(855) 972-2045
CATEGORY: mesotheliomaBlog
MAR. 20, 2017
Both doctors and lawyers have used the phrase “ticking time bomb” to describe mesothelioma. Several decades can pass between the time a patient is…
Both doctors and lawyers have used the phrase “ticking time bomb” to describe mesothelioma. Several decades can pass between the time a patient is exposed to asbestos fibers and the time mesothelioma symptoms first appear.
In fact, because of mesothelioma’s lag time, known as the latency period, some patients have difficulty pinpointing when and where they were exposed to asbestos, because so many years have passed. All too often, decades later, the deadly byproduct of asbestos exposure catches up in a hurry.
It’s a cruel reality for many: Effectively dormant for decades, mesothelioma cancer kills most of its victims within two years once symptoms begin appear.
Sadly, in far too many cases, by the time the signs linked to this highly aggressive form of cancer become obvious, patients are in the latter stages of the fast-moving disease, limiting both the treatment options and potential longevity. Yet, in many instances, the earlier mesothelioma is diagnosed, the better the odds that a patient will live years — not just a few months — after treatment begins.
Since timing is crucial both to longevity and the hope of recovering compensation from companies responsible for exposing victims to asbestos in the first place, quickly recognizing and reacting to the symptoms of mesothelioma can help the chances of extending a patient’s life. To that end, medical experts warn that anyone who already is aware of asbestos exposure in their past should receive regular checkups to monitor any early signs of mesothelioma, which often are hard for patients themselves to detect.
Weitz & Luxenberg has represented 33,000 asbestos victims in lawsuits cases over the years, helping to recover billions in settlements and jury awards for its clients.*
Understanding how to recognize mesothelioma symptoms can not only extend a patient’s life, but help to recover financial compensation from the asbestos companies that created the medical circumstance in the first place.
While there are four types of mesothelioma, the pleural and peritoneal forms are by far the most common, accounting for a combined 90% of the estimated 3,000 new cases of mesothelioma diagnosed annually in the United States.
Pleural Mesothelioma Symptoms
Of the four mesothelioma classifications, the pleural form is the most prevalent, accounting for approximately 75% of annual cases in the U.S. Pleural mesothelioma attacks the linings of the lungs, often leaving a thick layer of tumor surrounding the lung tissue, and gradually reducing a patient’s ability to breathe.
As a result, victims frequently complain of the following symptoms:
- Shortness of breath
- Difficulty swallowing
- Chest, back, and flank pain and tightness
- Fatigue
- Persistent cough
- Coughing up blood
Peritoneal Mesothelioma Symptoms
Similar to pleural mesothelioma, the peritoneal type also attacks a crucial lining of the body cavity, located in the abdominal area. As a result, most of the symptoms are often associated with the digestive tract.
Peritoneal mesothelioma constitutes roughly 15% of the cases diagnosed annually in the U.S. and patients generally complain about these conditions:
- Abdominal pain or swelling
- Formation of lumps in the belly area
- Weight loss
- Gastric disturbances, such as diarrhea and constipation
Pericardial Mesothelioma Symptoms
The pericardium is a sack that surrounds the heart muscle, and while pericardial mesothelioma is rare, asbestos can sometimes cause tumors to form in that crucial lining, too.
Because the tumor can constrict the heart and lessen blood flow throughout the body, patients frequently complain about these conditions:
- Fatigue
- Chest pain
- Pressure in the chest cavity
- Murmurs or an irregular heartbeat
- Fever
- Persistent cough and swelling of the face and arms
Testicular Mesothelioma Symptoms
The rarest of the four mesothelioma forms, this particular cancer type attacks the lining of the testes, causing lumps and discomfort in the genital area.
Victims most frequently complain of swelling, pain, sensitivity, and irritation in the scrotum area. Those aware of asbestos exposure in the past should take note of unusual masses forming in the testicles and consult a doctor as quickly as possible.
