OM651 Motor im Abgasskandal - Verbraucherschutz Blog - R&U

Erneuter Erfolg im Mercedes-Abgasskandal vor dem BGH

Marco Rogert — Thu, 02 Jun 2022 10:58:29 +0000

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has anew positive for a plaintiff we represented in the Mercedes emissions scandal. This is not the first case we have conducted that has been referred back to the competent lower court for further review by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH ruling of 13 July 2021, Ref. VI ZR 128/20 and Federal Court of Justice decision of February 23, 2022, Ref. VII ZR 602/21). In this decision, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) also ruled that the judgment of the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Koblenz had to be overturned and referred back to the Court of Appeal for a new decision (BGH decision of 20 April 2022, Ref. No. VII ZR 720/21). Specifically, the case concerns a used Mercedes-Benz GLK 220 CDI BE 4M (emission class Euro 5). The vehicle is equipped with a Diesel engine type OM 651 equipped.

Both the Regional Court and the Higher Regional Court had previously dismissed the plaintiff's claim and had not awarded him any damages. However, the Federal Court of Justice criticised the plaintiff's factual submission that Exhaust gas purification The driver's vehicle's performance is controlled by a software function that detects whether the vehicle is on the test bench and, in this case, activates a coolant target temperature control (CTC). When a CTC is activated, nitrogen oxide emissions are reduced to the permissible level.

BGH considers immoral behavior to be given

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) stated that a mandatory recall by the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) does not sufficiently establish the existence of an inadmissible defeat device. Rather, according to established case law of the highest courts, circumstances must exist that make the conduct of the persons involved appear particularly reprehensible (cf. BGH ruling of September 16, 2021, Ref. No. VII ZR 190/20). By using a Test bench recognition software According to the BGH, however, this would constitute immoral conduct.

The KBA has been investigating since autumn 2018 on suspicion of impermissible shutdown device against Daimler AG. The use of a software, which detects whether the vehicle is on the test bench and then reduces nitrogen oxide emissions, appears to be immoral according to the Federal Court of Justice. Nitrogen oxide emissions are thus only minimized on the test bench and not in real driving conditions on the roads. There, the legal limit of 180 mg/km is significantly exceeded. The KSR keeps the coolant circuit artificially colder and delays the warming up of the engine oil. This results in significantly lower NOx formation and compliance with the limit values on the test bench. However, if the engine is started without the test bench detection software, the KSR does not take effect. The result: The coolant and engine oil heat up more quickly and nitrogen oxide emissions are higher.

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends Mercedes drivers

If you are the owner of an affected vehicle with Engine type OM651 you should now Chance of a possible compensationThe law firm Rogert & Ulbrich was the first law firm in Germany to be able topositive decisionbefore the Federal Court of Justice in a Daimler case. Please contact us and let usyour demandscheck without obligation and free of charge.

Mercedes-Abgasskandal: Erneut positive BGH-Entscheidung

Marco Rogert — Mon, 02 May 2022 10:18:45 +0000

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has anew positive for a plaintiff represented by us. This is not the first case we have conducted that has been referred back by the Federal Court of Justice to the competent lower court for further review (BGH ruling of 13 July 2021, Ref. No.: VI ZR 128/20). This time, too, the Federal Court of Justice ruled that the case had to be referred back to the Court of Appeal for a new decision (Federal Court of Justice decision of 23 February 2022, Ref. VII ZR 602/21). Specifically, the case concerns a used Mercedes Benz E 350 D Avantgarde Night EU6 (emission class Euro 6), which was purchased for € 69,900. The vehicle is equipped with a diesel engine of the Type OM 642 equipped.

Both the Kiel Regional Court and the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court initially did not award damages to the plaintiff represented by us. However, the Federal Court of Justice criticizes the factual submissions of the plaintiff, Exhaust gas purification The driver's vehicle's performance is controlled by a software function that detects whether the vehicle is on the test bench and, in this case, activates a coolant target temperature control (CTC). When a CTC is activated, nitrogen oxide emissions are reduced to the permissible level.

