Porsche Abgasskandal - Verbraucherschutz Blog - R&U

Rekordpreise für Diesel- Jetzt erst RECHT Auto rückabwickeln

Marco Rogert — Fri, 11 Mar 2022 11:52:00 +0000

Diesel is at a record high in Germany and petrol is also approaching a record high. The ever-increasing price of crude oil is having an impact on consumers. A litre of diesel has never been as expensive in Germany as it is now. Drivers, and currently diesel drivers in particular, have to dig deep into their pockets to fill up. We at Rogert and Ulbrich say: “Now it’s time” – reversing your diesel vehicle is more attractive than ever before.

Why is filling up so expensive? And why is the price of diesel so high? The price at the filling station is closely linked to the development of the oil price - and it is currently particularly high. This is due, among other things, to the fact that oil production is not running at full speed due to current events and that high demand is currently meeting a shortage of supply.

Diesel price overtakes gasoline price

The "diesel emissions scandal", which has been public knowledge since 2015, is far from over in legal terms - on the contrary! Ever new findings regarding further manipulation by car manufacturers, especially with current engines and vehicle models, ensure that more and more victims are demanding compensation from the manufacturers or dealers.

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends

The law firm, which has been in existence for 15 yearsRogert & Ulbrichhas made it its mission to fight on behalf of injured consumers nationwide. The broad team of lawyers and business lawyers not only helped within the framework of the emissions scandal has already compensated thousands of defrauded customers for damages and has thus made a valuable contribution to achieving justice. Our initial consultation is free and non-binding. Get advice without obligation.

VTDI-Abgasskandal rund um VW, Audi und Porsche

Marco Rogert — Thu, 13 Jan 2022 12:52:14 +0000

For many German car manufacturers, the diesel emissions scandal is still omnipresent, including the VW Group around the subsidiary brands Audi and PorscheAfter the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) announced on its website at the beginning of 2018 that several illegal switch-off devices had been found in vehicles with a 3l or 4.2l VTDI engine As far as I could tell, some owners of affected vehicles were only informed about this in 2019 with an “individual” letter. The result: A mandatory recall in the form of a (mandatory) software updateAnyone who fails to comply with the manufacturer's request risks having the affected vehicle taken out of service by the local registration authority.

Another consequence of the letters sent to vehicle owners in 2019 could now be that any claims for damages against the manufacturers of affected vehicles could become time-barred at the end of this year. Anyone who still wants to assert their claim for damages should definitely do so this year.

Numerous judgments have already been won against VW, Audi and Porsche

In the past, we have succeeded in a number of positive judgments Claims for damages of up to €50,000 and more were enforced not only against the VW subsidiaries Audi and Porsche, but also against the parent company Volkswagen.

Among other things, we were able to obtain damages of over €72,000 for our client before the Berlin Regional Court (case no. 7 O 118/19). The subject of the dispute was a Porsche Macan S 3.0 TDI, in which the illegal switch-off devices identified by the KBA were installed. Before the Ingolstadt Regional Court (case no. 43 O 741/19), we were also able to obtain damages of over €68,000 from Audi AG for an affected Audi A6 3.0 BiTurbo. We were also recently able to obtain damages of over €49,000 from Volkswagen AG for a VW Touareg 3.0 TDI before the Bonn Regional Court (case no. 2 O 246/21). According to the judge's statements, the fact that Audi AG is responsible for the manufacture of the VTDI engines does not exclude a claim for damages against Volkswagen AG according to the plaintiff's submission.

Federal Court of Justice also grants claim for reduced value

Another possibility for compensation is the so-called "small damages". In its ruling of July 6, 2021 (case number VI ZR 40/20), the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruled that instead of reversing the transaction, injured buyers of affected vehicles can also claim the reduced value caused by the inadmissible switch-off devices, i.e. the so-called "small damages". The advantage: affected vehicle owners can keep their vehicle and still be compensated. The amount by which the value of the vehicle has been reduced can be estimated without an expensive appraisal, for example based on a percentage of the purchase price.