Mesothelioma Symptoms in Other Parts of the Body
As with many forms of cancer, as the disease takes hold, mesothelioma can aggressively spread to other parts of the body, a process called metastasis, which usually means the patient is entering the advanced stages of the disease.
Don’t Wait to Seek Expert Advice
Both medically and legally, time is the essential component for any victim of asbestos exposure who has begun feeling symptoms associated with mesothelioma. Delays in seeking medical treatment can not only shorten a patient’s life expectancy, but could potentially impact a family’s chances of recovering compensation and holding the responsible asbestos companies accountable for the damage they’ve done. Statutes of limitation, the legal window in which victims can file a lawsuit, vary significantly from state to state, as well.
Given the burden of staggering medical bills and mesothelioma’s frightening mortality rate, the path for victims and their families is paramount: Don’t wait to seek expert treatment and legal advice.
Weitz & Luxenberg has been prosecuting mesothelioma cases for 30 years. For a free, confidential consultation, call (855) 594-0553.
* While our past record doesn’t guarantee future success, it is something you may want to consider when evaluating our experience.
View Sources
- Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation. (n.d.). What is Mesothelioma? Retrieved from http://www.curemeso.org/site/c.duIWJfNQKiL8G/b.8578801/k.639A/What_is_Mesothelioma.htm
- American Cancer Society. (n.d.). Signs and Symptoms of Mesothelioma. Retrieved from https://www.cancer.org/cancer/malignant-mesothelioma/detection-diagnosis-staging/signs-symptoms.html
LOOKING FOR LEGAL HELP?
We would feel privileged to assist you.
For a free case review, please contact us today.
Asbestos Information
CATEGORY: mesotheliomaBlog
MAR. 20, 2017
Shock and confusion are understandable reactions after being diagnosed with any serious disease, including mesothelioma. Patients diagnosed with mesothelioma often undergo difficult and overwhelming…
Shock and confusion are understandable reactions after being diagnosed with any serious disease, including mesothelioma. Patients diagnosed with mesothelioma often undergo difficult and overwhelming emotions after learning about their condition, treatment options, and prognosis. At the same time, they and their loved ones are trying to quickly absorb a lot of information amid a flurry of tests and consultations with medical experts. After all, rapid responses are crucial to extending patients’ life expectancies after being diagnosed with the aggressive disease. But even after all the meetings with general physicians, pulmonologists, oncologists, radiologists, and others, there are bound to be unanswered questions. Here are a few of the most common questions associated with mesothelioma:
Questions for Your Medical Team
How Did I Get It?
Mesothelioma has been tied to asbestos exposure, and over 3,000 cases are diagnosed in the U.S. every year. Mesothelioma takes 20 to 50 years to develop. If you did not work in an asbestos-related industry, but your spouse or family member did, you may have secondhand exposure.
What Type Do I Have?
Depending on the origin of your mesothelioma, you will have one of four types. Pleural originates in the lungs, peritoneal in the abdomen, pericardial in the heart, and testicular in the testicles. Pleural is the most common, accounting for 75% of cases. Based on symptoms and testing, your doctor should be able to asses quickly which type of mesothelioma you have.
What Stage Is My Cancer?
Staging mesothelioma — determining how far the cancer has spread — is based on the results of exams, imaging tests, and biopsies. Pleural mesothelioma is the only type for which a formal staging system currently exists and is based on the TNM: T (spread of primary tumor), N (spread of cancer to the nearby lymph nodes), and M (indicates whether the cancer has metastasized to other organs).
What Are My Treatment Options?
Once your cancer is found and staged, your team will discuss your treatment options. Depending on the location and extent, treatment can include chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and/or surgery. A combination of these options may be recommended, but be sure to ask about other treatment options including clinical trials, alternative medicine, and palliative care.
What Is My Prognosis?
Every mesothelioma case is different. Key factors include the patient’s physical condition, age, location of the cancer, the stage, and type of the disease. Treatment can sometimes extend the lives of mesothelioma victims well beyond the usual survival threshold of between 1 to 2 years after diagnosis.
How Is Mesothelioma Diagnosed?
