California Air Resources Board Rejects Volkswagen Recall Plan
CARB rejected Volkswagen's recall plan because it contained gaps and lacked sufficient detail. The agency said Volkswagen’s descriptions of proposed repairs lacked enough information for a technical evaluation and did not adequately address overall impacts on vehicle performance, emissions and safety.
SACRAMENTO — The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has rejected Volkswagen’s submitted recall plan for 2-liter diesel passenger vehicles sold in California between 2009 and 2015. Along with the rejection, the agency notified Volkswagen of violations of California air quality regulations tied to the company’s use of “defeat device” in those vehicles.
CARB rejected Volkswagen's recall plan because it contained gaps and lacked sufficient detail. Additionally, the board said Volkswagen’s descriptions of proposed repairs lacked enough information for a technical evaluation and did not adequately address overall impacts on vehicle performance, emissions and safety.
“Volkswagen made a decision to cheat on emissions tests and then tried to cover it up,” said CARB Chair Mary D. Nichols. “They continued and compounded to lie and when they were caught they tried to deny it. The result is thousands of tons of nitrogen oxide that have harmed health of Californians. They need to make it right. Today’s action is a step in the direction of assuring that will happen.”
The board’s rejection does not remove the possibility of a recall, but allows for a broader array of potential remedies. According to the agency, CARB will continue its investigations with the Environmental Protection Agency to return the vehicles to legally required emission levels, determine mitigation for past and future environmental harm, and assess penalties.
“The rejection is not a surprise. Volkswagen has been working on an additional potential fix involving the catalytic converter. Those details have not been worked out,” said Rebecca Linland, senior analyst at Kelley Blue Book. “The reasons for the rejection involve needing more details and specifications. This is not a major setback. If they present them with another plan and that’s rejected, we can start to see some real concern. However, it’s unfortunate because it continues to delay getting consumers the answers and solutions they want, need and deserve.”
Originally posted on F&I and Showroom
More Compliance

Dealer Ads and the FTC
The agency has made it clear in recent enforcement actions and warnings, in auto retail and other industries, that advertised prices must include all nonoptional costs to the consumer.
Read More →
AAMS Training and Mosaic Compliance Services Merge
The strategic combination is intended to expand technology-driven compliance solutions for the automotive industry.
Read More →
The Jurisprudence of Pricing
Legal concept helps makes sense of California’s recently passed version of the failed federal CARS legislation.
Read More →
Trump 2.0 and Enforcement Priorities
The upshot is don’t relax, because regulation indeed continues.
Read More →
June Is Automotive Service Professionals Month
Observance is opportunity to thank technicians for their crucial role in auto retail.
Read More →
Cox Automotive Releases Compliance Guide
New edition walks auto dealers through relevant regulations for 2025.
Read More →
Trump 2.0 and Retail Automotive
Administration’s plans should generally bode well for the industry.
Read More →
CARS Rule Update: 5th Circuit Oral Arguments Recap
In this video, Jim Ganther of Mosaic Compliance Services, recaps the key takeaways from the oral arguments in the critical CARS Rule case, including potential outcomes and what dealers should do to stay ahead of compliance changes.
Read More →
State of the CARS Rule, Part 3
The players in the automotive industry should coordinate their responses to this pending regulation.
Read More →
The Future of Car Dealer Documents
Where forms, documents, agreements and contracts could be in 50 years.
Read More →