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends

Do you drive an affected VW, Audi or Porsche and have received a recall letter from the manufacturer in 2019? Then you should act quickly, especially in view of the impending statute of limitations, andchances of successhave us check it.Current case law also shows that your chances have never been better.Prevent your potential claims for damages from becoming time-barred and let us examine them free of charge and without obligation.

Audi AG zur Rücknahme eines Porsche Cayenne S verurteilt

Marco Rogert — Fri, 03 Sep 2021 07:24:13 +0000

Audi AG was ordered by the Cologne Higher Regional Court to withdraw a Porsche Cayenne S 4.2l The proceedings we conducted resulted in the Higher Regional Court of Cologne (case no.: 19 U 107/20) Audi AG was ordered to take back the vehicle and pay damages of almost €80,300. Our client had purchased the vehicle in 2015 for just under €106,000 and had driven it 73,000 km by the date of the court hearing.

According to documents from the Federal Motor Transport Authority, this was already possible in 2018 various vehicles from Audi AG and Porsche AG with 4.2l diesel engines and Euro 6 emissions standard detect inadmissible shutdown devices.

Not Porsche, but Audi AG is liable

Even if the first thought might be "if it says Porsche on the car, it's Porsche inside," and the lawsuit would then initially be directed against Porsche AG, that's not the case. Indeed, it wasn't Porsche AG that developed the engine, but Audi AG, which was clarified during the proceedings. Therefore, the Cologne Regional Court ordered both Audi AG and Porsche AG (as so-called "joint and several debtors") to take back the car and repay the purchase price to the plaintiff.

First before the Higher Regional Court, then took over the Audi AG took full responsibility and paid the plaintiff damages amounting to almost €80,300.

Audi AG has already been ordered to pay damages in several proceedings

That Audi AG is responsible for the manipulation of the vehicles it developed and produced 4.2l diesel engines Two further rulings by the Karlsruhe Regional Court and the Hamm Higher Regional Court have already determined whether Audi AG is liable. In all cases, the courts confirmed that Audi AG intentionally and immorally harmed buyers. Ultimately, the decisive factor was that the engines were equipped with software without which the vehicles would have been far from being included in the EURO6 emissions standard, the courts stated. Those responsible acted for the purpose of profit optimization. The deliberately chosen method of generating profit for this purpose constitutes a particularly reprehensible offense and thus gives rise to claims for damages for buyers of these vehicles.

Rogert & Ulbrich achieves another major victory in the diesel emissions scandal

Another milestone for us. We have been fighting nationwide on behalf of consumers against major corporations since the diesel emissions scandal began in 2015. The ruling against Audi AG brings us and our clients one step closer to asserting claims for injured diesel drivers. You are welcome to have us examine your claims free of charge.

Audi AG muss Porsche-Fahrzeug zurücknehmen

Marco Rogert — Mon, 10 May 2021 14:08:56 +0000

The Munich I Regional Court ordered Audi AG to take back a Porsche Macan S Diesel (judgment of May 4, 2021, case number 41 O 9400/20). The plaintiff, who purchased the vehicle in 2013 for around €80,000 and had driven almost 78,000 km with it by the time of the hearing, was awarded his purchase price minus compensation for use in return for returning the vehicle, thus a sum of €55,187.49 for his 8-year-old car.

Development and production of the engine by Audi AG

The interesting thing about this case: Audi – and not Porsche – was ordered to pay damages for the purchase of a Porsche Macan S Diesel sentenced.

In the case, the court assumed that Porsche had installed the engine in the vehicle, but that the engine was developed by Audi and that the immoral damage was therefore committed there. Audi also failed to explain and disclose the circumstances, so the court followed the plaintiff's presentation and argument.

Even after being asked to do so by the court, Audi did not disclose the results of the investigations into the question of the responsibility of Audi executives. At the same time, however, the plaintiff's statements provide sufficient evidence that the board of directors was aware of the matter, the ruling states. This is supported in particular by the fact that the use of an illegal defeat device was a decision that entailed considerable risks for the company and also personal liability risks for the people who made the decision.