Specialists are used for mesothelioma diagnoses. From your initial symptoms, doctor visits, X-rays, CT scans, and ultimate diagnosis, time passes and there will be lots of information to take in and process. According to the American Cancer Society, here is a breakdown of a typical process from discovery to diagnosis:
Initial Symptoms: Mesothelioma often goes undiagnosed due to the lack of symptoms or because initial symptoms are common to a variety of illnesses that are not life-threatening. If you worked in a field with heavy asbestos use, symptoms may not present themselves until between 10 and 50 years later. While every case is unique, common symptoms for mesothelioma include:
- Dry cough or wheezing.
- Respiratory problems or trouble breathing.
- Abdomen or chest pain.
- Pleural effusions.
Consulting with your Physician: If you are experiencing any of the symptoms above, you should see your general physician. While these symptoms alone are not indicative of mesothelioma, if you have worked with or in an asbestos-related field, your doctor will investigate and recommend tests to rule out or confirm cancer. Be prepared to:
- Review your medical history.
- Review your work history.
- Discuss your symptoms.
- Have physical exams.
Imaging Tests: Testing can be a long and arduous process. It involves multiple diagnostic tools, doctor visits, reviews with specialists, and potential biopsies to determine the nature and extent of your cancer. While there is no standard course of testing, most processes involve two or more of these tests:
- X-rays.
- CT scans.
- MRIs.
- PET scans.
- Biopsies.
- Blood tests.
We Can Help
Developing mesothelioma is directly related to asbestos exposure and is the responsibility of those companies which manufactured, distributed, and sold asbestos products without an adequate warning of the dangers of breathing asbestos. You have options. Weitz & Luxenberg has 30 years of experience in asbestos litigation. We are compassionate and skilled representatives for mesothelioma patients seeking compensation.
If you or your loved one is dealing with mesothelioma, please contact our office at (855) 382-5591 for a free consultation.
View Sources
- American Cancer Society. (n.d.). How Is Malignant Mesothelioma Diagnosed? Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/cancer/malignantmesothelioma/detailedguide/malignant-mesothelioma-diagnosed
- American Cancer Society. (n.d.). How Is Malignant Mesothelioma Staged? Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/cancer/malignantmesothelioma/detailedguide/malignant-mesothelioma-staging
- American Cancer Society. (n.d.). Treatment of Mesothelioma Based on the Extent of the Cancer. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/cancer/malignantmesothelioma/detailedguide/malignant-mesothelioma-treating-by-extent
LOOKING FOR LEGAL HELP?
We would feel privileged to assist you.
For a free case review, please contact us today.
Asbestos Information
CATEGORY: Consumer Protection – GeneralBlog
DEC. 14, 2015
On October 9, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a notice in the Federal Register clarifying and summarizing its Declaratory Ruling and Order…
On October 9, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a notice in the Federal Register clarifying and summarizing its Declaratory Ruling and Order of July 20 concerning the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) for unsolicited robocalls and spam text messages. This Order rejected the vast majority of industry petitions to weaken consumer protections under the TCPA and establish pro-industry rules that would have shielded many robocallers and spam texters from liability for the near-perpetual harassment that they cause many consumers to suffer.
The Federal Register notice comes shortly after the filing of consolidated appeals by an array of industry players in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit challenging the substance of the FCC’s Order. (The lead appeal is known as ACA International v. FCC, Case No. 15-1211.) Although the appeals seemingly did not cause the FCC to publish this notice in the Federal Register, an understanding of the appeals and the notice helps provide a roadmap of where the ongoing TCPA saga may go.
FCC Order on Robocalls and Spam Text Messages
A previous TCPA blog post explained the harassing and harmful telemarketing, robocalling, and spam texting that the TCPA aims to stop. In short, the statute bars most unsolicited telephonic communications. Each violation subjects the caller to a $500 fine, which may add up quickly to million-dollar judgments or settlements where tens of thousands of individuals were targeted.
A follow-up TCPA blog post described how the FCC stood firm in the face of an industry onslaught by issuing the July 20 Order.
The notice repeats and emphasizes much of what is contained in the July 20 Order. In this way, it should be viewed as an assertion by the FCC that it meant what it said ¾ that it “strengthened the core protections of the TCPA by confirming that:
- “Internet-to-phone text messages require consumer consent;
- “Text messages are ‘calls’ subject to the TCPA . . . [,]” as many courts and the FCC had previously determined.
- “Callers cannot avoid obtaining consumer consent for a robocall simply because they are not ‘currently’ or ‘presently’ dialing random or sequential numbers[.]” This means that using dialing equipment that has the potential to dial random or sequential numbers is sufficient to incur liability.
- “Simply being on an acquaintance’s contact list does not amount to consent to receive robocalls from third-party applications downloaded by the acquaintance[.]” The FCC reiterated that express, written consent is required from the person being called. This is also just common sense.
- “Callers are liable for robocalls to reassigned wireless numbers when the current subscriber to or customary user of the number has not consented, subject to a limited, one-call exception for cases in which the caller does not have actual or constructive knowledge of the reassignment[.]” Callers thus have one get-out-of-jail-free card.
In addition, the FCC clarified that “[c]onsumers may revoke consent at any time and through any reasonable means” and that carriers may implement “consumer-initiated call-blocking technology” to help stop robocalls.
The FCC’s July 20 Order is quite balanced. For example, text message application providers such as WhatsApp are not per se liable if they play only a “minimal role in sending text messages”; senders of on-demand text messages in direct response to consumer requests do not face liability; and, subject to strict privacy protections, “certain free, pro-consumer financial and healthcare-related messages may be sent without consumer consent.”
Industry Goes to Court Against FCC TCPA Order
Instead of seeking to avoid liability by complying with the FCC’s Order, many businesses went straight to court. The robocalls and spam text messages which led to the TCPA in the first place, and which have subjected many companies to multimillion dollar liability cases under the TCPA, must be so profitable that complying with the FCC’s Order is just unacceptable. These businesses are placing their own profits ahead of consumers’ interest in living free of robocalling and spam texting harassment. In my view, this all shows that the FCC is doing its job to protect us.
The appeals focus on three main issues, all of which are critical to consumer protections. First, industry wants to avoid liability for using autodialing equipment with the potential to dial sequential or random numbers if the equipment is not presently used for this purpose. The statute, however, imposes liability for equipment with the “capacity” to dial sequential or random numbers. This issue is important for consumers because proving that dialing equipment was used in a particular manner for one specific call could be impossible. Focusing on the equipment’s capacity ¾ or potential ¾ will help keep industry honest.
Secondly, the industry wants to avoid liability for calling reassigned numbers and wants more than the one-call exception to liability. In other words, industry wants the focus to be on the intended recipient of the call rather than the actual recipient.
But, clearly the actual recipient is harassed by unwanted calls and businesses could not rationally argue that they would not accept a sale from an unintended, but actual, call recipient. Many of us have received calls from telemarketers who seem to be calling someone else but quickly shift their message to our circumstances.
And the one-call exception is reasonable. If there is no answer, that number should be removed from the call list.
Finally, industry wants to be able to dictate by what means consent can be revoked. Businesses see the “by any reasonable means” standard as violating their ability to defined revocation by contract. Abstractly, this makes sense and honors our ability to freely make contracts. But so often this freedom is abused by placing onerous restrictions on revocations in the fine print of consumer contracts ¾ contracts which the average consumer has no leverage to negotiate or alter.
The parties have not yet briefed these issues in the appeal, and this blog will keep you updated as the case develops. For now, thankfully, the FCC Order’s consumer protections are in place. But this Order will not necessarily keep businesses from violating the TCPA.
Filing a Lawsuit for TCPA Violations for Robocalls and Spam Text Messages
Weitz & Luxenberg is investigating potential claims of TCPA violations. If you have received any of the following, please contact us at 855-681-2247:
- Unsolicited or unwanted phone call, text message, or advertising fax.
- Phone calls in spite of being on the Do Not Call Registry.
- Phone calls before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m.
If you have received these unwanted communications, you may be entitled to monetary compensation and we may be able to help you.
LOOKING FOR LEGAL HELP?
We would feel privileged to assist you.
For a free case review, please contact us today.
Asbestos Information
CATEGORY: Consumer Protection – GeneralBlog
DEC. 1, 2015
Student loan debt for school on a nationwide basis has skyrocketed to a level that has surpassed even credit card balances. Of course, students…
Student loan debt for school on a nationwide basis has skyrocketed to a level that has surpassed even credit card balances. Of course, students saddled with school loan debt find it difficult to make ends meet.
Compounding the situation is the challenging job market after graduation. For many students, whether having to return to their parent’s home to save money or living on their own, more student loan debt means less money for buying a home, a car or discretionary consumer goods, among other things.
Parents suffer too: their retirement plans are often delayed or reduced while assisting their children with paying off student loans. This ripple effect on the national economy is already significant and the future consequences are ominous.
The State of Outstanding Student Loan Balances
According to the November 2015 “Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit” released by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, outstanding student loan balances have swelled to $1.20 trillion as of September 30, 2015, surpassing auto loan balances ($1.05 trillion) or credit card balances ($714 billion).
In addition, 11.6 percent of aggregate student loan debt was 90+ days delinquent or in default during the third quarter of 2015. In May 2015, the Department of Education and the National Center for Educational Statistics issued their report, “The Condition of Education 2015 At a Glance,” which found that 85 percent of students received loans and grants at a four-year postsecondary institution, and 77.3 percent at two-year postsecondary institutions.
In October 2015, the Institute for College Access and Success (TICAS) issued “Student Debt and the Class of 2014,” which reports that seven out of 10 seniors at the national level (69 percent) who graduated from public and nonprofit colleges in 2014 had student loan debt. These borrowers owed an average of $28,950.
From 2004 to 2014, TICAS found that the share of graduates with debt rose modestly from 65 percent to 69 percent. However, for that same 10-year period, the average debt at graduation rose 56 percent, from $18,550 to $28,950, more than double the rate of inflation (25 percent). According to TICAS, about “one-sixth (17 percent) of the Class of 2014’s debt was comprised of private loans, which provide fewer consumer protections and repayment options and are typically more costly than federal loans.”
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Uncovered Deceptive Collection Practices
To make matters worse, a federal bureau has recently uncovered deceptive student loan debt collection practices. In May 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released its latest supervision report highlighting violations uncovered by the Bureau’s examiners (Winter 2015 report).
Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), the CFPB has authority to supervise banks and credit unions with more than $10 billion in assets and certain “nonbanks.” Those “nonbanks” include private student loan lenders as well as financial institutions the Bureau defines through rulemaking as “larger participants.” The Bureau has also uncovered widespread deceptive student loan debt collection practices.
In the Bureau’s Winter 2015 report, which generally covers supervisory activities between July 2014 and December 2014, the examiners found that some student loan debt collectors made deceptive statements to consumers with defaulted federal student loans.
Collection agencies overstated the benefits of federal student loan rehabilitation. Specifically, these agents overstated the rehabilitation program’s impact on a consumer’s report and credit score. The agencies also overstated the extent to which collection fees would be waived upon completion of the program.
In addition, examiners identified instances in which collection agents misrepresented to consumers that they could not participate in a federal student loan rehabilitation program unless consumers made payments by credit card, debit card or Automatic Clearing House. In fact, no such program requirement existed.
Violation of FDCPA: Fear Tactics Used Against Student Debtors to Trigger Payment
Examiners also found that collectors threatened to take action against certain consumers, creating the impression that if they do not make a payment they will be sued. Yet none of the collection agents knew whether legal action actually would be taken and they did not intend to do so.
As the CFPB pointed out, these practices violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), which prohibits the “use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer” and the “threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) & (10).
The FDCPA provides for private rights of action against debt collectors, and permits debtors to recover actual damages, statutory damages and attorneys’ fees and costs for violations of its terms. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k.
Student Loan Servicing: CFPB Investigates Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Discover Bank
The Wall Street Journal reported in October 2015 that Wells Fargo had become the latest big-name bank to be scrutinized as part of the CFPB’s ongoing investigation into student loan servicing practices. CFPB has been investigating the second largest private student-loan originator in the country since at least late last year. The investigation is purportedly focused on payment processing and policies related to borrowers who have a difficult time making payments.
In addition, in August 2015, Citigroup announced through a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that federal regulators had opened a probe into its student loan servicing practices. According to Citigroup’s filing, the company is cooperating with the unnamed regulators, noting that similar serving practices have been the subject of an enforcement action against at least one other institution. The filing states that “[i]n light of that action and the current regulatory focus on student loans, regulators may order that Citibank, N.A. remediate customers and/or impose penalties or other relief.”
In July, the CFPB took its first student loan servicing action ever against Discover Bank. According to the enforcement action, Discover engaged in illegal student loan servicing and debt collection practices since at least 2010, when it acquired the more than 800,000 private student loans accounts from Citibank. Among other violations, the bank was found to have overstated amounts due on student loans and failed to notify borrowers of their rights.
Student Loan Borrowers Should Contact W&L for Help
Weitz & Luxenberg is investigating possible claims involving student loan servicing unfairness. You may be entitled to recover damages if:
- One or more of your student loan servicers has failed to inform you of all of your repayment options and rights.
- You are in default or struggling to repay your student loan and you feel you have been falsely threatened by collectors with legal action.
- You have been the victim of false representations or other deceptive practices.
Please contact us today for a free consultation. Use on online form or live chat, or call us at 855-681-2247.
LOOKING FOR LEGAL HELP?
We would feel privileged to assist you.
For a free case review, please contact us today.
Asbestos Information
CATEGORY: Consumer Protection – GeneralBlog
OCT. 2, 2015
As recently as five months ago, Volkswagen broadcast a series of commercials to promote the environmental cleanliness and fuel efficiency of its diesel engine…
We are no longer accepting new cases.
As recently as five months ago, Volkswagen broadcast a series of commercials to promote the environmental cleanliness and fuel efficiency of its diesel engine vehicles. One commercial showed an elderly woman taking off her white scarf, holding it against the tailpipe and then lifting up the scarf up, showing it still bright white. It could have been an advertisement for Clorox.
Of course, as we all now know, Volkswagen knew at the time it aired those commercials that it was under investigation by the federal and California state governments. The investigation centered on Volkswagen including a device on its diesel cars that tricked regulators into believing that they meet government diesel emission standards.
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that nearly 500,000 Volkswagen vehicles in the U.S. contain a “defeat device” — software designed to deliberately circumvent emission standards.
VW Diesel Cars Exceed Emission Standards
According to the EPA, the offending Volkswagen vehicles actually exceed state and federal emission standards under normal driving conditions by orders of magnitude — and sometimes as high as 40 times the permitted level.
Volkswagen subsequently revealed that 11 million cars and light commercial vehicles throughout the world (under several of its brand names) contain the same defeat device to disguise actual diesel emissions.
Volkswagen’s defeat device is a software algorithm. When the electronics system in vehicles equipped with the 2.0 litre Common Rail diesel engine (or 2 litre TDI® engine) senses that the vehicle is undergoing an inspection, the algorithm fully activates the vehicle’s emission control system.
VW Diesel Models Affected by Emissions Device
The software instructs the nitrogen oxides (NOx) trap to operate at full capacity, rather than allowing more pollutants to pass through it — which is what happens in reality when the car is being driven according to The New York Times. In other words, the device fools the government into believing that the vehicles are complying with the NOx emission standard — because that is what the software is designed to show.
In fact, the diesel engines during driving conditions operation do not have that level of NOx control and release a substantially higher level of pollutants.
The impacted VW and Audi vehicle and model years are
- 2009-2015 Jetta
- 2009-2014 Jetta SportWagen
- 2012-2015 Beetle
- 2012-2015 Beetle Convertible
- 2010-2015 Audi A3
- 2010-2015 Golf
- 2015 Golf SportWagen
- 2012-2015 Passat
CNBC states that according to the EPA, a recall of the affected diesel models is likely to take place.
Diesel Prices Makes Cars More Expensive
Volkswagen has issued a mea culpa and figuratively fallen on its corporate sword. Volkswagen Group of America CEO Michael Horn stated, “Let’s be clear about this: Our company was dishonest with the EPA and the California Air Resources Board and with all of you.”
The “you” are the half million purchasers of these vehicles who were duped by Volkswagen into believing they were buying a diesel car that promised better fuel efficiency and the highest emission standards.
Volkswagen Supervisory Board member Olaf Lies has even publicly stated that the installation of the software amounts to a crime, “Those people who allowed this to happen or who made the decision to install this software – they acted criminally.”
Both the CEO of Volkswagen A.G. and the company’s sales chief have resigned and it is reported that Volkswagen has suspended half a dozen engineers. Volkswagen continues to be very careful in its public statements.
However, none of Volkswagen’s statements address the real-life issue: owners of these vehicles are now driving vehicles with impermissibly high emissions from their engines. The statements also do not absolve Volkswagen of its egregious acts and the mammoth fraud it has perpetuated on consumers.
Volkswagen touted these engines as superior to an engine that runs on conventional gasoline, and a consumer who bought the diesel version paid several thousand dollars more for the vehicle.
Consumers opted to pay more for a vehicle which, as advertised and promoted, offered a cleaner and more fuel efficient engine.
Also, diesel fuel is more expensive at the pump than conventional gasoline. Consumers who purchased the diesel engines also accepted the future obligation of paying 20 to 40 cents per gallon more (and in some parts of the country the differential is even larger).
They chose diesel over gasoline because they believed they would recoup the costs over time due to its better fuel efficiency, while at the same time aiding the environment.
Volkswagen vehicle owners, justifiably, are outraged and angered that they now own vehicles that offer none of the promises made by the company and now have little to no market value.
These diesel vehicles have a direct impact on the environment. Researchers estimate that Volkswagen’s cars have contributed approximately 46,000 tons of added pollutants into the air we breathe since 2008.
NOx is the primary emission spewing from these cars and is linked to respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, as well as premature deaths. Early estimates, founded on past modeling, suggest that the increase of NOx emissions from these eight models has contributed to the deaths of 50 to 100 people according to The New York Times article on Volkswagen deception.
VW Needs to Fix the Emissions Recall Problem
Volkswagen, in all likelihood, will require a significant amount of time to correct the impact of its defeat device. The company has just announced its initial recall plan for vehicles sold in Europe, but that plan excludes cars owned in the U.S.
It is believed that the higher U.S. emission standards will require substantial engineering changes. While simply removing the defeat devise (i.e., rewriting the program without the algorithm) should permit most vehicles to meet emissions standards in the short term, this approach will dramatically impact the engines’ fuel efficiency and, potentially, could adversely impact the system’s performance.
In other words, removing the defeat device might result in fuel efficiency being greatly reduced, leaving Volkswagen owners with a vehicle that requires them to pay a premium at the pump without any attendant fuel efficiency benefit, and the cost of operating these vehicles could increase every time is they are used.
If Volkswagen needs to add a physical part to the vehicles’ system, it may take many months — if not years — to design, test, manufacture and install the necessary fix to the nearly 500,000 impacted U.S. cars.
Weitz & Luxenberg is seeking to assist owners of these Volkswagen (and Audi) diesel models. If you have any questions concerning these cars or how the defeat device within the car may impact an upcoming state inspection of your vehicle, please feel free to contact us.
LOOKING FOR LEGAL HELP?
We would feel privileged to assist you.
For a free case review, please contact us today.
Asbestos Information
Categories