More than a million Vauxhall drivers could be due compensation because we believe Vauxhall installed special software (known as a ‘defeat device’) in certain Diesel vehicles to cheat emissions tests. If we are right, Vauxhall owners were mis-sold cars that are more polluting than the law allows and worth less than the cost they paid.
Drivers were sold a combination of environmental impact and driving performance that was a fiction. Unable to meet international emissions standards, these cars should never have been allowed on the road.
Vauxhall is the latest company that is accused of using ‘defeat devices’ similar to the ones used by Volkswagen in the Dieselgate scandal. If you’ve been affected, we believe you deserve compensation.
We believe that Vauxhall installed ‘defeat devices’ in certain Diesel cars designed to reduce emissions levels in a regulatory test environment. The practical effect of a defeat device is that the car can detect when it is in a test environment (because the tests have standard conditions which the defeat device is designed to identify) and tell the engine to reduce the pollutants it is producing in order to pass that test. In doing so, the performance of the car is also reduced.
When the car is in normal driving conditions (i.e., most if not all of the time), it maintains optimal performance, and as a result the vehicle pumps out unlawful levels of NOx and other pollutants without the driver realising. Without passing these tests, the cars would not have been cleared to drive on UK roads and they do not meet the environmental and performance standards promised in the glove compartment handbook.
The defeat device Vauxhall created is different in its details to what Volkswagen used in the Dieselgate scandal but the effect (and we say, clearly the intention) was broadly the same. The VW group has since paid out hundreds of millions of pounds in settlements in the US, Germany and Australia.
The premise of a GLO is simple.
The campaign is no win, no fee so if you signed up and we don’t win in Court you pay absolutely nothing (as we have insurance to cover any adverse costs).
You and the other claimants will be represented by Milberg London LLP, a global law firm that has vast experience in handling similar claims.
If the legal claim is successful, we guarantee that you will receive at least 50% of the damages awarded to you in compensation. Our legal costs will be paid from the remaining 50% of the damages.
Milberg London and its partners are ranked in London’s top legal directories; Chambers and Partners and The Legal500.
The Milberg London team has a long track record of fighting tirelessly for the underdog and using every available legal option to hold wrongdoing corporations to account.
We are at the forefront of group action law and practice and instructed in some of the most significant multiparty cases ever to be heard before the courts in this jurisdiction. Uniquely in the legal market, we have in-house scientific expertise such that we are leading both the legal analysis and the expert evidence in relation to several Dieselgate group actions, including against Vauxhall and Mercedes.
Our market-leading legal team regularly goes toe to toe with major corporate defendants and their immense war chests. We make them take our claims seriously.
We can back this up with our commercial pedigree having been forged in the biggest cases at the biggest firms, as well as having one of the UK’s largest client onboarding centres for fast and efficient engagement of new clients, and the support of our stateside affiliates. But more importantly, the Milberg London team care about promoting access to justice and work hard to minimise the hassle and stress of the legal process for their clients.
You can find out more about Milberg London by visiting their website here.
I got in touch with Milberg through a friend. They helped me with a delayed payment from an employer. They were very professional and kept me informed throughout the process. My experience with their service was excellent. I will contact them again if I require legal advice.
Sally
Good service and kept up to date
Paul Neil
Excellent in customer relations in assisting me to understand the method of claiming against being miss sold an imperfect product with emission standards not comparable to British values
Thomas Newell
Really efficient good communication. Always aware of what stage we are up to .
Helpful and friendly staff who actually answer the phone.
Mr & Mrs Lyons
Outstanding service
Wayne Barnett
So far this company's dealings with me have been entirely professional and honest. I understand these things take a long time and much information is needed, which I've provided as promptly as possible. No negative experience at all, don't understand where other negative reviews are coming from?
Richard Taylor
Unfortunately, the wheels of justice turn slowly, and group actions of this scale and complexity take many years to work their way through the Court system.
Since there are NOx emissions claims against 13 vehicle manufacturers, the Court is actively managing the claims and has appointed 4 lead cases to proceed to trial first ahead of the other claims. Vauxhall was not selected as a lead claim and so will proceed through the Courts after the lead claims.
Please note that there is always the possibility that claims will settle before the Court process comes to an end, for example as with the settlement reached with VW in relation to the VW NOx Emissions Claim.
Please stick with us, we believe we will be successful and we are making good progress on the case, with lots of hard work going on behind the scenes.
Not directly. We believe all car manufacturers installed defeat devices differently so the technical case against Vauxhall will be different. However, broadly speaking, we believe this settlement is a positive development for all emissions cases in this jurisdiction.
We believe Vauxhall installed defeat devices in certain Diesel cars that were designed to reduce emissions levels in a regulatory test environment. Without passing these tests, the cars would not have been cleared to drive on UK roads. Put simply, we believe Vauxhall cheated the emissions tests. The software appears to have identified when the engine was operating under regulatory test conditions and reduced the levels of pollutants being pumped out so it passed the test. But this kind of environmental performance could never be replicated under real life driving conditions. The defeat device Vauxhall created is different in its details to what Volkswagen used in the Dieselgate scandal but the effect (and we say, clearly the intention) was broadly the same.
A defeat device is any element of design, software or hardware in a car which detects different vehicle conditions (e.g. temperature, vehicle speed, engine speed etc) and adjusts or disables the car’s emission control system. In the case of Vauxhall (and VW and Mercedes) the manufacturers appear to have written software into the computer unit that controls the engine.
The practical effect of a defeat device is that it can detect when it is in a test environment (because the tests have standard conditions which the defeat device can be designed to identify) and tell the engine it needs to reduce the emissions it is producing in order to pass that test.
By contrast, when the car is outside of a test environment (i.e., most if not all of the time), it recognises that and the vehicle pumps out unlawful levels of NOx and other pollutants without the driver realising.
The reason for using a defeat device appears to have been that the engines in question could not meet the emissions test and produce an acceptable consumer driving experience.
Assuming the claim succeeds, drivers that purchased, financed or leased a new or used Diesel Vauxhall between 2009 and 2019 did so on a false premise and may be able to receive compensation.
These consumers had a reasonable expectation their car would meet certain environmental and performance standards. That’s what they were promised in the glove compartment handbook.
The reality was that the cars were far more polluting than drivers were told. They pumped more harmful substances like NOx into the atmosphere, which are known to cause thousands of premature deaths a year in the UK – academic research has also established that long-term exposure to air pollution increases the risk of serious infection and death from COVID 19. Unable to meet international emissions standards, these cars should never have been on the road.
The cars would also be worth less than the drivers paid for them (because Vauxhall did not deliver an environmentally compliant car which also met performance expectations) and are worth even less today in the second-hand car market. Drivers were sold a combination of environmental impact and driving performance that was a fiction – it could never happen under normal conditions and Vauxhall knew that.
Put simply, Vauxhall did not provide the car drivers paid for.
We estimate that over one million UK drivers have purchased or leased a new or second-hand Vauxhall during the period when we say Vauxhall was cheating the tests. Each of these motorists could be eligible to claim compensation.
We urge drivers to check whether they could be in line for compensation by checking your vehicle and receive a free legal assessment here.
Drivers who bought a second-hand car from a registered Vauxhall dealership may be eligible for compensation too. Their losses may be lower than motorists who paid more for a new car.
This will depend on a range of factors including how much drivers paid for their car and how much harm the Court determines Vauxhall caused by its behaviour. Under consumer protection law motorists could recover between 25% and 75% of the price of their vehicle depending on the severity of the misleading or aggressive practice or the difference between the market price of the product at the time of sale, and the price paid. This could be many thousands of pounds, even for second-hand owners.
Purchasers of affected cars have already been awarded compensation in other countries. Below are some examples of pay outs in similar cases in other countries. Remember, however, that the English Courts are not bound by these decisions and will have to make their own calculation of loss for vehicle owners.
In the US, claimants received between US$5,000 and US$10,000 from VW and between US$822.50 and US$3,290 from Mercedes.
In Spain, VW claimants were awarded €3,000 each.
In Germany, there has been a large range of awards against VW ranging from €1,000 to tens of thousands of Euros for each claimant (against Daimler/Mercedes, awards of over €40,000 have been given).
In the Netherlands, a court declared that first-hand VW owners were entitled to €3,000 and second-hand VW owners were entitled to €1,500.
The Court determined that a Group Litigation Order (or ‘GLO’) is the most appropriate way to manage a claim and made a GLO at the start of 2024. The claim has been proceeding according to the terms of the GLO.
A GLO is a procedural mechanism that allows lots of claims with “common or related issues” of fact and/or law to be managed together as one case.
The GLO was ordered at the start of 2024 and the case has been progressing as per the terms of that Order.
