2015vwgolfdiesel
Top Post Dawg
^^^^^^^^^
Agreed
Agreed
I full on agree that aftermarket windshield and wheels should be excluded.. but what we are seeing and talking about is something completely different. Different seats? Seriously? Thats not acceptable because the seat that was engineered for that car and its safety systems is not what is going back in there. Windshield and aftermarket wheels that are DOT approved are fine.. I wouldnt put it past any of the yahoos on this site or otherwise to put in some bench seat from a 75 Datsun.Wrong-O. Show me where in the settlement it says that.
They're buying back a car they once sold, and has been owned / maintained / modified (within reason) / used.
Under your interpretation, lack of (dealer) maintenance would be a deduction, lack of any maintenance records whatsoever would be a huge deduction, just reading your signature leads to all kinds of questions how they might theoretically devalue your car.
Again, we're talking about a straight VW for VW seat swap in this case, not slapping in a bench seat from a 1975 Datsun pickup truck.
(EDIT) I was just thinking back to when I sold my TSX back to an Acura dealer, after 6 months of owning it. I bought it used with 8,000 miles on it, CPO. It had been a service loaner. Naturally, it had been maintained at the dealership while they had it, and it was in great condition. As it turned out, I really disliked that car. When I approached a local dealership to inquire about buying it from me, the CPO was very important to them. I had installed nice looking Enkei wheels on it, to get away from the traditional Acura 5-spoke look, with Bridgstone Driveguard run flat tires. Thankfully I had the stock wheels bagged up in the garage, because the dealer placed more value on stock wheels than aftermarket (so he could resell it as a CPO -- stock wheels is a requirement). I had my one oil change done at a local Honda dealership, so technically (to him) it was serviced within the Honda/Acura family. He didn't catch that the replacement windshield was OEE, and I wasn't purposely deceptive about this; it didn't cross my mind and he didn't check. Point being, this all factored in to the negotiations as to how much he would pay me for the car, and this is exactly NOT the situation with the VW settlement. I suppose the settlement could have included a checklist with standardized deductions for modifications, wear, lack of records, etc., but it doesn't. It's a straight buyback amount with certain criteria (some fuzzily defined) to be met, and nothing more should be read in to that agreement (by either side).
Lots of seats are compatible between vehicles of the same manufacturer and can be freely interchanged without affecting crash compliance - because they're designed to be freely interchanged without affecting crash compliance. Seat rails and attachment points to the bodyshell are in the same places and the electrical connectors are all the same if this is the case. Want GTI seats in your base Golf of the same generation? No problem, swap away. Want leather seats in place of fabric? No problem, they're all designed to be compliant.Different seats? Seriously? Thats not acceptable because the seat that was engineered for that car and its safety systems is not what is going back in there.
I agree that right and wrong behavior is a little murky here. Yes, people have the right to do want they want with their cars, but VW also has the right to turn them away. Take the guy who completely stripped his car. Unethical, yes- illegal, no. Did he get his big payout? No. It is up to individuals if they want to behave ethically or only within the framework of the law.Funny how the only one currently whining and complaining is...
But I think it's an honest debate to be had -- what crosses the ethical line, what's ok within the framework of the settlement, what's an overreach by VW.
I also agree that "unethical" and "within the terms of the agreement" can unhappily coexist. I just happen to believe your interpretation of what's dishonest is far too strict and limiting to an owner. If this was about a lease return, I'd agree with you on the seat swap, but because of the contract, not the settlement.
An owner is entitled to treat the car as something they own, not something they're borrowing.
For a seemingly high and mighty moralist, sitting on the highest horse that I have ever seen, you don't seem to have a problem violating federal and state laws with the illegal modifications that you have done to the car in your sig.. TypicalTwo wrongs dont make a right.. Funny how the biggest complainers and whiners about how "illegal" and "terrible" VW is for killing millions of people would have no problem with being unethical in returning the car.
Oh well... Karma is still alive and well.
You don't have an argument from me on that character -- he was clearly testing limits, and made his car inoperable. That wasn't an ethical dilemma, nor a legal one.I agree that right and wrong behavior is a little murky here. Yes, people have the right to do want they want with their cars, but VW also has the right to turn them away. Take the guy who completely stripped his car. Unethical, yes- illegal, no. Did he get his big payout? No. It is up to individuals if they want to behave ethically or only within the framework of the law.
For a seemingly high and mighty moralist, sitting on the highest horse that I have ever seen, ,,, snip... don't seem to have a problem violating federal and state laws with the illegal modifications .... snip..... .Mark
It is against federal and state law to alter, remove or change in any way the emission control equipment on a vehicle:At the risk of .... whatever...
IMO
MODs might-could-may-can be illegal. I just do not understand the FED, State laws
All I know for sure is:
No MODs for my car, for fear I might loose my 11 year, 162,000 mile warranty
You said it better than I.It is against federal and state law to alter, remove or change in any way the emission control equipment on a vehicle:
https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/clean-air-act-vehicle-and-engine-enforcement-case-resolutions
https://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/mobilesource/vetech/tampering.html
The second is from Texas, but all or most states have similar laws. One cannot pick and chose which laws to obey, especially if one is going to take the moral high ground in such a strong fashion...Mark
I was just speaking about the broader subject of swapping and stripping- not this particular seat case. From my own viewpoint, swapping seats isn't a huge deal. The guy who completely stripped his car thought that because it met his defintion of operable, he was golden. Wrong. There is a line somewhere- before making the car legally inoperable , that is too far.You don't have an argument from me on that character -- he was clearly testing limits, and made his car inoperable. That wasn't an ethical dilemma, nor a legal one.
This particular dust-up that brought this long dormant thread back from the grave is "stripping out" a 2010 VW seat, and replacing it with a (much newer condition) 2015 VW seat (IF it fits). Very different scenario, very far from murky.