It's (semi) Official. 2015 owners get the shaft

[RollingCoal]

I still fail to see how getting the car free for a year and getting all your money back, or getting a free fix and $7k is a raw deal. If you don't want the reduced performance of the car, and don't want to just keep it, you get a full refund. If you don't mind a reduction in performance, because it's still the best combination of things available for that style vehicle, then you get $7k. If you want the car you paid for, you get the car you paid for.

Separate emotion and "fairness" out of it and stick to the facts and maybe you will understand the point here. Here are the facts which I will line item to help you think through them in order since something is not connecting for you.

All owners with non 2015 vehicles are getting Nada clean trade in value from 9/15. Nada is an independent third party.

2015 values that weren't available from Nada are being calculated at 29% depreciation regardless of when you bought the vehicle. Where did they get 29% from?

29% depreciation doesn't happen in a day, week, month, or year from the time of purchase except in very few cases. Average new vehicle depreciation in the US is 19% in 12 months.

VW was strictly prohibited by the wording of the CAS to influence owners decisions about the fix vs selling back.

By giving a heavily depreciated value they slightly tilt the scale towards repair for the vehicles that are easier and likely cheaper for them to repair. See the above point. They aren't supposed to do that.

What aren't people getting here? This thread is based on the fact that the vehicles are being assigned a value which neither represents the real value of them at the time of the scandal or is in line with the plethora of data they could have used to determine a fair value. If you think the fix money is fine well great! Again, I'm not saying it's not a valid option, it certainly is. What I'm saying is a $30,000 vehicle wasn't worth $20,000 a day, week, or few months after it was purchased. The figure they used isn't based in reality. On top of that, the mod value is based of a percentage of that fictitious value so in theory it should be higher too. It's not a horrible deal really, but by accepting it you should admit to yourself that it's based off fake math and you're selling yourself a bit short in the face of a payday.

 

[autdi]

Separate emotion and "fairness" out of it and stick to the facts and maybe you will understand the point here. Here are the facts which I will line item to help you think through them in order since something is not connecting for you.

All owners with non 2015 vehicles are getting Nada clean trade in value from 9/15. Nada is an independent third party.

2015 values that weren't available from Nada are being calculated at 29% depreciation regardless of when you bought the vehicle. Where did they get 29% from?

CAS settlement doc pdf page 60:

and (2) for Model Year (“MY”) 2015 Eligible Vehicles for which no value was published by NADA as of September 2015, derived by multiplying 0.717 by the MSRP for each individual vehicle, as indicated on the list of all owned and leased vehicles provided by Volkswagen, dropping any fractional amount, and then adjusting each Base Value for options. The 0.717 figure represents the ratio of average September 2015 Clean Trade values to average MSRPs for MY 2015 Passats.

29% depreciation doesn't happen in a day, week, month, or year from the time of purchase except in very few cases. Average new vehicle depreciation in the US is 19% in 12 months.

Which is why a 2014 that is 13 months old having >34% depreciation is similarly unrealistic. Basically the older the car, the less the first year matters, the more time you had to spread the 2k+ in taxes out over. Those in 2014 (late) and 2015 models get to pay tax twice in 2 years with a trade in. Being made whole, I should be in a similar car, not given the cash to buy it, less the tax and fees necessary to actually get it off the lot.

VW was strictly prohibited by the wording of the CAS to influence owners decisions about the fix vs selling back.

By giving a heavily depreciated value they slightly tilt the scale towards repair for the vehicles that are easier and likely cheaper for them to repair. See the above point. They aren't supposed to do that.

What aren't people getting here? This thread is based on the fact that the vehicles are being assigned a value which neither represents the real value of them at the time of the scandal or is in line with the plethora of data they could have used to determine a fair value. If you think the fix money is fine well great! Again, I'm not saying it's not a valid option, it certainly is. What I'm saying is a $30,000 vehicle wasn't worth $20,000 a day, week, or few months after it was purchased. The figure they used isn't based in reality. On top of that, the mod value is based of a percentage of that fictitious value so in theory it should be higher too. It's not a horrible deal really, but by accepting it you should admit to yourself that it's based off fake math and you're selling yourself a bit short in the face of a payday.

The other issue unique to the 2014, the fix may or may not ever be approved, then I really don't have an option, if I wanted to have my financial loss due to the scandal covered, the only way that happens is a trade in, so I have to fight for that number to actually put me in a similar car, and off the lot with it. Right now, the trade number doesn't do that. No there isn't a negative equity or anything like that, I paid X, at 13 months, I couldn't drive off in the same car for 2/3 X.

 

[fredthe]

What I'm saying is a $30,000 vehicle wasn't worth $20,000 a day, week, or few months after it was purchased. The figure they used isn't based in reality. On top of that, the mod value is based of a percentage of that fictitious value so in theory it should be higher too. It's not a horrible deal really, but by accepting it you should admit to yourself that it's based off fake math and you're selling yourself a bit short in the face of a payday.

Which is why, though I will likely take the mod, I'm preparing my objection to that portion of the settlement. It's especially applicable in my case, because (a) I bought it less than a month before the scandal and (b) it's a wagon, which didn't even become available until 6 months after the start of the model year so at most they only have 1/2 year depreciation.

 

[troms]

Separate emotion and "fairness" out of it and stick to the facts and maybe you will understand the point here. Here are the facts which I will line item to help you think through them in order since something is not connecting for you.

All owners with non 2015 vehicles are getting Nada clean trade in value from 9/15. Nada is an independent third party.

2015 values that weren't available from Nada are being calculated at 29% depreciation regardless of when you bought the vehicle. Where did they get 29% from?

29% depreciation doesn't happen in a day, week, month, or year from the time of purchase except in very few cases. Average new vehicle depreciation in the US is 19% in 12 months.

VW was strictly prohibited by the wording of the CAS to influence owners decisions about the fix vs selling back.

By giving a heavily depreciated value they slightly tilt the scale towards repair for the vehicles that are easier and likely cheaper for them to repair. See the above point. They aren't supposed to do that.

What aren't people getting here? This thread is based on the fact that the vehicles are being assigned a value which neither represents the real value of them at the time of the scandal or is in line with the plethora of data they could have used to determine a fair value. If you think the fix money is fine well great! Again, I'm not saying it's not a valid option, it certainly is. What I'm saying is a $30,000 vehicle wasn't worth $20,000 a day, week, or few months after it was purchased. The figure they used isn't based in reality. On top of that, the mod value is based of a percentage of that fictitious value so in theory it should be higher too. It's not a horrible deal really, but by accepting it you should admit to yourself that it's based off fake math and you're selling yourself a bit short in the face of a payday.

I plan to shut up now, but you are making very good, clear points here. I agree that it's difficult to imagine a just reason why the 2015 values would be calculated differently. They may be the easiest to fix, and I can understand why VW would ideally want ALL compliant vehicles to remain on the road, but they've clearly been ordered not to employ any tactics to influence owners' decisions in this matter. One can only hope that it is because these vehicles do, or are expected to comply with relatively little modification.

If that's the case, in the future one might view it as: Your registered/legal vehicle has been recalled. You have/will be inconvenienced by this situation, yet very well compensated for your troubles. If the 2015s were the only cars involved, there would likely be no offers of buyback and maybe we would be offered a small fraction of the fix restitution. Just a recall and then we'd all move on with our lives, happily driving our VWs along the way. That is why I think, although your numbers, argument and point are certainly valid, they're bouncing off some 2015 owners who don't see any practical reason for their cars to be bought back. Why would I expect to be offered a buyback on my year-old car that has nothing wrong with it?

Having an emotional perspective, not wanting to do business with VW, is an entirely different view. You want the buyback, and it appears that it's more to your advantage NOT to take it. Clearly you should reasonably feel like you're being treated fairly without bias toward the choice you make.

