I think the issue ryeman is hinting at is that there is a reason VW used the chest software ONLY during tests as opposed to during normal usage. If used during normal usage potential problems may occur with the exhaust system so he would like VW to offer better warranties post recalls.
I can recall not so long ago when 3yrs warranty was a big thing, from memory Mazda led the way there. We had issues in an 13mth old EB Falcon that cost my Dads company lots of $$ to fix as they refused with it being out of warranty. I think a 5yr warranty for VW and Skoda is something they will be dragged into sooner rather than later. Especially if they want to regain confidence in their cars again.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoi polloi
It depends on how big a player VW (or Skoda or Audi) want to be... No one car brand can be everything to everyone. I'd be happy with a car that drives like a VW, has the reliability/running costs of a Toyota and the warranty of a Kia but that won't happen...Quote:
Originally Posted by woofy
Back on topic :)
I am keeping an open mind to date over the dieselgate business. I deliberately haven't signed up to any class action because I just don't know what VW will propose as a fix and what impact this will have. As mentioned before we don't have punitive damages in Australia so a US-style payout is out of the question. Yes, there is a probable loss in resale (greater at first but probably diminishing over time) but again we have no idea of the final markdown. The danger of joining a class action before cards are on the table is that VW may offer compensation equal to or greater than what an Australian court would otherwise award. In this case a class action would fail.
I'm happy to wait as my car still drives as well as it did two months ago...
- Anthony
I'm interested in what Australian consumer protection laws have in effect to this dieselgate saga.
I hear differing analysis - one side says that there's the potential of not much since you've already got the car ranging towards some compensation because their anti-corporate-citizen actions have affected resale values so some compensation results through to the far edge of full value refund due to being lied about a product which was sold not fit for purchase.
Whoever says or believes that needs to learn about consumer laws. "Not fit for purpose" means that the product doesn't perform it's intended function to any reasonable degree.Quote:
Originally Posted by dero
In this case, a modern passenger car's function is to transport humans with a reasonable degree of safety, in reasonable comfort etc.
Not meeting emissions targets has nothing to do with fitness for purpose.
Sent from my LG-G2 using Tapatalk
Probably little. The consumer guarantee (which is different to the supplier's warranty) only guarantees that the goods "will work and do what you asked for". Further, from the ACCC website:Quote:
Originally Posted by dero
I'd say the only area where you might be able to exercise guarantee rights are safety (the NOx emissions are higher than allowed, so they are unsafely polluting the environment [but then, so is that 1992 model diesel truck being operated by the small business down the road, except, the standards were different in 1990s, so its allowed]) and not matching the description (they said it meets the standard, but it doesn't). Apart from those two, affected car continue to meet all other aspects. Even if you were to make a claim, the fix is a remedy, not compensation, and only for that portion that is problematic. Therefore, you can't claim for the whole car to be replaced if a $1000 software upload will fix it.Quote:
Consumer guarantees on products and services
Since 1 January 2011, the following consumer guarantees on products and services apply.
Products must be of acceptable quality, that is:
- safe, lasting, with no faults
- look acceptable
- do all the things someone would normally expect them to do.
Acceptable quality takes into account what would normally be expected for the type of product and cost.
Products must also:
- match descriptions made by the salesperson, on packaging and labels, and in promotions or advertising
- match any demonstration model or sample you asked for
- be fit for the purpose the business told you it would be fit for and for any purpose that you made known to the business before purchasing
- come with full title and ownership
- not carry any hidden debts or extra charges
- come with undisturbed possession, so no one has a right to take the goods away or prevent you from using them
- meet any extra promises made about performance, condition and quality, such as life time guarantees and money back offers
- have spare parts and repair facilities available for a reasonable time after purchase unless you were told otherwise.
With respect to the resale/trade-in issue, it is my opinion that it is altogether too ephemeral to be able to realistically determine whether there has and will continue to be a change in the value of affected cars in the marketplace.
There are far too many ifs buts and maybes at this point for there to be any clear picture of what will be the outcome of this situation so what is being written on the subject is pure speculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmura
Having said that, I'm sure a lawyer could successfully argue that the "etc." at the end of your definition of a car's function would include "whilst meeting all Australian Design Rules".
Cheers
George
They will certainly remedy them to meet the advertised description for emissions, I think where the lawyers are rubbing their hands together is that by doing this, it may affect power etc.
VW aren't stupid, you bet that they will achieve both but noone is to say the peak power or torque will be in the same RPMs as they were before. If they are shown to use more fuel which is likely, that would be harder to prove.
So it's been announced that the fix won't have an affect on performance.
Volkswagen EA189 engine fix to have no effect on performance
I think I'll end up waiting to see user reports on this before making my mind up either way on doing it or not. If I'm to speculate and read into this, I'm guessing that what he's saying here is that the EA189 meets the Euro 5 requirements without the cheat enabled so the software fix to take away the cheat code is how they can get away with not having it affect performance?
I read that article... VW said the engine fix should have no effect on performance and that no perfomance effect is their aim. Hope they're right...Quote:
Originally Posted by dero
Time will tell.
- Anthony