Take action now! All current clients have been sent a crucial survey regarding each individual claim against Mercedes. The Court has ordered that all clients complete this survey. This is a pivotal step in the litigation process which will assist in validating claims and potentially quantifying any compensation upon the success of the claim. The survey asks straightforward questions about your ownership of the vehicle(s) you are claiming for.
Please check your emails including junk/spam folders if you have an active claim but have not yet received a link to the survey. Alternatively, please feel free to contact us to resolve any issues.
More than 600,000 Mercedes drivers could be due compensation because we believe Mercedes installed special software (known as a ‘defeat device’) in certain Diesel vehicles to cheat emissions tests. If we are right, Mercedes 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.
Mercedes 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.
Our Mercedes claim is being managed by an exceptional team of experienced litigators in London.
Please note we are no longer taking on any new claims. The claim has progressed beyond the stage of adding new claimants.
Current clients have paid nothing to join the claim and could be entitled to thousands of pounds in compensation.
We believe that Mercedes 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 cheat software Mercedes is alleged to have used is similar to the ‘defeat’ code deployed by VW, Audi, Skoda and SEAT in the Dieselgate scandal. The VW group has since paid out hundreds of millions of pounds in settlements in the US, Germany and Australia. Group Litigation has also taken place and reached a settlement against the VW Group (known as the VW NOx Emissions Group Litigation) in England & Wales following a trial heard in 2023. The Court determined that a Group Litigation Order (or ‘GLO’ for short) is the most appropriate way to manage the Mercedes claim and set a GLO to commence from May 2023. The claim has been progressing in accordance with the terms of the GLO. A GLO is a procedural mechanism that allows multiple claims with “common or related issues” of fact and / or law to be managed together as one case.
There are 13 ongoing cases against various car manufacturers in relation to their NOx emissions. The Court is actively managing the NOx emissions claims together. 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 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, including Mercedes, 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.
The premise of a GLO is simple. The campaign is no win, no fee, so if you sign up and we don’t win in court you pay absolutely nothing.
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.
Your claim will be dealt with simultaneously to the other claims within the GLO. This means that once the overall claim is settled or concluded in Court, each individual claim within the GLO should also be concluded simultaneously.
Milberg London and its partners are ranked in the 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 BMW, 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 backup 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
Not directly. We believe all car manufacturers installed defeat devices differently so the technical case against Mercedes will be different. However, broadly speaking, we believe this settlement is a positive development for all emissions cases in this jurisdiction.
We believe Mercedes 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 Mercedes 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 Mercedes 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 Mercedes (and VW and Vauxhall) 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 Mercedes 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. 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 Mercedes 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 Mercedes knew that.
Put simply, Mercedes did not provide the car drivers paid for.
We estimate that over 600,000 UK drivers have purchased or leased a new or second-hand Mercedes during the period when we say Mercedes was cheating the tests. Each of these motorists could be eligible to claim compensation.
Drivers who bought a second-hand car from a registered Mercedes 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 Mercedes 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.
This case is being brought via a Group Litigation Order (or ‘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. In February 2023, the High Court agreed this is the most appropriate way to manage the claim and granted the GLO. The GLO was ordered by the Court in May 2023, constituting the action.
The VW litigation which has now settled also proceeded under a GLO.
There is real momentum in the Mercedes claim. The High Court granted a Group Litigation Order (‘GLO’) in 2023 and Milberg London is working hard to progress your claims in accordance with the GLO.
For instance, all c. 70,000 of Milberg’s clients under this claim have been asked to complete a “Schedule of Claimant Information” survey regarding their period of ownership of the vehicle(s) they are claiming for in alignment with the GLO. This is a crucial and essential step in the litigation as it has been ordered by the Court. It is beneficial for each client to engage in the survey as it will assist in validating the claim against the Defendants while the answers may also be used to quantify any compensation that may be owed to each client upon the success of the claim.
Similarly, the Claimant firms have served multiple iterations of the Group Register on the Defendants. The Group Register records details of all Claimants bringing a claim against Mercedes and identifies which law firm they are being represented by. We have a duty to ensure that information recorded in the Group Register is accurate and reflects each claim we are proceeding with or have taken steps to discontinue based on information provided.
As ordered by the Court, the Claimants have served their Generic Particulars of Claim on the Defendants, which sets out our claim against them in general terms common to all Claimants, and the Defendants have now filed their Generic Defences, in which they have denied the claims against them. The Claimants also submitted a Generic Reply to respond to further points outlined in the Defendants’ Generic Defence.
The Court is actively managing the NOx emissions claims with the aim of ensuring the cases are dealt with promptly, fairly and proportionately. The 13 emissions cases against various manufacturers are collectively known as the “Pan-Nox Emissions Litigation”. To better manage the monumental litigation, the Court has appointed 4 cases out of these 13 to proceed as the “Lead GLOs”. These include Mercedes, Ford, Renault/Nissan and Peugeot/Citroen. Central points of contention between each case will be decided simultaneously through the Lead GLOs. 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 the Court and the Claimant law firms’ resources.
A trial took place in October 2024 to consider the extent to which the decisions of German regulators can be said to be binding on the decisions of the Courts of England and Wales. The Claimants won this trial and the only German regulatory decisions which will bind the Courts of England and Wales are those which have identified prohibited defeat devices in the cars.
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 these manufacturers. Crucially, this will be a public trial. It will then be considered to what extent these devices were illegal. In the run up to this trial the legal team is doing a significant amount of work on technical expert analysis of the vehicles in question and their software in order to prepare our case for trial.
We will keep you informed and updated on the progress of these claims. Please look out for our frequent case update emails and double check your junk / spam folders if you have not received them recently.
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 (see above). If the claim is successful, the lawyers are paid from the compensation recovered from Mercedes. 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 4 to 6 weeks.
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.
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.
Mercedes was selected as a Lead GLO, as mentioned above. This means that the Mercedes claim will be one of the first cases of the 13 ongoing emissions cases to proceed to trial. The first trial is scheduled to take place Autumn 2025 and will likely create significant pressure for Mercedes.
Please stick with us, we believe we will be successful, and we are making good progress on the case, one step at a time, with lots of hard legal work going on behind the scenes. Thank you for trusting us!
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 and our registered office is at Third Floor, Sutton Yard, 65 Goswell Road, London, EC1V 7EN.
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-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 |
---|---|
_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_5 | 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 | 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. |