Neue Beweisbeschlüsse in Verfahren gegen Mercedes Benz

Illegal shutdown devices in the OM 651 engine.

The Stuttgart-based carmaker has to prepare for headwinds in two lawsuits involving the reversal of purchase contracts.

For example, the regional courts of Mainz and Duisburg issued orders for evidence in proceedings (LG Mainz of 16.09.2020, Az. 5 O 398/19; LG Duisburg of 17.09.2020, Az. 12 O 70/19) which are intended to determine whether the models GLK 220 CDI 4Matic Euro 6 and GLC 220 d 4Matic Euro 5, both with the engine OM 651 equipped with an illegal switch-off device. Both models are subject to a mandatory recall by the Federal Motor Transport Authority. In the court proceedings, Mercedes claims that the installed - illegal - switch-off devices were not solely for the purpose of identifying the test bench and initiating measures to keep emissions particularly low. This meant that the car manufacturer was often able to evade liability.

Is the OM 651 engine legal after all? The courts see it differently!

Currently, the emissions scandal surrounding Mercedes Two diesel engines were recalled: the OM651 and the OM642, where OM stands for oil engine. The four-cylinder OM 651 engine (1.8 liters to 2.1 liters displacement) was installed in the A, B, CLA, S, V and GLA classes as well as in the SLK Roadster, Vito and Sprinter. The OM651 can also be found in some Mercedes hybrid models.

The LG Mainz would like to take evidence on the question,

whether the "installed software, which is responsible for the exhaust gas control system, recognizes whether the vehicle is on the test bench in order to then control the exhaust gas purification to such an extent that it passes the NEDC exhaust gas tests. In normal driving, however, parts of the exhaust gas control system are deactivated, which is why the NOx emissions are then considerably higher and the vehicle emits many times more than the legal limits of the Euro 6 standard allow."

In addition, the expert must determine whether the on-board diagnostic system (OBD) has been manipulated so that it falsely reports during the inspection that the exhaust systems are functioning properly.

The Regional Court in Duisburg goes even further and wants to have an expert opinion clarify whether

whether the dosage of the urea solution (“AdBlue”) to be supplied to the SCR catalyst is reduced outside the test cycle, i.e. during normal road use, to below the quantities necessary to comply with the prescribed limit values;

and

whether the exhaust gas purification system in the plaintiff's vehicle is only 100% active within a temperature window between 17° C and 30° C and whether it is reduced to such an extent outside this temperature window that the exhaust gases are emitted untreated?

Open questions about the affected Mercedes models

If the expert answers these questions in the affirmative, the following questions should also be answered:

Is there a technical basis for such a reduction or
Is there a comprehensible or even compelling reason for deactivation?

Is the reduction or deactivation essentially dictated by the emission measurement test procedures?

Is the reduction or deactivation necessary to protect the engine from damage or an accident and to ensure the safe operation of the vehicle?

Does the reduction or deactivation work longer than is necessary to start the engine?

We firmly believe that the reports will shed light on the matter and will keep you informed as to whether things are getting too tricky for the Stuttgart car manufacturer. It remains exciting to see whether the Mercedes diesel scandal involving the models with the OM 651 engine will also result in lucrative settlement offers for affected consumers.