Immoral placing on the market of an engine with unauthorized software

In the case itself, the Chamber decided that the programming and installation of such software violated the minimum requirements in legal and commercial transactions on the motor vehicle market to such an extent that compensation for the financial losses caused was required. Especially if a buyer has no concrete idea of the legal validity of the type approval and compliance with the statutory emission limits, the placing of the engine on the market is immoral and is equivalent to a direct fraudulent deception of the buyer.

Der Skandal im Abgasskandal- hat VW das BGH Urteil zum Kauf nach ad-hoc Mitteilung durch Prozessbetrug erstritten?

Marco Rogert — Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:00:00 +0000

New hope for diesel buyers who purchased their vehicle after September 22, 2015.

In its judgment of July 30, 2020, the Federal Court of Justice ruled on the case of a plaintiff who bought his diesel vehicle in August 2016, almost 11 months after the publication of the “ad hoc announcement” by Volkswagen AG.

In contrast to the fundamental ruling in diesel emissions scandal of 05.05.2020, where the Senate had affirmed claims against the Volkswagen Group for intentional immoral damage, the BGH, here the claim for damages. In the opinion of the Senate, “VW's communication of 22 September 2015 is likely to destroy the confidence of potential buyers of used cars with VW diesel engines in the correct exhaust emission technology and to eliminate the innocence in this regard."

In plain English: From this point on, buyers of used VW vehicles with diesel engines could no longer expect a compliant vehicle from the VW Group.

A sentence that you have to let roll around on your tongue in many ways.

Surprisingly, according to the BGH, this statement was not challenged by the plaintiff in the specific case under consideration.

There is no grain of truth in VW’s ad hoc announcement

Original sound partner Dr. Marco Rogert: But that should definitely have been done, in other words, denied – as we lawyers put it! At R & U, we have analyzed the decisive reasons for the Federal Court of Justice's ruling in detail and found that the July ruling on "ad hoc purchases" is based on the assumption that Volkswagen AG had "come clean" with its announcement of September 22, 2015. But VW has not done so - on the contrary!

There is not a shred of truth in the third sentence of the ad hoc communication. It reads: “The software in question does not affect driving behavior, consumption or emissions.”

Original sound partner Dr. Marco Rogert: In the case of the EA 189, the scandalous engine that made the emissions scandal known, no court has since denied that the "complained software" does indeed influence the vehicles' exhaust emissions. It was used for the sole purpose of reducing emissions on the test bench in order to create the illusion that the legal limits were being complied with.

The content of the ad hoc communication was incorrectly worded in order to downplay the scandal

So the willingness of those responsible in Wolfsburg to provide clarification cannot have been that great back then.

Original sound partner Dr. Marco Rogert: Rather, it can be assumed that this content in particular was deliberately formulated incorrectly and incompletely in order to deceive potential buyers and diesel drivers in particular and thus downplay the scandal. The aim was not to inform consumers, but rather to limit the damage to the company.

Criminal charges filed against those responsible at the VW Group – dismissed lawsuits could be reopened

The R & U law firm sees itself as a representative of the interests of its clients – thousands of victims from Germany and abroad – and as an organ of the legal system obliged to make this fact public.

"We have filed a criminal complaint against those responsible at the VW Group. Significant evidence for the false and incomplete ad hoc notification also arises from new findings by the Munich public prosecutor's office and the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA)."

Learn more in the Handelsblatt!

Partner Dr. Marco Rogert

We will defend ourselves against all decisions based on this BGH ruling (ad hoc ruling) from July. Even lawsuits that have already been legally dismissed could be reopened in the event of a criminal conviction of VW for fraudulent proceedings.

Almost all Euro 6 diesel vehicle models from VW, Audi and Porsche recalled. Vehicles with the EA288 engine also affected

The second sentence of the ad hoc announcement, “The new EU 6 diesel-powered cars from the Volkswagen Group currently offered in the European Union meet the legal requirements and environmental standards,” also seems less credible today.

In fact, almost all 3.0 liter diesel vehicle models of the brands VW, Audi and Porsche, the Euro 6 emissions class, have already been recalled by the KBA due to illegal switch-off devices. Further recalls are currently being issued for the 3.0 liter models in the Euro 5 emissions class.

