Diesel scandal
BGH is examining claims for damages because of an Audi engine
Diesel scandal: The VW subsidiary Audi has also tricked its engines with the emission values. The first case of an affected buyer is now being negotiated – with a special feature.
The VW subsidiary Audi is also involved in the diesel scandal because of its own engines, thousands of car buyers are demanding compensation.
Today the first of these cases will be heard at the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe. Whether there is already a judgment is open.
So far, there have only been judgments by the highest court on Audi in relation to the VW scandal engine EA189, which was built by Volkswagen and was also used in smaller Audi diesels. Affected Audi buyers have mostly sued VW – and in many cases got their money back. Plaintiffs who took action against Audi because of the EA189 have a much more difficult time. Because the BGH expects concrete evidence that someone at Audi knew about the illegal exhaust technology. Several rulings by the Munich Higher Regional Court, which gave detailed reasons for this assessment, stood up to scrutiny in November.
VW diesel scandal and suspicion against Audi
After the VW diesel scandal broke out in September 2015, however, the larger Audi engines were also quickly suspected. In March 2017, the public prosecutor opened an investigation. Ex-Audi boss Rupert Stadler, the former Audi engine boss and later Porsche board member Wolfgang Hatz and two senior Audi engineers have been on trial in Munich since September 2020.
Audi is also concerned with the suspicion that hundreds of thousands of diesel engines have been manipulated to pass emissions tests even though they emit too many toxins on the road. The Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) ordered a number of recalls, and according to Audi, around 225,000 vehicles are affected.
The case that is now being negotiated in Karlsruhe is about an EA897 engine model. According to the Ingolstadt-based car manufacturer, there are currently a low four-digit number of legal proceedings relating to vehicles that are affected by the same KBA complaints.
Peculiarity of the case
The case is special in that the plaintiff financed his car with a loan from the Audi Bank. The contract provided for the possibility of being able to return it with the final installment at a fixed price. The man had made no use of this, although the diesel scandal had already been exposed at this point.
The OLG Celle had recently considered this behavior to be contradictory, the plaintiff came away empty-handed. He appealed against this judgment in Karlsruhe. (Az. VII ZR 389/21)
Actually, the BGH judges wanted to negotiate a very similar case at the same time, which the buyer had decided for himself. The OLG Koblenz was of the opinion that Audi is principally liable for deliberate and immoral damage. The damage is also not compensated by the so-called securitized right of return. It could be advantageous for the plaintiff to keep the car and insist on compensation. This was about a model of the previous EA896 engine in a VW Touareg.
However, Audi and VW withdrew the revision at short notice. The decision was made to “concentrate the BGH hearing on one procedure”, it was said to justify.
Audi assumes that plaintiffs are entitled to a documented right of return in an equally low four-digit number of proceedings. Almost 8,600 first-instance and around 650 second-instance judgments had been passed on all Audi diesel engines (V-TDI) by the end of November. The judges ruled in favor of Audi in around 80 percent of the cases.