The Claimant firms have now served multiple iterations of the Group Register on the Defendants. The Group Register records the details of all Claimants bringing a claim against Vauxhall and states which law firm they are being represented by.
As ordered by the Court, the Claimants have served their Outline Generic Particulars of Claim on the Defendants, which sets out our claim against them, and the Defendants have now filed their Outline Generic Defences, in which they have denied the claims against them.
The Court is actively managing the NOx emissions claims. Since there are 13 emissions cases against various manufacturers, the Court has appointed 4 cases to proceed as the ‘Lead GLOs’, which are Mercedes, Ford, Renault/Nissan and Peugeot/Citroen. It would be inefficient for all claims to proceed through the Courts at the same time with the possibility of different rulings in different cases and would be an extreme burden on Court and the Claimant law firms’ resources. The Lead GLOs are due to proceed to trial first while Vauxhall and the other non-lead GLOs will essentially wait behind those cases. A factual trial is due to take place in October 2025 in the Lead GLOs to determine whether there are/were defeat devices in vehicles made and supplied by those manufacturers. We will keep you updated on the progress in these claims.
Milberg London are representing their clients through a Damages Based Agreement (‘DBA’). A DBA means all of Milberg London’s fees depend on the success of the case and the level of those fees is determined as a percentage of the compensation recovered. It also provides that a steering committee of representative claimants have authority to instruct the lawyers on behalf of the group. This is because it would be impossible for Milberg London to take instructions from everyone individually.
No.
The lawyers only get paid if there is a win at the end of the case. If the claim is successful, the lawyers are paid from the compensation recovered from Vauxhall. If the case is unsuccessful, the customers pay nothing.
Any costs that need to be paid up-front or along the way (e.g. barristers, Court fees and experts) are covered by either Milberg London on a self-funding basis or by a litigation funder. The litigation funder is paid back at the end of the case out of the lawyers’ share of the compensation – not the consumer’s (see below).
The lawyers are Milberg London, part of an international group of firms with significant experience of consumer and group litigation.
Milberg London are self-funding certain aspects of the case with the support of their affiliates in the US. Milberg London have also entered into a funding arrangement with an ALF third party funder.
Our legal team are working hard behind the scenes to progress your claim and are making good headway. We will endeavour to provide you with regular updates every 6 to 8 weeks with developments happening in your case.
In addition, you can always get in touch with your Case Manager for an update, email [email protected] or call us on 020 3824 6541.
There are a number of reasons why a vehicle may be ineligible:
It was not manufactured within the relevant time period.
It is not a model we have identified as being affected by the Diesel emissions scandal.
That is not a problem. We believe you still have a valuable claim even though you have sold the vehicle. Your claim and loss will be based on the period you owned the car.
To contact Milberg London please call +44 (0)20 3824 6541 or email [email protected]
Milberg London LLP is a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales under registered number OC430853. We are authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with registration number 670230.
We regularly update this website, however, if you want the latest information, please check your emails for our regular case updates or contact our client care team.
Cookie | Description |
---|---|
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement | Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Advertisement" category . |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics | Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Analytics" category . |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary | Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Necessary" category . |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-non-necessary | Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Non-necessary" category . |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others | Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to store the user consent for cookies in the category "Others". |
elementor | This cookie is used by the website's WordPress theme. It allows the website owner to implement or change the website's content in real-time. |
viewed_cookie_policy | The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin to store whether or not the user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data. |
Cookie | Description |
---|---|
_fbp | This cookie is set by Facebook to display advertisements when either on Facebook or on a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising, after visiting the website. |
fr | Facebook sets this cookie to show relevant advertisements to users by tracking user behaviour across the web, on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin. |
NID | NID cookie, set by Google, is used for advertising purposes; to limit the number of times the user sees an ad, to mute unwanted ads, and to measure the effectiveness of ads. |
Cookie | Description |
---|---|
_ga | The _ga cookie, installed by Google Analytics, calculates visitor, session and campaign data and also keeps track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookie stores information anonymously and assigns a randomly generated number to recognize unique visitors. |
_gat_gtag_UA_187025217_4 | Set by Google to distinguish users. |
_gid | Installed by Google Analytics, _gid cookie stores information on how visitors use a website, while also creating an analytics report of the website's performance. Some of the data that are collected include the number of visitors, their source, and the pages they visit anonymously. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
cookielawinfo-checkbox-other | 1 year | No description available. |