Test bench detection software as a starting point for immoral behavior

The BGH makes it clear that the use of such Software, which detects whether the vehicle is on the test bench and then reduces nitrogen oxide emissions, can be considered a starting point for the assumption of immoral behavior by Daimler AG. This is because nitrogen oxide emissions are only minimized on the test bench and not in real driving conditions on the roads. There, the legal limit of 180 mg/km is significantly exceeded. The KSR keeps the coolant circuit artificially colder and delays the warming up of the engine oil. This results in significantly lower NOx formation and compliance with the limit values on the test bench. However, if the engine is started without the test bench detection software, the KSR does not intervene. The result: The coolant and engine oil heat up more quickly and nitrogen oxide emissions are higher.

This software function is initially only available on one Mercedes GLK 220 CDI with the OM 651 diesel engine detected. However, it is now known that this defeat device has also been installed in Mercedes C-, E-, and S-Class vehicles with the OM 642 diesel engines. In June 2019, the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) had already issued an official recall for around 60,000 GLK 220 CDI vehicles with the Euro 5 standard. The KBA now assumes that more than 700,000 affected vehicles out of.

If you drive a Mercedes, then act now!

If you are the owner of an affected vehicle with engine type OM651, you should nowchance of possible compensationThe law firm Rogert & Ulbrich was the first law firm in Germany to be able topositive decisionbefore the Federal Court of Justice in a Daimler case. Please contact us and let usyour demandscheck without obligation and free of charge.

Urteil gegen Daimler AG – vorsätzlich sittenwidrige Schädigung

Marco Rogert — Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:12:31 +0000

In its judgment of January 28, 2022, the Stuttgart Regional Court ordered Daimler AG to pay the plaintiff represented by us damages of € 13,526 against return of the vehicle (case number 17 O 711/19). The vehicle in question is a Mercedes Benz GLK 220 CDI 4Matic of the Euro 5 emissions class. The affected Mercedes has a OM651 engine The plaintiff bought this as a new car for a purchase price of € 47,349.

The LG affirmed a claim for damages pursuant to. § 826 BGB for intentional immoral damage. The vehicle in question did not comply with the requirements of the EC Regulation 715/2007According to this regulation, manufacturers are obliged, among other things, to comply with the specified limit values and not to impermissible shutdown deviceswhich reduce the effectiveness of emission control systems. Vehicles must therefore comply with the specified limit values under normal operating conditions.

Daimler AG violated EC Regulation 715/2007 with the vehicle in question. The vehicle was not equipped accordingly, so that the legally stipulated limit values for nitrogen oxide emissions were not met under normal operating conditions.

Implied deception through placing on the market

The fact that Daimler AG has placed the vehicle on the market represents an implicit deception. Placing the vehicle on the market signals that "the vehicle complies with the applicable regulations and fulfils its objective purpose of being used on the road".

This deception caused the buyer concrete damage. If the limits are not complied with, there is a risk of the registration being revoked and the vehicle being taken out of service. This would result in a significant loss of value. The plaintiff therefore bought a vehicle that did not correspond to the contract.

The chances of suing Daimler AG are increasing enormously!

More and more courts are ordering Daimler AG to pay damages. This fact increases the chances for all Daimler drivers enormously. We therefore recommend that you let your claims Check with us free of charge and without obligation.

Mercedes-Abgasskandal: Zeichen aus Köln – Daimler verurteilt

Marco Rogert — Fri, 28 Jan 2022 09:41:37 +0000

The Cologne Regional Court ordered the Daimler Group to withdraw a Mercedes Benz ML 250 Bluetec 4Matic (engine type OM651) and to repay the purchase price of around € 26.400,00 (Judgment of the Cologne Regional Court of January 10, 2022, case number 19 O 11/21).

In its reasoning, the court found that Mercedes-Benz AG, on the basis of a fundamental strategic decision made for its group in engine development in its own interest in terms of costs and thus profit, had systematically and deliberately deceived the Federal Motor Transport Authority over many years with regard to the diesel engine of the OM 651 series.

The engine control software of this model was deliberately programmed in such a way that the legal emission limits were only complied with on the test bench by means of an inadmissible switch-off device.

During the proceedings, Daimler failed to refute the arguments put forward by the plaintiff as to whether and why the contested illegal switch-off devices were necessary for reasons of engine protection.

