Has anyone traded in a tuned Golf R?

[Corprin]

Didn’t think that was a personal attack, you alluded to your mental illness. I had assumed you were just an idiot. My apologies.

 

[Fastlax16]

Didn’t think that was a personal attack, you alluded to your mental illness. I had assumed you were just an idiot. My apologies.

childlike responses. “I know you are but what am I?” is how I should respond.

The fact that you thought ecu tunes were hard to detect and they couldn’t be easier really bothers you that much?

 

[Corprin]

Lol

 

[Fastlax16]

I was wrong, a dealer can detect an ECU tune easily. They can even detect them if a car was flashed back to stock.

FIFY. Glad we are done here.

 

[Backtrack2015]

This thread was actually an interesting window into the participants’ views on ethics and the law. It’s probably one of the more interesting threads here, except for the silly and largely irrelevant “gotcha” regarding the difficulty of detecting a previous tune.

The most disturbing post was the one advocating for ethical behavior only when it might ultimately lead to personal gain, while generally discouraging it otherwise as a competitive disadvantage.

 

[Fastlax16]

This thread was actually an interesting window into the participants’ views on ethics and the law. It’s probably one of the more interesting threads here, except for the silly and largely irrelevant “gotcha” regarding the difficulty of detecting a previous tune.

The most disturbing post was the one advocating for ethical behavior only when it might ultimately lead to personal gain, while generally discouraging it otherwise as a competitive disadvantage.

It wasn't entirely irrelevant. The basis for part of his argument about what is kosher to not tell a dealer (worn brakes etc) centered around them being expected and inspectable. A tune is clearly inspectable and who knows how he defines "expected" but the fact that vw mandates scans prior to warranty work shows that they expect to find them otherwise it wouldn't be mandated. So if a tune is inspectable and expected, not disclosing it isn't a problem according to Corprin Esq.

 

[jimlloyd40]

Because I don't want you to make the same stupid statement in the future about ecu tunes being hard to find. Here's how hard it is for a VW dealer to find a tune. Happy trails, partner.

https://www.golfmk7.com/forums/inde...-ecu-for-routine-service.343460/#post-7024786
https://www.golfmk7.com/forums/index.php?threads/i-got-td1d.367071/
https://www.golfmk7.com/forums/index.php?threads/cobb-tune.369600/

All three of the links you posted do show that the dealer knows how many times your ECU has been flashed. But you won't get TD1'd unless you try to get warranty work done for powertrain related issues. It still does not absolve you of fraud. The dealer doesn't need to check the flash counter except for powertrain warranty problems. My dealer knows I'm tuned several times and has not denied warranty repairs for non powertrain problems.

 

[jimlloyd40]

This thread was actually an interesting window into the participants’ views on ethics and the law. It’s probably one of the more interesting threads here, except for the silly and largely irrelevant “gotcha” regarding the difficulty of detecting a previous tune.

The most disturbing post was the one advocating for ethical behavior only when it might ultimately lead to personal gain, while generally discouraging it otherwise as a competitive disadvantage.

That is a very astute statement. Good job.

 

[jimlloyd40]

It wasn't entirely irrelevant. The basis for part of his argument about what is kosher to not tell a dealer (worn brakes etc) centered around them being expected and inspectable. A tune is clearly inspectable and who knows how he defines "expected" but the fact that vw mandates scans prior to warranty work shows that they expect to find them otherwise it wouldn't be mandated. So if a tune is inspectable and expected, not disclosing it isn't a problem according to Corprin Esq.

My dealer only scans the ECU flash counter if it's a powertrain warranty issue. I've had the thermostat housing and drivers side one touch window switch replaced under warranty and the dealer knows I'm FBO IS38 and likes my dyno results.

