In today’s hilarious twist, Volkswagen has lost its appeal against a record $125 million Australian fine for lying to the public in respect of its hyper-polluting diesels. It emerged from court once again with its reputation in tatters.
Podcast (audio-only version, for listening in the car, etc.): [ Ссылка ]
Save thousands on any new car (Australia-only): [ Ссылка ]
AutoExpert discount roadside assistance package:
[ Ссылка ]
Did you like this report? You can help support the channel, securely via PayPal: [ Ссылка ]
See, in August of 2016, the ACCC emerged from hibernation long enough to write a stern letter to Volkswagen, advising that it was preparing to sue the company in Federal Court, vis-a-vis dieselgate.
In between then and 2019, Volkswagen and the ACCC groped around under the table, and they jointly decided that $75 million would be an appropriate penalty, given the breadth of deception which Volkswagen had perpetrated upon the ‘Strayan public.
And then Justice Lindsay Foster said (again, paraphrasing) said: ‘we’re gunna fine you $125 million instead’. I like Justice Foster.
Wig Dude Six actually described Volkswagen’s and the ACCC’s $75 million bilateral accommodation as “manifestly inadequate” to compensate for its “false representations”.
And this is where I justify calling them ‘liars’. A lie is simply misrepresenting the truth (or what the liar perceives the truth to be). So if a Federal Justice declares Volkswagen to be an issuer of false representations on things that matter - of substance in the consumer domain - they pretty much are liars henceforth.
Wig Dude Six actually said Volkswagen’s conduct was (quote): “an egregious breach of Australian consumer law of the worst kind imaginable”.
It was a record fine, too - roughly five times the previous gold medal for anti-consumer conduct held by a shonky business called Empower Institute ($26.5 million there) and more than 12 times the previous automotive anti-consumer gold medal. ($10 million - held by Ford for the infamous PowerShift dual-clutch transmission.)
Hoaxwagen’s basis for appealing the $125 million was pretty much the standard toddler in the sandpit tantrum. Like: ‘We agreed on 75. Then a nasty man in a scary wig made us pay 125. That’s 50 more. It hardly seems fair.’ (Paraphrasing.)
The actual words they used in the appeal were “manifestly excessive”. This is a company that makes nine million vehicles a year, with revenue of 223 billion Euros last year. $125 million is not even chump change for them.
What gets me about them (and I’m talking about the corporation exclusively here, in this report, not the individuals within it - they’re just doing their jobs, however imperfectly) is that A) if Volkswagen was an individual, he or she would be a sociopath.
I’m not a psychologist but it seems to me manifestly narcissistic, and completely devoid of empathy to be obsessed about your own fair treatment when the thing that got you there was ‘an egregious breach of the worst kind imaginable’.
And now the consequences are all so unfair, according to them. That’s a comedy skit that simply writes itself.