 

[grawk]

I think they picked the number they did so that the total compensation was about what most people paid for their cars. Don't get too hung up on what they called each piece of the money, it's a complete package that should be evaluated. Anything else is exactly getting hung up on the emotions.

 

[DanB36]

I agree that it's difficult to imagine a just reason why the 2015 values would be calculated differently.

Well, that's easy--there was no published NADA trade-in value for 2015 model year cars in September 2015, so they had to come up with some other way of valuing the cars.

 

[GoFaster]

Bear in mind:

The 0.717 gets multiplied by 1.2 then gets $2986 added to it. For a hypothetical $30,000 car it comes out about $1200 less. Yes, the initial taxes are also lost.

The car is still under warranty.

If you want to get out, you have until 2018 to do it. At that point you will have had 3 years use out of the car.

$1200 plus about $1000 fees plus about $3900 tax (I am using Ontario Canada 13% HST) = $6100 over 3 years. That's pretty cheap for a $30000 vehicle.

 

[RollingCoal]

Too bad I drive in excess of the 1024 a month which I imagine 80% of tdi owners do. I have to calculate out what I would lose by holding on to the car until the warranty is up or it needs an expensive service I don't want to pay for.

On that note, does anyone know which of the service intervals on the 2015's are costly? I seem to remember there is one at 40k or so that runs in excess of $500.

 

[bizzle]

That's the dsg service, due every 40k

 

[RollingCoal]

That's the dsg service, due every 40k

Mine is a 6mt so I don't have to worry about that one thanks though.

Something just popped into my mind that I realized when the tables came out which I hadn't mentioned in this thread. The buy back price VW is giving for the Sep 2015 value is almost the same as the clean trade value today. I mean they are less then $1k apart, about $800 in my case. Are we really to believe that since last September (post dieselgate) our cars have only depreciated $800-$900 but in the first few months they depreciated $10,000? It's really laughable when you look at it that way.

If you plot a vehicle depreciation curve the drop is most significant the first year but levels out over time. If you plot the depreciation curve VW is suggesting, it is almost a vertical drop from say Jan 2015 to Sep 2015 then almost a flat line from there. Totally out of line with reality.

 

[bizzle]

Without all the data it's difficult to see the slope.

What likely happened is the value of your car dropped over the year and now it is going back up so it's looks like it hasn't moved much. People are snapping them up at auction to sell back so the values are rising rapidly. I get black book notifications each month on change of value of my car and it's been rising from 1-3% each month for a few months now.

 

[RollingCoal]

Without all the data it's difficult to see the slope.

What likely happened is the value of your car dropped over the year and now it is going back up so it's looks like it hasn't moved much. People are snapping them up at auction to sell back so the values are rising rapidly. I get black book notifications each month on change of value of my car and it's been rising from 1-3% each month for a few months now.

Interesting that it's going back up. I guess as people forget about dieselgate the values will move back in line with what they should have been.

 

[bizzle]

I don't think it's due to people forgetting

 

[Cincy_TDI]

Have a 2015 Jetta TDI SEL which I will be selling back. Luckily I had enough money down due to a Passat TDI that got totaled I will make out ok with the buyback. Not a fan of this Jetta. Lots of annoying rattles in the dash, stereo died twice, all the brakes had to be replaced. Homelink broke, now issue with the push button start.

If they could not get it right the first time, doubt now fixing won't cause long term effects. Send me my check here is the car time to move on.

 

[coolbreeze]

15 owners stand to gain long term if they take restitution. Hundreds of thousands of TDI's will be removed from the used market and we will have no competition since we will not see new Deisel's coming into a market with strong enthusiasts demand. There will nothing in the car market that compares for mpg and fun factor. Values will climb so a year from now you will be smart to take restitution money and sell your high demand vehicle if you want out from VW.