Original sound partner Dr. Marco Rogert: And that's not the end of the story. There are also legitimate doubts about whether the successor to the scandalous EA189 engine - the EA 288 - is clean for the group's 2.0 liter diesel models. Here, too, we already have 8 regional courts that have sentenced VW to pay damages in the first instance.

An internal document proves that there was a written instruction to also use the manipulation software used in the scandal engine EA 189 in the EA 288 vehicles - at least until week 22 of 2016.

In retrospect, the idea that the foundation for VW AG's transformation from Saul to Paul in the emissions scandal was laid with the ad hoc announcement in autumn 2015 seems more than refuted and certainly also criminally relevant.

The end of the emissions scandal is still far from in sight.

Here again is the ad hoc announcement from Volkswagen AG dated September 22, 2015:

Volkswagen AG informs:

Volkswagen is working hard to clarify irregularities in the software used in diesel engines. The new cars from the Volkswagen Group with EU 6 diesel engines currently offered in the European Union meet the legal requirements and environmental standards. The software in question does not affect driving behavior, consumption or emissions. This provides clarity for customers and dealers.

Further internal tests to date have shown that the control software in question is also present in other diesel vehicles of the Volkswagen Group. The software has no effect on the majority of these engines.

Vehicles with EA 189 engines are conspicuous, with a total volume of around eleven million vehicles worldwide. A noticeable deviation between test bench values and real driving conditions was only found for this engine type. Volkswagen is working hard to eliminate these deviations with technical measures. The company is currently in contact with the responsible authorities and the German Federal Motor Transport Authority.

To cover necessary service measures and further efforts to regain the trust of our customers, Volkswagen, to set aside around 6.5 billion euros in the third quarter of the current financial year. Due to the ongoing investigations, the assumed amount is subject to estimation risks. The Group's earnings targets for 2015 will be adjusted accordingly.

Volkswagen does not tolerate any violations of the law. The Board of Management's primary goal remains to regain lost trust and prevent damage to our customers. The Group will continuously and transparently inform the public about the further progress of the investigation.

69.000+ EUR Schadensersatz für Porsche Macan Fahrer

Marco Rogert — Mon, 21 Sep 2020 09:00:53 +0000

Cologne Regional Court orders car dealership to take back the car.

The Cologne Regional Court dismissed the emissions scandal lawsuit brought by the driver of a Porsche Macan S 3.0l instead (LG Cologne dated September 15, 2020, case number 32 O 200/19).

The lawsuit was directed against the car dealership where the car was purchased.
The car dealership was ordered to take back the car and refund the purchase price less compensation for use.

The plaintiff still receives for the car, which he bought as a new car in December 2015 for 89,496 euros 69,464 eurosHe must pay compensation of almost €15,000 for the distance traveled, 53,370 km. The court assumed a total mileage of 300,000 km for the expensive car, known for its longevity.

Built-in shutdown device causes significant material defect

The court qualified the installed defeat device and the resulting mandatory recall as a significant material defect. The mandatory recall threatened a ban on operation if the recall measure was not implemented, thus agreeing with the KBA's assessment. Porsche AG Built-in defeat devices can lead to increased NOx emissions during vehicle operation. A warm-up strategy that only kicks in during the NEDC test bench procedure and is not activated in real-world traffic results in nitrogen oxide emissions on the test bench being improved compared to emissions during normal driving.

Court: Software update not suitable as a remedy

According to the court, installing a software update is not sufficient to completely eliminate the defect. It is not sufficient if the car subsequently shows traces of the repair or replacement measures or requires further repairs in the future due to irreparable circumstances.

Even if the vehicle were to comply with the limits of the Euro emissions standard after installing a software update without manipulating the engine control system and without suffering any technical disadvantages, the vehicle would still be defective, the ruling states.
The characteristic of the vehicle affected by the emissions scandal remains a flaw in the car even after the software update and cannot be eliminated.

Porsche zahlt 92.000 EUR Schadensersatz

Marco Rogert — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 11:30:10 +0000

Good news for drivers of Porsche Cayenne 4.2l Diesel EU5.

The Cologne Regional Court upheld the claim of a Porsche driver. The plaintiff will receive a sum of approx. 92,000 euros.

The court sentenced the Porsche AG to refund the purchase price less compensation for use and to take back the defective vehicle.

The engine of the Porsche Cayenne Diesel 4.2l, which was initially leased in September 2013 and then purchased in September 2017, is called EA 897 and was recalled by the Federal Motor Transport Authority due to the use of an illegal defeat device. Here, too, those affected were asked to take their car to the workshop to have a software update installed.

Unauthorized switch-off device in the Porsche Cayenne: warm-up strategy

The Cologne Regional Court ruled that a reasonable buyer, as well as a lessee, may assume that a car purchased or leased by him is registrable.

This includes ensuring that the type approval required for the vehicle was not obtained through deception.

According to the assessment of the Federal Motor Transport Authority, the engine control software implemented in the engine put into circulation by Porsche AG contains an inadmissible shutdown device, namely a warm-up strategy. This only starts when the NEDC test bench procedure is run. It is not activated in real road traffic.
The decisive factor for the classification as an inadmissible defeat device is the fact that the effectiveness of the emission control system is reduced in normal driving conditions compared to the test bench behaviour, without any of the exceptions listed in EC Regulation No 715/2007 being applicable.

The exhaust emissions values determined on the test bench are not usually achieved in real road traffic. However, vehicle owners can legitimately expect that this deviation will not be increased by the use of manipulation software. The damaging act of implementing an illegal switch-off device in an engine control system lies precisely in the fact that vehicles are brought onto the road in a state in which the illegal switch-off device deprives the test bench procedure of its significance in relation to the real driving of the vehicle. This means that the state control of exhaust emissions limits, which is already limited by the restriction to test bench values, loses its effectiveness.

Even the implementation of a software update developed by Porsche AG does not change the legal assessment

The court judged Porsche AG's conduct to be intentionally immoral. Porsche's deception served the purpose of avoiding legally and technically sound but more expensive solutions for exhaust gas purification in order to reduce costs (and possibly avoid technical problems) and to gain a competitive advantage with the help of the apparently environmentally friendly test bench values. This pursuit of profit at the price of deliberately deceiving and disadvantaging customers gives the action the character of immorality.

Porsche Abgasskandal - Verbraucherschutz Blog - R&U

Rekordpreise für Diesel- Jetzt erst RECHT Auto rückabwickeln

Diesel price overtakes gasoline price

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends

You might also be interested in:

VTDI-Abgasskandal rund um VW, Audi und Porsche

Numerous judgments have already been won against VW, Audi and Porsche

Rogert & Ulbrich recommends

You might also be interested in:

Audi AG zur Rücknahme eines Porsche Cayenne S verurteilt

Not Porsche, but Audi AG is liable

Audi AG has already been ordered to pay damages in several proceedings

Rogert & Ulbrich achieves another major victory in the diesel emissions scandal

You might also be interested in:

Audi AG muss Porsche-Fahrzeug zurücknehmen

Development and production of the engine by Audi AG

Immoral placing on the market of an engine with unauthorized software

You might also be interested in:

Der Skandal im Abgasskandal- hat VW das BGH Urteil zum Kauf nach ad-hoc Mitteilung durch Prozessbetrug erstritten?

New hope for diesel buyers who purchased their vehicle after September 22, 2015.

There is no grain of truth in VW’s ad hoc announcement

The content of the ad hoc communication was incorrectly worded in order to downplay the scandal

Criminal charges filed against those responsible at the VW Group – dismissed lawsuits could be reopened

Almost all Euro 6 diesel vehicle models from VW, Audi and Porsche recalled. Vehicles with the EA288 engine also affected

Here again is the ad hoc announcement from Volkswagen AG dated September 22, 2015:

Volkswagen AG informs:

You might also be interested in:

69.000+ EUR Schadensersatz für Porsche Macan Fahrer

Cologne Regional Court orders car dealership to take back the car.

Built-in shutdown device causes significant material defect

Court: Software update not suitable as a remedy

You might also be interested in:

Porsche zahlt 92.000 EUR Schadensersatz

Good news for drivers of Porsche Cayenne 4.2l Diesel EU5.

Unauthorized switch-off device in the Porsche Cayenne: warm-up strategy

You might also be interested in: