Or at least took a couple of Jr College courses on civil law


VW is getting sued by the Feeb over the TDI thing.

In the complaint it says "Remedy or mitigate" on page 27

United States Files Complaint Against Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche for Alleged Clean Air Act Violations | OPA | Department of Justice

my eyes started to bleed and I only have a High School reading level, So
does that mean VW has to fix the problem or can they just pay off the owners?

__________________
1993 MB 300D 245K died.

What you quoted does not say nor imply "or" ... it does say "including but not limited to" I do not know who is the lawyer you seek.

Interpreting that line indicates to me that VW has to cause the excessive emissions to stop. Remedies? Speculative - Fix the cars? Cause them to stop operating on our roads?

If I was VW, I would try to pick door #3: mitigate the NOx emissions by offsetting them by either producing a large number of electric cars or by buying financial credits from a company that had reduced NOx emissions. If they were allowed to do that, no impact at all on customers, and they may get off cheap.

VW has a lot to worry about here. Seeing as how the EPA collectively fined 10 or so heavy truck manufacturers 1 BILLION dollars 15 years ago for exactly the same emissions cheat, EPA officials are probably still trying to understand how VW managed not to learn this lesson by prior example.
It wont be pleasant when it comes.

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

I am not an attorney but I'd say that mitigate means to not allow any more bad things to happen than necessary.

IE if a tenant moves out early on me with six months left on a lease it is my oblgation to mitigate my loss by renting it to someone else if possible and letting the first tenant off for only the months he occupied it plus the vacant time.

Often to encourage this to happen I'll ask the first tenant to kick in 50 or 100 a month to incentivize the new tenant to rent.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

I'm not "that kind" of lawyer, and this is not to be construed as 'legal advice' from me to you on the topic of your car, but...

I don't see where it says, "remedy or mitigate." The provision you refer to says:
"Order VW to take appropriate steps, including, but not limited to, mitigation of excess NOx emissions, to remedy the violations of Sections 203(a)(1), 203(a)(3)(A), and 203(a)(3)(B) alleged above."

Translation: They are asking the court to order VW to take "appropriate steps" in response to the filed complaint, and such "appropriate steps" are to include the mitigation of excessive NOx emissions from the affected diesel engines, so that they are no longer in violation of the listed sections.

The "but not limited to" language seems like 'tall-building lawyer' speak to me; it is unnecessary because "including" is a term of enlargement and not of limitation and does not suggest that any "appropriate steps" not explicitly expressed are excluded.

I'm not sure where you're coming from here....how does paying off the owners mitigate excessive NOx emissions and bring VW in line with the law? Regardless, a cursory reading of the complaint suggests that this is an action brought by the attorney general at the request of the EPA requesting (in addition to injunctive and other affirmative relief) that civil penalties be assessed against VW for the listed violations. Those civil penalties would, I assume, be paid to the treasury, not to the owners of VW vehicles.

Hope this is helpful and responsive to your questions.

__________________
Christopher
'06 Mercedes E350 station wagon (silver/black)
'85 Mercedes 300D (black pearl/palomino)
'85 Mercedes 300SD (smoke silver/burgundy)
'79 Cadillac Sedan DeVille

'05 Toyota Camry (because always running is nice)

'85 Mercedes 300D sold back to orig. owner 8-1-06
'84 Volvo 264GL Diesel, owned 2000-2013

^Thanks, that helps.

__________________
1993 MB 300D 245K died.

I'd bury 'em, or, disperse their fines paid, among the automakers that manufactured diesel engine cars without lying, as VW did.

If their situation allows it, that could be the easiest way to get through the first phase of redemption. More will be needed, but it might get the feds off their back for a period of time.

__________________
Mike Murrell
1991 300-SEL - Model 126
M103 - SOHC
"Fräulein"

didn't think of that, how much revenue did the the other car makers loose because they couldn't make a clean diesel without blue juice.

__________________
1993 MB 300D 245K died.

"lose......"

Doesn't matter. Just slice the pie up based on the manufacturer's reports of units sold in the U.S. for those years. The fact of the matter is that they were ALL financially damaged, because VW was selling bogus vehicles, based on their outstanding mpg numbers, thereby diminishing sales of the bona fide, non-felonious manufacturers.

Besides the fact that I don't think your solution is a recognized remedy for the alleged violations, how exactly would this work? Are you suggesting that the manufacturer that sold the largest number of diesel cars during the same period in which VW was selling vehicles which, if not altered, would not have met emissions standards, should be awarded the largest piece of the pie? Even if large numbers of people bought those vehicles for reasons that had nothing to do with miles per gallon claims? Might that not have the effect of providing a windfall to the manufacturer who, arguably, was the least harmed by VW's alleged deceit?

It's easy enough to make that statement, but how would you prove it in a court of law? I don't think saying, "judge, obviously they suffered some financial harm here" is going to cut it.

Again, is it necessarily the case that all diesel vehicles sold by VW during the period of alleged wrongdoing by the company were sold because of VW's claims about miles per gallon? And didn't the use of the defeat device during testing cause the EPA's mpg numbers (that were reported to purchasers and prospective purchasers by VW) to be lower than the actual mpg results that purchasers saw when driving the vehicles?

__________________
Christopher
'06 Mercedes E350 station wagon (silver/black)
'85 Mercedes 300D (black pearl/palomino)
'85 Mercedes 300SD (smoke silver/burgundy)
'79 Cadillac Sedan DeVille

'05 Toyota Camry (because always running is nice)

'85 Mercedes 300D sold back to orig. owner 8-1-06
'84 Volvo 264GL Diesel, owned 2000-2013

SRJ hates VW. Just ignore him.

I know he's no fan of the brand. I'm just curious if his proposal was backed by any thought other than dislike of VW or their actions....

__________________
Christopher
'06 Mercedes E350 station wagon (silver/black)
'85 Mercedes 300D (black pearl/palomino)
'85 Mercedes 300SD (smoke silver/burgundy)
'79 Cadillac Sedan DeVille

'05 Toyota Camry (because always running is nice)

'85 Mercedes 300D sold back to orig. owner 8-1-06
'84 Volvo 264GL Diesel, owned 2000-2013