German consumer advocates want to seek compensation for Mercedes customers affected by the diesel scandal. You accuse Daimler of deliberately manipulating the exhaust gas values, similar to Volkswagen. However, the case is different here.
The Federation of German Consumer Organizations (vzbv) has filed a model declaratory action against the car manufacturer Daimler before the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court, said board member Klaus Müller.
Austrian consumer protection association joins
“The VSV supports Austrian owners of Daimler Mercedes vehicles and offers free and risk-free connection to the model declaratory action by our German lawyer,” says Peter Kolba, chairman of the VSV. Even if the vzbv should also seek a settlement with Daimler excluding Austrians – as was the case with VW at the time – participation would make sense because it would interrupt the statute of limitations for claims.
Daimler considers his system to be legal
In the opinion of the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA), Daimler used an impermissible exhaust technology in hundreds of thousands of diesel vehicles of its parent brand Mercedes-Benz and therefore had to recall automobiles en masse. However, Daimler considers the functions to be permissible. “Despite official recalls, Daimler AG continues to deny that it had deliberately manipulated the emissions levels of its vehicles,” said Müller. The court should now determine this and give consumers legal clarity.
By installing defeat devices, manufacturers can ensure that cars comply with the permissible limit values for exhaust gases during type approval. In road traffic, however, they sometimes significantly exceed this limit. However, there is a difference whether the exhaust gas control distinguishes between real and test bench operation.
It’s about Mercedes GLC and GLK
According to vzbv, around 254,000 Daimler vehicles in Germany are affected by the official recalls. In its model lawsuit, however, the association focuses on a certain type of engine (OM651). This means that the owners of almost 50,000 Mercedes GLC and GLK models could join in, which could be shut down without a software update.
The main purpose of the model declaratory action is to facilitate the way to compensation. Because the cars were recalled in 2018, the cases are threatened with statute of limitations at the end of the year. Daimler customers can prevent that if they join the lawsuit.
The lawsuit against VW was successful
The vzbv had filed a similar model declaratory action against Volkswagen in 2018. At the beginning of 2020, consumer advocates and VW agreed on a settlement that around 245,000 customers accepted. Volkswagen paid them between 1350 and 6250 euros, depending on the age and type of vehicle.
Shortly afterwards, the Federal Court of Justice ruled that VW had systematically deceived its customers: If they had known that diesel cars with a certain engine emitted far more pollutants than could be measured on the test bench, they would probably have opted for a different vehicle, it said. The group is therefore obliged to pay damages. In most cases, plaintiffs were given the right to return their car, but had to credit their use. Instead, many agreed with VW on a one-off payment and kept the car.
Different legal opinions in the Daimler case
In the case of Daimler, there have been a number of individual claims for damages in the past – with different outcomes. The success depends on “how those affected describe their case in court,” say the consumer advocates. There is still no legal clarity as to whether Daimler acted deliberately or immorally. Therefore, the consumer advocates want to force more clarity with the model lawsuit.
“Thermal window not immoral”
Some plaintiffs see the so-called “thermal window”, which was used as standard by Daimler and other manufacturers, as a point of attack. It is part of the engine management system and reduces emission control when the outside temperature is cooler. Plaintiffs see it – as with VW – an impermissible defeat device. In the case of Daimler, however, things are more complicated. At the end of June, the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe announced in connection with such a lawsuit that the use of this technology alone should not be classified as immoral.
The fact that the highest civil judges judge the case in a more differentiated manner than the VW case is nothing new. You had already spoken out in January when the scheduled negotiations never came to fruition – the plaintiffs always backed down. At that time, the Senate had announced that it had not yet seen any fraudulent conduct at Daimler. The thermal window always works the same, whether on the street or in a test. VW, on the other hand, had secretly used software in millions of diesel cars that concealed the fact that too many pollutants were being emitted on the test bench.