Last visit was: 15 Jul 2025, 16:18 It is currently 15 Jul 2025, 16:18
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
rahuluec
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Last visit: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 91
Own Kudos:
417
 [46]
Location: Bangalore, India
Posts: 91
Kudos: 417
 [46]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
42
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 15 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,601
Own Kudos:
32,358
 [19]
Given Kudos: 687
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,601
Kudos: 32,358
 [19]
11
Kudos
Add Kudos
8
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,348
 [13]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,348
 [13]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
6
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
GMATFIGHTER
Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Last visit: 25 Jan 2022
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
Posts: 16
Kudos: 221
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
bsv180985
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

I honestly believe that the answer here should be B. We need the past perfect to indicate an action occured before another event in the past. the test drive took place before the automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges. other answer choices made it look like the test drive took place simultaniously with the pleading
User avatar
GMATFIGHTER
Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Last visit: 25 Jan 2022
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
221
 [2]
Posts: 16
Kudos: 221
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I actually just remembered an important point leading me to agree that the answer here should be D. The construction "having + past participle" also indicates an action in the past before the main verb of the sentence. The main verbs of this sentence are "pleaded" and "agreed", so "having test driven" took place before the "pleaded." Another mistake I made with option B is that "that" would imply that there are other cars that the manufacturer didn't test drive. We don't know whether the manufacturer test drove most of these cars or a small number of them. I think it would make sense that he's in court because he did a mistake when he test drove ALL the cars. So option D says "having test driven cars" implies that we're talking about all the cars that he had were tested.

another mistake I've picked up from option B is that it has the "it." I believe there could be a typo in the question because I think it should be "manufacturer" rather than "manufacture." the company itself can plead in court, but it's rather a person who can do that, so the "it" in option B is simply wrong.
avatar
arnaudl
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Last visit: 06 Jun 2011
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
125
 [1]
Posts: 9
Kudos: 125
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here is my reasoning.

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer
pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer
tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million
in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with
their odometers disconnected


(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers
disconnected -> Sounds like manufacturer pays 16M for the cars
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected
odometers -> Sounds like manufacturer pays 16M for the cars
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected
odometers -> Sounds like manufacturer pays 16M for its cars

We are left with D and E
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers
disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected
odometers

I choose D as it is more direct to convey the idea that Manufacturer is fined because of his action of test-driving the cars without the device on.

Please comment
avatar
rohinipathi
Joined: 29 Jul 2010
Last visit: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
7
 [2]
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 12
Kudos: 7
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected - the auto manufacturer agreed to pay not for cars..but for driving the cars with odometer disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers - it and the Error remains
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers -its
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected - correct.
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers - Same as with A
User avatar
Pillarsofcreation
Joined: 21 Jun 2015
Last visit: 06 May 2020
Posts: 96
Own Kudos:
45
 [2]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
GPA: 2.61
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I think it all boils down to meaning. I will only talk about D and E as most people have no problem in eliminating A,B and C. The placement of the word test-driven is important in the next two options.

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected - Means that they paid charges because they test-drove cars with their odometer disconnected. Seems logical. If the company did this, then the whole process of test driving would be faulty and thus they will be sued if people find this out.

(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers - Means the company had some cars that were test-driven without odomoters. The company had to pay for 'test-driving cars' and not for 'driving cars'

D is my choice.
User avatar
Kingsman
Joined: 11 Jan 2014
Last visit: 28 Apr 2019
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 58
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Accounting, Finance
GPA: 3.17
WE:Analyst (Accounting)
Posts: 23
Kudos: 26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
Hi All,

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacture pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.



Understanding the intended meaning of the sentence is the key to get to the correct answer choice. The automobile manufacturer agreed to pay the fine for its action. It agreed to pay for the action of test-driving the cars which had their odometers disconnected.



Per the original choice, the auto manufacturers agreed to pay fine for the cars and not for their action. This distorts the intended meaning of the sentence.

PoE:

(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected: Incorrect for the reason stated above.

(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers: Incorrect. Same error as in choice A.

(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers: Incorrect. Same error as in choice A.

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected: Correct. This choice correctly conveys the action for which the auto manufacturers agreed to pay the fine.

(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers: Incorrect. Per this choice, the auto manufacturers agreed to pay the fine for “having cars”. This is not the intended meaning.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Shraddha,

I do not clearly understand your answer. Would you please help me more on this? Thanks in advance.
In (E), I thought that "that were test driven" modifies "cars" so the meaning will not be different from (D). Is there any different between "test driven cars" and "cars that were test driven" :).
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,348
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The intent is clear here. The fine is for doing the crime of test driving cars whose odometers had been disconnected with an ulterior motive. The fine is not either for having the cars that were test-driven or for possessing the cars that were test-driven. The company can also escape if its cars were test driven not necessarily by the company but maybe even by some other entity. Only D establishes that the manufacturer itself did the crime. Hence D survies.
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 14 Jul 2025
Posts: 11,294
Own Kudos:
41,763
 [2]
Given Kudos: 333
Status:Math and DI Expert
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 11,294
Kudos: 41,763
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Meaning issue..
The damages are NOT for cars itself but for DRIVING cars without odometer.
Hence FOR should be followed by something to do with driving car and not just car..
Eliminate A,B and C.
Even E has a meaning issue.
D clearly mentions that the civil damages were for having test driven cars without odometer.
D
avatar
MissionWin
Joined: 19 May 2018
Last visit: 03 Mar 2019
Posts: 38
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 38
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
What this sentence is supposed to mean is that the automobile manufacturer agreed to pay damages for odometer tampering, specifically, for test driving cars that had their odometers disconnected. That is to say, for an action. Options A B and C do not refer to an action, they refer to the cars themselves. They all mean that the manufacturer agreed to pay damages for the cars, themselves. This is obviously a meaning error. So these three can be discarded. E can also be discarded for changing the meaning. ‘having cars’ implies that the manufacturer agreed to pay damages just for having cars that were test driven with their odometers disconnected. The only one that conveys the right meaning is option D.
User avatar
Bambi2021
Joined: 13 Mar 2021
Last visit: 23 Dec 2021
Posts: 321
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 321
Kudos: 130
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
If they paid civil damages to people that have bought these cars, then arent they paying these damages for each of the cars rather than for the act of test-driving.

With this reasoning I went with A.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,450
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,450
Kudos: 953
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7356 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts