purchase the vehicle – it's money that VW gladly took from me for that vehicle, knowing they were selling me something other than as advertised.
I am realistic, in that I don't believe I'll get what's fair.
But it's not about the money. I'd be thrilled If VW was forced to pay what I paid them for the car, and had to go out of business (sell off factories, etc) in the process -- even if the end result was less money for me than the "probable" settlement.
VW does not deserve to be in business.

 

[Pachena]

I'm not sure what you meant by "make sure it is not put back on the road". If you accept money from VW as buyback, you are transferring ownership to them. Nothing you can do about it.

Unless you are talking about maliciously do something to the vehicle, which would be liable against you.

I don't believe ANY of the affected TDI's should be on the road, after some grace period, unless fixed.

I will need information as to how "condition" factors into the final settlement. Right now, mine is in "like new" condition. If condition isn't important, then I can make mine less "like new".

Until they buy back the car, it's mine. I can drill holes in it if I wish.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

One that spewed extra NOx, and contributed to who know how much extra respiratory issues for folks that had nothing to do with either side of the settlement.

Oh puleeze, go cry me a river. Meanwhile it is still perfectly legal to drive the legions of pre-2007 TDIs that spew far worse emissions on all counts (not just NOx) than a 2009+ CR TDI.

I'm all for improved emissions standards and holding car manufacturers to them, and punishing them when they don't, but give me a break... compared to the number of older vehicles on the road that are held to much lower standards, the extra contribution from newer TDIs under high load is a drop in the bucket. Plus they are better for CO2 and particulates. My previous gasser 2.0T could lay down as much of a smokescreen as our old 2005 Passat TDI. We can't even get a puff out of our CR TDIs.

VW screwed up. They proposed what I consider is a fair settlement. So if you're pissed off at VW, take the buyback and go buy a Honda or something.

I'm no TDI apologist any longer; personally I find that developments in gas engines make TDIs almost a moot point now, and I traded mine in before dieselgate for a TSI as I couldn't justify the up-charge for a TDI. Now we will trade my wife's for a Golf TSI wagon, once the settlement comes through.

Over-the-top statements such as yours are not helpful at all to the process. Leave emotion out of it, and work on cold hard facts.

 

[GoFaster]

Those people freaking out about NOx, I hope you stay away from any motor vehicle from 2006 or before (legally allowed to emit about as much as a common-rail TDI does in cheating mode), and don't go outside in a thunderstorm (lightning is a significant natural source of NOx and ozone), and don't have any electric motors with commutators in your house (the "universal" motors commonly found in vacuum cleaners etc are one example - the sparks are miniature lightning). And if you're that worried about NOx, you should be even more worried about particulate matter - for which the common-rail TDI has very low exhaust emissions. But as with any car, it has tires (where do you think the rubber slowly disappears to), and brake pads (where do you think the pad material slowly disappears to), and it can be driven on dusty roads. And all those environmentally friendly green plants ... make pollen. And heaven help if there's a forest fire ... or a volcanic eruption. If you use a small engine (lawnmower, chainsaw, etc) don't even discuss emissions - those have no emission controls and are hundreds of times worse than any modern car. And if you smoke ... ! ! !

I really wonder if those bleeding hearts are like the person who goes to McDonalds for lunch and then has a diet Coke to cut down on calories.

The emissions from modern cars, including a TDI in cheating mode, are a fair approximation of zero compared to ANYthing that was on the road while anyone with a driver's license today was growing up.

 

[tobianogreg]

Planecrazy, I believe the judge quoted an actual (Ontario consumer) law not a thesis.

 

[JohnNS]

Previous cars polluted worse is such a terrible argument. They had a different standard to follow and they were (as far as know) legal. Current cars have a different standard to to follow and VW didn't.

The number of old standard cars around is probably small, smaller than the number of active scandal affected cars (well, pre-US buyback anyway).

 

[Pachena]

Oh puleeze, go cry me a river. Meanwhile it is still perfectly legal to drive the legions of pre-2007 TDIs that spew far worse emissions on all counts (not just NOx) than a 2009+ CR TDI.

"Cold hard fact" is, the rules changed.
Emissions and safety regulations change over the years. Time will eventually result in more of the older (less safe, less clean) vehicles being off the road, replaced by newer (more safe, cleaner) vehicles -- or at least that's how it should work.
The emission requirements were different in years past. If VW could not make cars that met the current regulations, they should have stayed out of that market segment. Period. It's very simple.

I'm all for improved emissions standards and holding car manufacturers to them, and punishing them when they don't, but give me a break... compared to the number of older vehicles on the road that are held to much lower standards, the extra contribution from newer TDIs under high load is a drop in the bucket. Plus they are better for CO2 and particulates. My previous gasser 2.0T could lay down as much of a smokescreen as our old 2005 Passat TDI. We can't even get a puff out of our CR TDIs.

Too bad for VW that there isn't an emission score that allows them to produce less of one pollutant in exchange for more of another. Not my concern – I'm not in the car making business.
I expect a car I buy to meet the rules of the day. Everyone should expect no less. I expect seat belts now, too -- even though they used to not exist, and then they were an option. Just sayin'! (With VW, buyers should double check the seatblelts I suppose -- just because they are required by law, and pictured in literature doesn't mean they'll actually be in the car -- after all, this IS Volkswagen, and they shouldn't be trusted!)
If manufacturers weren't punished for not meeting standards, why would they?
And remember, "meeting standards" means they just have to get barely over the bar! It shouldn't be too much to ask by a company that wants to sell vehicles.
And VW didn't simply "not meet" the standards -- they cheated and at the same time they happily took my money something they sold as a "clean diesel". They intentionally sold me misrepresented goods. I was a victim of fraud.

VW screwed up. They proposed what I consider is a fair settlement. So if you're pissed off at VW, take the buyback and go buy a Honda or something.

If you consider the settlement fair -- great. I'm not trying to change how you feel, just trying to explain why I don't think the settlement is fair.
I'll take the buyback. Don't know what I'll get in the short term. All I know for certain is it won't be be any of the VAG vehicles, unless VW starts treating me a little better before this episode is over (wholesale value trade in for a new car at "list price" doesn't come close!).

I'm no TDI apologist any longer; personally I find that developments in gas engines make TDIs almost a moot point now, and I traded mine in before dieselgate for a TSI as I couldn't justify the up-charge for a TDI. Now we will trade my wife's for a Golf TSI wagon, once the settlement comes through.

Not relavent at all what folks plans are. But here's mine:
I was expecting to have my TDI for as long as I typically keep vehicles (15-20 years). Now I have to find something else. My next car is currently only a "reservation" for a Model 3, which I would'nt have reserved if the VW TDI fraud had not occurred. I know I could probably drag out this TDI thing (buyback process (until my Model 3 arrives (still a lot of unknowns on that one, as well). But I'll turn the TDI in first chance I get and get something else in the interim.
For me, it's not about the money -- it's about having nothing to do with this car or VW ever again.

Over-the-top statements such as yours are not helpful at all to the process. Leave emotion out of it, and work on cold hard facts.

I don't mean to either help or hurt the process. I'd rather have a fair deal than a fast deal.
Again -- I'd be very happy with half of the current settlement "estimate", if I know that VW was bankrupt in the process, selling assets to paying back the folks they cheated.
If they pay everyone back what they are TRULY owned (not some negotiated deal) and survive -- even better.

 

[Pachena]

Dreamers, dream on. Ain't gonna happen the way you're dreaming of. Punitive damages don't go to you, they go to Environment Canada. It's not you, personally, that was wronged; it is considered to be the collective "everyone", because it's not just you, personally, that was affected (however much nor little is another matter) by the extra emissions - it was "everyone". You're not "entitled" to anything more than the car's fair market value and that, presumably, is what the various lawyers have been hammering out for months.

Punitive awards can be two-fold.
1. VW committed fraud against each of us, selling of goods that they knew were NOT what we were paying for.
2. VW committed a crime against the country because sold vehicles that it knew didn't meet the required bar. VW should have to pay based on each KM driven by those vehicles!

If you didn't like that, your deadline for opting out and filing independent lawsuit has long since passed. It's water under the bridge.

There was another option.... I didn't like the settlement, and filed an objection.
Not sure it did anything, but it WAS an option.

 

[Pachena]

Up to 40 times, at high load. Not 40 times all the time. And for one parameter only, NOx. For others, in particular CO2, TDIs do very well.

Rather than talk about NOx, CO2, decibels or any other pollutants, lets just say that VW failed to meet to required law of the land.

Moreover owners had a car that saved them a significant sum on fuel costs and in fact for most of us, delivered better than EPA/NRC estimates for fuel consumption. We love our TDI and are reluctant to part with it. We do so as part of a cold business decision recognizing that a brand new wagon for a relatively modest amount of money makes sense.

I paid extra for my TDI. I knew, based on the KM's I drive, it would take a very long time before I saw any financial savings, if I ever saw any.
I bought the car because I thought it was a "clean diesel". I didn't get what I paid for.
I LOVED my TDI. Now I detest it.

We do not know that. There is a fix for the newer generation cars. There may yet be one for first-generation cars. If the fix reduces performance, some restitution is called for. If it doesn't, then it's like any other emissions recall.

I've been reading some reports (and Youtube) of Europeans that have had a fix applied -- they aren't thrilled. Most have worse fuel economy. Most see performance from a stop (torque) seemingly unaffected, but passing performance (horsepower) significantly worse.
Not sure if it's the same as would be required in North America, to meet our requirements.

This is what VW is offering much more here. They are freezing resale value to pre-scandal levels; and they are offering a substantial cash payout whether you choose the fix or to sell back the car. We stand to get over $20,000 for a car that would be worth, at best, about $15k on the market today. We are going to get a brand-new car with the warranty reset to zero for $3k + tax. A base model that will be better equipped than our 2013 Comfortline.
For those opting for a fix, they get the cash payout, plus a greatly extended warranty on emissions components.

Again... "pre-scandal" refers to when VW's crime was discovered. The date the crime was committed is different for each of us. Insufficient penalties do nothing to stop this from occurring in the future. Making penalties effective the date of getting caught, only encourages this sort of fraud and concealing ghe fraud.
Also, some folks are going to get a LOT less than those numbers.

The precedent has been set in the courts. Those holding out for a more generous offer than the already generous proposal, are just impeding those of us who recognize that this is an unprecedentedly generous settlement well beyond previous precedents for similar automotive mis-stating of specifications. We just want to get on with it before something happens to our cars that will disqualify us.

The Hyundai settlement was a precedent, but not "The" precedent -- there are lots of significant differences.
The Hyundai settlement solved the issue of fuel consumption -- people got paid for the extra fuel their vehicle consumed. They CONTINUE to get paid (annually) for the extra fuel used. And, the payments weren't effective the date "they were caught".
Hyundai issue was advertised fuel consumption -- other than increased cost to the vehicles owner, there was not other harm. The remedy did what it could to make the owners whole.
THe VW NOx issue isn't sop easily fixed using the same methods. Every KM we drive contributes to the real issue.
The Hyundai incident was also "accidental" (or so the parties agreed) -- VW has already plead guilty and admitted what they did, and it was not accidental. This is a HUGE difference.

 

[Motley]

Yep...Facebook part deux.

 

[ElectricMayhem]

Right, so I argue, they will continue to give you the same pass they have given you so far.

Again, the government takes vehicles that don't pass emissions, off the road, every single day. This is the government that has tripled my electricity bill over the past few years, due to their misguided green agenda. They do some very strange things, and I could totally see them exerting their authority over the few people who don't take the buyback. The government will see it as disobedience.

Sure, I don't disagree with you, thus again, if they don't, I will argue the above will happen (pass), because the law is written to discourage DIY modifications ... not manufacturer designs which the same government approved and failed to catch by their own testing procedures.

You are reading a lot into the law, that simply isn't there. I don't have it in front of me, and it's true there is language about deleting cats. But the most important bit simply says "No-one may cause an out-of-emissions vehicle to be driven." Period. That is the source of the power the government has to take vehicles that fail Drive Clean off the road, and, again, they do that all day long.

Think what you want, but I can say they have their own portion of guilt in this ... by claiming to enforce emissions by writing half-ass regulations like current DriveClean or letting car manufacturers to police themselves as far as new cars go.

Oh, for sure they bear some responsibility for allowing so many out-of-emissions cars to be sold and driven for years. It is very embarrassing. That is why they are reacting the way they are - it is to deflect attention from their essential incompetence.

 

[cuestalf]

I still remember, just when US settlement was approved, the Canadian drivers were left out of it. Many in this same forum, started with very negative and pessimist comments about how Canadian will get nothing. Well, after a while, a settlement for Canadian were visible. Once it was proposed, those with the negative and pessimist comments changed their tone. Today we have a similar situation. Many are totally sure we will not get more than is already proposed, and some, are convinced the amount is not enough (I include my self here) and compensation should be higher, if not full repayment.

It will funny, as experiment, to see the judge to hire a team to read into all these forums, and for those who think this is OK, they will get it. And for those who think more should be repaid, then pay them more.

How many pages this forum will turn to...?

But, not to worry, it will not happen because the ideology of ".... I want it, and I want it now..." will be discouraged. Not good for society/economy.

Now you can disagree. This is a free country.

 

[grey matter]

"Cold hard fact" is, the rules changed.
Emissions and safety regulations change over the years. Time will eventually result in more of the older (less safe, less clean) vehicles being off the road, replaced by newer (more safe, cleaner) vehicles -- or at least that's how it should work.
The emission requirements were different in years past. If VW could not make cars that met the current regulations, they should have stayed out of that market segment. Period. It's very simple.
Too bad for VW that there isn't an emission score that allows them to produce less of one pollutant in exchange for more of another. Not my concern – I'm not in the car making business.
I expect a car I buy to meet the rules of the day. Everyone should expect no less. I expect seat belts now, too -- even though they used to not exist, and then they were an option. Just sayin'! (With VW, buyers should double check the seatblelts I suppose -- just because they are required by law, and pictured in literature doesn't mean they'll actually be in the car -- after all, this IS Volkswagen, and they shouldn't be trusted!)
If manufacturers weren't punished for not meeting standards, why would they?
And remember, "meeting standards" means they just have to get barely over the bar! It shouldn't be too much to ask by a company that wants to sell vehicles.
And VW didn't simply "not meet" the standards -- they cheated and at the same time they happily took my money something they sold as a "clean diesel". They intentionally sold me misrepresented goods. I was a victim of fraud.
If you consider the settlement fair -- great. I'm not trying to change how you feel, just trying to explain why I don't think the settlement is fair.
I'll take the buyback. Don't know what I'll get in the short term. All I know for certain is it won't be be any of the VAG vehicles, unless VW starts treating me a little better before this episode is over (wholesale value trade in for a new car at "list price" doesn't come close!).
Not relavent at all what folks plans are. But here's mine:
I was expecting to have my TDI for as long as I typically keep vehicles (15-20 years). Now I have to find something else. My next car is currently only a "reservation" for a Model 3, which I would'nt have reserved if the VW TDI fraud had not occurred. I know I could probably drag out this TDI thing (buyback process (until my Model 3 arrives (still a lot of unknowns on that one, as well). But I'll turn the TDI in first chance I get and get something else in the interim.
For me, it's not about the money -- it's about having nothing to do with this car or VW ever again.
I don't mean to either help or hurt the process. I'd rather have a fair deal than a fast deal.
Again -- I'd be very happy with half of the current settlement "estimate", if I know that VW was bankrupt in the process, selling assets to paying back the folks they cheated.
If they pay everyone back what they are TRULY owned (not some negotiated deal) and survive -- even better.

Blah, blah, blah. Total B.S.