 

[Fastlax16]

All three of the links you posted do show that the dealer knows how many times your ECU has been flashed. But you won't get TD1'd unless you try to get warranty work done for powertrain related issues. It still does not absolve you of fraud. The dealer doesn't need to check the flash counter except for powertrain warranty problems. My dealer knows I'm tuned several times and has not denied warranty repairs for non powertrain problems.

I didn’t say they had to check the flash counter, I said they had the ability to check if they so chose. Just like they have the ability to check for bald tires, worn brakes etc. Nothing requires they check any of those things before buying a car.

Fraud by omission in my state only applies to withholding information you have a duty to disclose. I had no such duty as the information was not knowable only to me at a dealership capable of performing a scan. A non-Vw dealer or private sale, yes you could make the argument.

And unrelated but VW absolutely requires dealers scan a car and verify before certifying it, the fact that they didn’t is their issue.

 

[XM_Rocks]

You should refrain from providing legal advice online but maybe google duty to disclose and search on here for how easy it is for dealers to find ecu tunes. The more you know.

Tort law is rarely black and white.

I’ll restate what I’ve stated before.

If you run into a company or an individual that’s a ”right fighter” with more money than logic, you’re going to have a bad time.

This is rare... but does happen.

Trying to argue that YOU intentionally traded a car that YOU modified to the point of devaluing the car due to TD1 concerns/warranty complications AND your argument is that the dealer should have done THEIR due diligence and found YOUR failure to disclose.

Put that in front of a jury of your peers... you’d have to convince half of them that you’re 0% liable.

Oh, and you’d have to pay your attorney/their legal staff the whole time, in 15 min increments.

 

[Fastlax16]

Trying to argue that YOU intentionally traded a car that YOU modified to the point of devaluing the car due to TD1 concerns/warranty complications AND your argument is that the dealer should have done THEIR due diligence and found YOUR failure to disclose.

There was no failure to disclose because there was no duty to disclose.

Trying to argue that YOU intentionally traded a car that YOU drove to the point the tires were bald and needed to be replaced, devaluing the car due to the cost and labor of replacement parts AND your argument is that the dealer should have done THEIR due diligence and found YOUR failure to disclose.

I'm sure you'll now argue there is a duty to disclose bald tires to a car dealership or is this an area where they should do their due diligence?

We aren't going to see eye to eye on on this so agree to disagree.

 

[JC_451]

On here are numerous stories of people tuning leased cars and turning them back in with 0 issues.

Nice to discuss morality and ethics and such, but let's get real here. Someone actually getting sued over this isn't ever going to happen.

 

[XM_Rocks]

There was no failure to disclose because there was no duty to disclose.

Trying to argue that YOU intentionally traded a car that YOU drove to the point the tires were bald and needed to be replaced, devaluing the car due to the cost and labor of replacement parts AND your argument is that the dealer should have done THEIR due diligence and found YOUR failure to disclose.

I'm sure you'll now argue there is a duty to disclose bald tires to a car dealership or is this an area where they should do their due diligence?

We aren't going to see eye to eye on on this so agree to disagree.

I agree, we aren’t going to agree.

Round and round... you keep stating ”duty to disclose”... like Tort Law lives in the realm of black and white.

I’ve only argued one thing, consistently, you’re the one that keeps assuming things and making things up.

The thought that someone would argue that visibly identifiable and normal external wear on a car that any used car dealer could identify and quantify is equal to something intentionally done to an ECU that only a small amount of dealers could identify is the same thing... that’s only in your mind.

You probably haven’t considered the Reasonable or Prudent Man standard/standard business procedure (in this case a normal used car dealer and how they process a used car trade irregardless of make) and if ECU scanning isn’t a normal and standard business process/procedure for trades.

Especially that the vast majority of used dealers don’t have access to this software.

Bye. I’m out.

 

[XM_Rocks]

On here are numerous stories of people tuning leased cars and turning them back in with 0 issues.

Nice to discuss morality and ethics and such, but let's get real here. Someone actually getting sued over this isn't ever going to happen.

No one is claiming people are getting sued left and right.