VW deliberately cheated, Daimler not: Court decides on the “thermal window”

diesel car

VW deliberately cheated, Daimler not: court decides on "thermal window"

VW deliberately cheated, Daimler not: Court decides on the "thermal window"-deliberately
Marijan Murat/dpa The diesel model lawsuit brought by the consumer centers focuses on the carmaker Daimler.

It wasn’t just VW that was involved in a wave of lawsuits in the emissions scandal, Daimler customers also complained in large numbers. However, the chances are worse: The BGH has now confirmed that Daimler did not use the so-called thermal window with fraudulent intent.

Because of the so-called thermal window in many Mercedes diesels, complaining car owners are not yet entitled to compensation from Daimler. Even if it is an illegal defeat device, the mere use of the technology is not immoral, the Federal Court of Justice ruled. Because unlike the scandalous engine EA189 from Volkswagen, the software does not differentiate whether the car is on the test bench. (Ref. VI ZR 128/20) The «thermo window», which was also used as standard by other manufacturers, is part of the engine control and reduces the emission control when the temperatures are cooler outside. The plaintiffs saw this as an inadmissible defeat device – as at VW.

That’s what Daimler says

Daimler said in a first statement: "The BGH cuts the ground from the general argumentation of the lawsuits that a supposedly impermissible defeat device in the motor control of vehicles alone justifies a claim for damages." It goes on to say: "The predominant case law at regional and higher regional courts in diesel proceedings is in favor of the company. In around 95 percent of the cases, the decision was made in favor of the company. At the level of the regional courts (LG) there are around 11.000 dismissal decisions in favor of the company, in only around 700 cases a decision was made against the company. At the higher regional courts (OLG) there are now over 550 decisions in our favor and only two decisions against us", so the carmaker.

Volkswagen used fraud software

Volkswagen had secretly used fraudulent software in millions of diesel cars, which on the test bench concealed the fact that too many pollutants were being emitted. For the BGH judges, this is the main difference to the Daimler thermal window, as the Senate chairman Stephan Seiters explained in the hearing on April 29. June once again stated: This always works the same, whether on the road or in the test. However, the use of the technology alone is not immoral, so it does not trigger any liability for damages.

Mercedes is finally introducing the EQT: But electric fans will have to wait

VW deliberately cheated, Daimler not: Court decides on the "thermal window"-deliberately

site Mercedes is finally introducing the EQT: But electric fans will have to wait

The plaintiff wanted Daimler to take back the car and refund the purchase price minus the kilometers driven. He had his 2012 C-Class for around 35.000 euros bought new. The Higher Regional Court (OLG) Koblenz had recently dismissed his claim.

The case is not yet over, however, because the plaintiff had accused Daimler of using a number of other illegal devices to manipulate exhaust gases, including the coolant system. The Koblenz Higher Regional Court did not investigate this specific allegation. That must now be made up for.

50.000 cars affected

Because of these and other allegations, the consumer centers are currently preparing a model declaratory action against the Stuttgart carmaker. They want a court to establish that Daimler used other devices in addition to the thermal window that were actually intended to dupe the authorities.It’s about 50 across Germany.000 cars of the sports SUV series GLC and GLK with the engine type OM 651, for which the Federal Motor Transport Authority had ordered recalls. The plaintiff’s C-Class also has such an engine, but it is not one of the models to which the model lawsuit should refer to. It was also not affected by an official recall. (AZ. VI ZR 128/20)

Super battery made in Swabia: Porsche builds its e-car battery in Tubingen

VW deliberately cheated, Daimler not: Court decides on the "thermal window"-decides

Site Super battery made in Swabia: Porsche builds its e-car battery in Tubingen

SV/dpa

Related articles

Please follow and like us:

4 thoughts on “VW deliberately cheated, Daimler not: Court decides on the “thermal window””

  1. VW
    Certainly cheated and was sentenced to billions of penalties in the United States!! That’s right … and end!! Only the stupid Europeans can be shit -free and still courtes a company with so much criminal energy!!! If stupidity were squeaking, Europe would have to swim in the oil so that you don’t hear anything!!!

    Reply
  2. When does the lawsuit against the e cars come?
    What interest will pursue the companies now financed by the state? What comes out at the back or who cheats? Who has balls in their pants to pillory the production of an electric car? The coin has two sides…..

    Reply
  3. character question
    Everyone actually knows: illegal defeat devices harm the general public (tax and pollutants) – but hardly the owner personally. The fact that some are still demanding enormous “moral” damages for themselves, even though their car always brought them from A to B as agreed, shows the character attitude as it was with the CumEx scam of some celebrities: legal tricks never replace personal integrity and decency, do it both are very visible. Automakers have rightly paid billions to the damaged public (the state treasury). The fact that some car owners seriously exploit courts and insurance companies and burden the general public with costs is unpleasant, but at least reveals their character.

    Reply
  4. Yes, the BGH has taken a stand again
    and, of course, is not on the side of the companies and not on the side of the citizens, as is the case in the USA. Yes, and the defeat device alone, which affects the environment and the climate, is of course not punishable. Although the buyer could assume that he bought an environmentally friendly car, his Benz rattled out pollutants in the cold, which the facility is intended to save. What a great judgement, something that would never have happened in the USA. But even worse is the admissions office at the Minister of Transport, which should have complained a long time ago because of the violation of the admission conditions, or what it is probably involved in the cover-up. But the citizens will probably never find out about this, just not the USA.

    Reply

Leave a Comment