 

[Exstereo]

While I agree that looking on the bright side of things is a good habit, I don't think keeping a 15 would be wise. Yes I may possibly be the last of the Tdi's but that may not be a good thing to possess. If all the turned in Tdi's are crushed or otherwise not around the aftermarket industry may turn thier backs on the Tdi community. You may say but there will be lots of them in other parts of the world so the aftermarket will still be there. If there is not a customer base in the US no US based distributor will stock parts they can't sell. And importing after market parts is risky to say the least. That in turn would force OEM parts on all of us which would allow VW to charge even higher prices than they do now. Before I get told I am wrong, this is my opinion. I did spend 10 years working for an OEM supplier and have a feel for how they work.

Now my bright side: I would have liked to gotten a larger number when I registered and got my buy back amount. I am taking the money and paying cash for an older Passat wagon so I will no longer have payments which is a big plus. I bought the car yesterday and to counteract VW's lack of compensation I think the wheels and tires from my 2015 golf may magicly get switched with the ones on the passat before November 1st....

 

[RollingCoal]

While I agree that looking on the bright side of things is a good habit, I don't think keeping a 15 would be wise. Yes I may possibly be the last of the Tdi's but that may not be a good thing to possess. If all the turned in Tdi's are crushed or otherwise not around the aftermarket industry may turn thier backs on the Tdi community. You may say but there will be lots of them in other parts of the world so the aftermarket will still be there. If there is not a customer base in the US no US based distributor will stock parts they can't sell. And importing after market parts is risky to say the least. That in turn would force OEM parts on all of us which would allow VW to charge even higher prices than they do now. Before I get told I am wrong, this is my opinion. I did spend 10 years working for an OEM supplier and have a feel for how they work.
Now my bright side: I would have liked to gotten a larger number when I registered and got my buy back amount. I am taking the money and paying cash for an older Passat wagon so I will no longer have payments which is a big plus. I bought the car yesterday and to counteract VW's lack of compensation I think the wheels and tires from my 2015 golf may magicly get switched with the ones on the passat before November 1st....

I don't disagree. To further muddy things up the 2015 is the first year of this platform so if the 2016+ cars don't come the 2015 is kind of on it's own. If parts end up being super expensive because they need to be imported it will make the ROI on the deisel even harder to achieve.

 

[ezshift5]

.....there are some really, articulate, savvy and just plain sharp folks within this forum.

That being said - as most of us know - there are two sides to the bell shaped curve........


ez (still grinning over the - IMHO - generous portorted VW BB)

 

[bizzle]

Not even sure how to respond to this latest bout of speculation other than to remind people reading that our parts are already imported

 

[RollingCoal]

Not even sure how to respond to this latest bout of speculation other than to remind people reading that our parts are already imported

Yes they're imported but there is a difference between being imported at wholesale by the tens of thousands and needing to order through smaller suppliers that import by the tens. Not saying that it's even a concern at this point because it's probably not. They're also likely more than enough parts already here to cover most anything for the foreseeable future but if your the type to keep a car for many years it could be an issue at some point.

 

[bizzle]

You think I go to the dealership parts counter for my 1998?

Not being able to find parts for a 2015 TDI will *never* be a problem you have to worry about.

 

[Exstereo]

You think I go to the dealership parts counter for my 1998?

Not being able to find parts for a 2015 TDI will *never* be a problem you have to worry about.

OK, why is do you say this? Just curious.

 

[Exstereo]

Not even sure how to respond to this latest bout of speculation other than to remind people reading that our parts are already imported

So your TV and microwave oven are both made in China, go and try to get one direct. If you can find one, good luck on it functioning when it gets to your house. And have you ever tried to return something to an overseas vendor. I watched a buddy of mine try, it's not pretty. Just things to think about.

 

[grawk]

VW enthusiasts have been buying parts from brazil and germany for ages. There won't be any problem getting parts for these cars for a very long time.

That said, there's no shame in not being an enthusiast.

 

[solBLACK]

I'm curious if removing this many diesel vehicles is going to raise the price of fuel. I don't have much knowledge when it comes to all of this so I'm always just speculating on the different scenarios.

 

[RollingCoal]

I seriously doubt it will have any impact on diesel fuel cost. Every big rig you see driving down the road and all gamut of smaller delivery vehicles are diesel along with most military vehicles and many others. TDi's are a small fraction of the entire US diesel fleet.