Immoral behavior

The argument that the engine control of the vehicle in question contains a so-called thermal window is not sufficient in itself to justify compensation. However, objectively immoral conduct on the part of the Daimler Group is evident from the plaintiff's further argument that the Federal Motor Transport Authority has now identified other illegal functions in addition to the thermal window. These are the coolant setpoint temperature control and the other modifications to the engine control, which reduce the rate of exhaust gas recirculation outside the NEDC test cycle, which leads to increased nitrogen oxide emissions.

The court is convinced that the defeat devices mentioned by the plaintiff are to be qualified as test bench recognition software.

What can you do?

Urteil gegen Daimler AG – Schadensersatz für Mercedes Sprinter

Marco Rogert — Wed, 17 Nov 2021 08:16:46 +0000

The Freiburg Regional Court ordered Daimler AG to pay damages of € 82,592 to a plaintiff in return for the return of the vehicles (judgment of October 18, 2021, case number 6 O 149/19). The case concerned three Mercedes Sprinter 316 CDIThe plaintiff purchased the three vehicles between February 2016 and August 2018 for a total price of € 111,960. The Sprinter class vehicles have the engine typeOM 651(Euro 6 and Euro 5). This engine is said to be equipped with various illegal switch-off devices. The nitrogen oxide emissions are controlled via the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR). The EGR is controlled by the outside temperature.

One of the plaintiff’s Mercedes Sprinters is also subject to a mandatory recall by the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA).

Intentional and immoral actions by Daimler AG

The Freiburg Regional Court sees in this case an intentional immoral injury to the plaintiff according to § 826 BGB due to the use of impermissible switch-off devices. The plaintiff has therefore already suffered damage through the purchase, as the vehicle did not comply with the legal requirements of EC Regulation 715/2007. The Regional Court also evaluates, among other things, the coolant target temperature control, the thermal window and the different operating modes of the SCR catalyst as an inadmissible switch-off device.

The coolant target temperature control means that the temperature of the coolant and the engine oil is artificially kept low at the start of the engine operation. This results in low emissions of nitrogen oxides. In real driving conditions, however, this function is deactivated and the legal limit of 180 mg/km is significantly exceeded. The thermal window also manipulates the exhaust gas purification, because here too optimization only takes place on the test bench and not in real driving conditions.
One of the vehicles also has an SCR catalyst. The urea mixture AdBlue is used to clean the engine's exhaust gases. Here, too, there are different operating modes that influence and ultimately manipulate the exhaust gas purification.

Chances against Daimler AG increase enormously

If you are the owner of an affected Sprinter, you should now chance of possible compensation We offer you, without obligation and free of charge, to have your claims checked. Thanks to our specially created database, we can immediately track whether your vehicle is also affected.

Daimler AG rückt immer mehr in den Fokus

Marco Rogert — Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:10:00 +0000

The Stuttgart Regional Court convicted the Daimler Group in two proceedings conducted by us, each time requiring payment of damages and the return of the vehicles.

The first trial involved a Mercedes-Benz GLK 220 with the emission class Euro 5 from 2015. The plaintiff had the car with the engine OM651 in July 2016 for € 34,700 and drove almost 52,000 km with it (judgment of October 13, 2021, case number 20 O 133/20). Now Daimler AG has to pay him almost € 27,000 and take the car back. Daimler AG asked our client for the first time in March 2019 to voluntary software update (promotion code 54 961 27) to play.

We carried out the second procedure for the driver of a Mercedes-Benz B 200 CDI, emission class 5 and year of manufacture 2010. The car is equipped with a OM640 engine Here, the Daimler Group was ordered to pay € 9,872 and also to take back the car. Our client had bought the car used in 2013 for € 17,400 and drove it almost 85,000 km (LG Stuttgart dated October 21, 2021, ref. 20 O 417/21).

In its reasoning, the court assumed that the vehicles did not comply with the European legal requirements of Regulation (EC) No. 715/2007, according to which they must not exceed the legally defined limit values under normal operating conditions.

The Chamber further states that the Daimler AG produced and placed both vehicles on the market without the necessary prerequisite being met, namely that the nitrogen oxide emissions in real driving under normal operating conditions and not only comply with the limit values on the test bench.
The continued existence of the so-called EC type approval depends to a large extent on compliance with this requirement. If the approval is revoked, however, every owner faces the risk of having their vehicle taken out of service, which could lead to a massive loss in value.

Negligent violation by Daimler AG

Daimler AG would at least be negligent in its responsibility for this violation.

Finally, in accordance with common practice, given the importance of European regulations and the high level of environmental protection, but also in order to provide consumers with correct information, Daimler would have had to study Regulation (EC) No. 715/2007 and its legal framework in detail. The court found that Daimler's reliance on the idea that passing the bench tests was enough did not meet this high standard of care.

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends

We are the pioneers in the diesel emissions scandal – also against Daimler AG. We can also say that we are the first law firm in Germany to positive decision before the Federal Court of Justice in a Daimler case. This is not only an enormous success for us as a law firm, but above all an incredible success for every affected and injured vehicle owner. We recommend that you let your claims Check with us free of charge and without obligation.

Thüringer OLG erachtet weitreichendere Prüfung von möglichen Abschalteinrichtungen bei Daimler AG als erforderlich

Marco Rogert — Wed, 25 Aug 2021 14:00:37 +0000

The Thuringian Higher Regional Court (OLG) announced in the main hearing on June 29, 2021 that a further presentation or, if necessary, the taking of evidence appears necessary due to further alleged technical devices. The Mühlhausen Regional Court did not sufficiently address this aspect in its judgment dismissing the action.

The case concerns a Mercedes-Benz GLK 220 CDI with the system developed by Daimler AG engine OM 651 with Euro 5 standard.

Installed shutdown devices should be checked more closely

The Mercedes-Benz is equipped with the so-called "thermo window" which reduces exhaust gas recirculation at cooler temperatures. However, there are other shutdown devices installed that influence the emission behavior. In addition to the thermal window, there are other shutdown devices, such as a "coolant target temperature control", a software function that affects the engine control and a software that affects the transmission. With the coolant target temperature control, a software function activates a special temperature control that keeps the coolant circuit artificially colder and delays the warming up of the engine oil. The engine control function bit 15 regulates the treatment of exhaust gases. With all of these software functions, the nitrogen oxide levels on the test bench remain below the legally prescribed limits. In real driving conditions, however, this function is deactivated and the legal limit of 180 mg/km is significantly exceeded.

The Thuringia Higher Regional Court does not consider the use of the thermal window alone to be intentional immoral damage, but other technical devices should also be sufficiently taken into account. It should therefore be examined whether other technical devices were installed that would justify a claim for damages. This would probably require a further presentation or, if necessary, the taking of evidence.

Also The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in its judgment of 13 July 2021 (VI ZR 128/20) decided that a thermal window alone was not sufficient, but that further tests should be carried out. For the first time, the Federal Court of Justice did not dismiss the case, but decided that the Higher Regional Court should revisit the case.

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends having claims checked

Due to the fact that more and more investigations are being conducted against Daimler AG, Rogert & Ulbrich recommends to have your claims checkedThe steadily growing number positive judgments against Daimler AG, the prospects of success for affected Mercedes drivers are getting better and better. Let us walk the path together and enforce your rights.

OM651 Motor im Abgasskandal - Verbraucherschutz Blog - R&U

Erneuter Erfolg im Mercedes-Abgasskandal vor dem BGH

BGH considers immoral behavior to be given

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends Mercedes drivers

You might also be interested in:

Mercedes-Abgasskandal: Erneut positive BGH-Entscheidung

Test bench detection software as a starting point for immoral behavior

If you drive a Mercedes, then act now!

You might also be interested in:

Urteil gegen Daimler AG – vorsätzlich sittenwidrige Schädigung

Implied deception through placing on the market

The chances of suing Daimler AG are increasing enormously!

You might also be interested in:

Mercedes-Abgasskandal: Zeichen aus Köln – Daimler verurteilt

Immoral behavior

What can you do?

You might also be interested in:

Urteil gegen Daimler AG – Schadensersatz für Mercedes Sprinter

Intentional and immoral actions by Daimler AG

Chances against Daimler AG increase enormously

You might also be interested in:

Daimler AG rückt immer mehr in den Fokus

Negligent violation by Daimler AG

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends

You might also be interested in:

Thüringer OLG erachtet weitreichendere Prüfung von möglichen Abschalteinrichtungen bei Daimler AG als erforderlich

Installed shutdown devices should be checked more closely

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends having claims checked

You might also be interested in: