If we decided not to have anything to do with any organisation that had ever been dishonest and corrupt then we would have to disown our government and have nothing to do with just about every religion on the planet.

Which car maker do you recommend ?

Edited by Stanb Sevento on 05/06/2017 at 00:19

I see your dilema Deft.The only up side is you get two years of replacement parts, thats it

Dont assume you will get trouble just because you have done 70K, many get double that and more. If the car has been allowed to regenerate when it needs to it can og on a long time.. Any garage can check the health of the BPF, you may be surprised how little of its capacity is used.

Its cars of your age and mileage that seem to suffer most from the fix, later ones seem to be less affected. Thats just my observation. I have heared a romour that VAG will be fined for all the cars left unfixed, but thats just romour. Im not getting mine done, not yet anyway (3 years old ) I will wait and see and the two years good will starts from the date of the fix.

Best of luck.

What annoys me is that the 'fix' is not mandatory in law - VAG broke the law by using ECU software to ensure vehicles that wouldn't have been Euro? certificated if it was removed, so why is the fix only optional (at least in the UK)? It should be that any vehicle without the fix should fail its next MOT and not be allowed back on the road (aside driving to the nearest dealership) until it is.

I realise that many people have complained about problems arising from the fix, but, rather than VAG paying huge fines to governments, I'd rather they pay owners to fix the problems, whether by cash or replacement parts, unless it can be proven that the car has been driven mainly for short journeys by the nature of issues arising. This, at least, would either give owners compensation against lower resale values, or give some extra trade to dealerships/garages who do the repairs, and not wasteful governments where that money would soon disappear into the ether.

What annoys me is that the 'fix' is not mandatory in law - VAG broke the law by using ECU software to ensure vehicles that wouldn't have been Euro? certificated if it was removed, so why is the fix only optional (at least in the UK)? It should be that any vehicle without the fix should fail its next MOT and not be allowed back on the road (aside driving to the nearest dealership) until it is.

No it shouldn't. One should not be forced into something that might well put one in a worse position. It seems that the wise advice 'if it works well, don't mend it' is particularly applicable in this sorry saga.

1 - I did say people disadvantaged should recieve compensation or have enough components changed out so they aren't, and 2 - what's the whole point of emissions laws if car manufacturers and people can ignore them with impunity? Why bother dragging VAG through all this 'fix' spectacle when it would've been easier and cheaper for all concerned just to give them a big fine and be done with the whole matter?

"The problem is that the theoretical driving route/pattern bears no relationship to any form of average of real drivers in real traffic conditions."

Yes, that's exactly what I meant - the results are meaningless for that reason.