 

[MrSprdSheet]

If you plot a vehicle depreciation curve the drop is most significant the first year but levels out over time. If you plot the depreciation curve VW is suggesting, it is almost a vertical drop from say Jan 2015 to Sep 2015 then almost a flat line from there. Totally out of line with reality.

The lawyers were unrealistic. What else can we say? Not offering retail trade value, offering reimbursement of sales taxes, and controlling for the wide variations around the prices people actually paid, was neglecting the primary ingredients of the fraud. If receipts complicate things, well, too bad.

Rolling Coal, this argument shows me the lawyers were willing to get complicated, where it served another's interest. On the one hand, late model owners who are willing to keep have been handed the most miss-aligned positive compensation of all (no depreciation, $X0,000 w/in 1,042 mi/yr), on the other 2015 owners don't deserve being handed a bill if they want out.

 

[troms]

Well, that's easy--there was no published NADA trade-in value for 2015 model year cars in September 2015, so they had to come up with some other way of valuing the cars.

I don't think you are deliberately being sarcastic, but that's like saying, "What do you mean you don't know how old you'll be when you die? That's an easy one, just take the year you were born and subtract it from the year you're going to die. The result should be pretty accurate."

I meant, I don't know why there would be different criteria used than THOSE USED TO CALCULATE THE NADA NUMBERS FOR PREVIOUS MODEL YEARS. It may not be as simple as just plugging the 2015 numbers into the same formula as the 2014, 2013, etc...since the cars are in their first model year. None the less, unless I'm overlooking something (which is entirely possible), we are not entering this blind. We don't START by looking at random, unpredictable numbers. We start by observing VERY predictable numbers. The 2015 numbers seem to be lower than what one might reasonably predict, based on the data from the previous 5 model years.

To the original poster's point, it appears that the value assigned to the 2015s is less than one would expect RELATIVE TO THE PREVIOUS 5 MODEL YEARS. It's not because VW didn't have NADA there to tell them the answer, so they just punted and hoped no one would call them on it. It seems that it is because a different set of criteria was used, or a different set of calculations was made in order to arrive at the buyback amount. That's all. I'm just saying I don't know why that would be.

This forum has been helpful to me. I'm grateful to learn the perspectives and line of thinking employed by other owners, especially owners of 2015s. Each day I feel more and more like keeping my TDI is the best move for me. Thanks.

 

[ChinaBob]

2015 Audi A3 Premium Plus TDI, $41,745 list price with some packages. I paid $39,000. Now, two years and 80,000 miles (yes, that's right, 80k!) later and Audi will buy it back for $35,663.93. With the goodwill package, that comes to $36,663.93, or 94% of what i paid for it.

I am happy.

 

[DanB36]

I meant, I don't know why there would be different criteria used than THOSE USED TO CALCULATE THE NADA NUMBERS FOR PREVIOUS MODEL YEARS.

Only NADA knows what those criteria are, and they aren't telling--at least, not in enough detail to allow anyone else to duplicate their work. If they did, why would we need NADA?

VW's methodology* for pre-2015 cars is simple: look at the book, as it was in 9/15. They can't do that with 2015 cars, since they weren't in the book in 9/15. They can't duplicate NADA's methodology, because they don't know what it is--and even if they did, it's far from certain that it would be valid on current-model-year cars (which is why "pay NADA to run the numbers for you" likely wouldn't work either).

Are the values for 2015 cars too low? It seems that way. @RollingCoal says that the 29% depreciation for the first year is much higher than average, which may be so. If that can be demonstrated, that sounds like a very worthy objection to make to the court and class counsel. But to your stated question of why the MY2015 values are calculated differently, the answer is "because it is literally impossible to calculate them the same way as for pre-MY2015 cars".

* Really, the methodology of the settlement agreements. There's no way to say who first suggested it, or what (if any) revisions happened between that first suggestion and the filing of the proposed agreements on 6/28.