Posts tagged Lemon Law
2013-2016 Dodge Dart Transmission Class Action CERTIFIED

After initially being denied certification, owners of 2013-2016 Dodge Darts equipped with the Fiat C635 engine may finally see some benefits after the presiding court reversed course and certified the class action.

The class members allege:

… an inherent defect in the hydraulic clutch system (“Clutch System”) that existed in all Class Vehicles at the time of sale that causes the clutch pedal to lose pressure, stick to the floor, and prevents his gears from engaging and/or disengaging. [Owners allege] that the clutch defect is caused by the degradation of the clutch reservoir hose, which releases plasticizer and fibers, causing contamination of the hydraulic fluid that bathes the components of the Clutch System. As a result, the contamination causes the internal and external seals of the clutch master cylinder (“CMC”) and clutch slave cylinder (“CSC”) to swell and fail. When fluid in the hydraulic system becomes contaminated, all of the components that have been exposed to the contaminated fluid must be replaced and any steel tubing must also be thoroughly cleaned with brake cleaner and blown out until dry to ensure that none of the contaminants remain. The clutch defect causes stalling, the failure to accelerate, and premature failure of the Clutch System’s components, “including the clutch master cylinder and reservoir hose, clutch slave cylinder and release bearing, clutch disc, pressure plate, and flywheel.”

FCA recognized the problem in 2016 when they implemented a voluntary customer service action, Service Bulletin 06-001-16 entitled “Clutch Pedal Operation X62 Extended Warranty” (“X62 Extended Warranty”) to address the issue of the contaminated hydraulic fluid caused by the degradation of the clutch reservoir hose and involved the “replacement of the hydraulic clutch master cylinder and reservoir hose” for the 2013-2015 Dodge Dart vehicles.

The entire opinion can be read here.

If you're in California and you’ve taken your Dodge Dart to a dealership for any issue, ranging from transmission stalling, transmission failure, clutch failure, or any other warranty concern, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU! Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you! Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain Oil Consumption Class Action Settlement Nears

To California residents, as mentioned before, Berman v. General Motors, LLC (the Chevrolet Equinox GMC Terrain oil consumption class action) is very near settlement. Notice of settlement has gone out to potential class members and there are very important deadlines approaching. Most significantly, if you want to NOT be in the class action and pursue an individual lemon law claim, you MUST OPT OUT of the class action prior to the September 20, 2019 deadline. Here is a link to the Notice that went out to class members and here is the information regarding opting out:

Equinox Oil Consumption

If you're in California and you own a 2.4L engine 2010, 2011, 2012, or 2013 Chevrolet Equinox and have experienced oil consumption issues, you may be have a potential lemon law claim. If you’ve taken your Equinox or Terrain to a dealership for issues above, from engine stalling, abnormal oil consumption, high pressure fuel pump failure, balance shaft chain failure or engine failure, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU! Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you! Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone
Your Legal Rights - Lemon Law - Podcast

KALW radio in San Francisco recently hosted a podcast about California Lemon Law and it is a delightful listen for anyone curious about the California Lemon Law. It’s only an hour long and goes by far too quickly. If you’re interesting in listening, feel free to click here.

Also, here is the relevant Civil Code text of California Lemon Law, with some parts in bold for emphasis by me

1793.2. (a) Every manufacturer of consumer goods sold in this state and for which the manufacturer has made an express warranty shall:

(1) (A) Maintain in this state sufficient service and repair facilities reasonably close to all areas where its consumer goods are sold to carry out the terms of those warranties or designate and authorize in this state as service and repair facilities independent repair or service facilities reasonably close to all areas where its consumer goods are sold to carry out the terms of the warranties.

(B) As a means of complying with this paragraph, a manufacturer may enter into warranty service contracts with independent service and repair facilities. The warranty service contracts may provide for a fixed schedule of rates to be charged for warranty service or warranty repair work. However, the rates fixed by those contracts shall be in conformity with the requirements of subdivision (c) of Section 1793.3. The rates established pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 1793.3, between the manufacturer and the independent service and repair facility, do not preclude a good faith discount that is reasonably related to reduced credit and general overhead cost factors arising from the manufacturer’s payment of warranty charges direct to the independent service and repair facility. The warranty service contracts authorized by this paragraph may not be executed to cover a period of time in excess of one year, and may be renewed only by a separate, new contract or letter of agreement between the manufacturer and the independent service and repair facility.

(2) In the event of a failure to comply with paragraph (1) of this subdivision, be subject to Section 1793.5.

(3) Make available to authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period.

(b) Where those service and repair facilities are maintained in this state and service or repair of the goods is necessary because they do not conform with the applicable express warranties, service and repair shall be commenced within a reasonable time by the manufacturer or its representative in this state. Unless the buyer agrees in writing to the contrary, the goods shall be serviced or repaired so as to conform to the applicable warranties within 30 days. Delay caused by conditions beyond the control of the manufacturer or its representatives shall serve to extend this 30-day requirement. Where delay arises, conforming goods shall be tendered as soon as possible following termination of the condition giving rise to the delay.

(c) The buyer shall deliver nonconforming goods to the manufacturer’s service and repair facility within this state, unless, due to reasons of size and weight, or method of attachment, or method of installation, or nature of the nonconformity, delivery cannot reasonably be accomplished. If the buyer cannot return the nonconforming goods for any of these reasons, he or she shall notify the manufacturer or its nearest service and repair facility within the state. Written notice of nonconformity to the manufacturer or its service and repair facility shall constitute return of the goods for purposes of this section. Upon receipt of that notice of nonconformity, the manufacturer shall, at its option, service or repair the goods at the buyer’s residence, or pick up the goods for service and repair, or arrange for transporting the goods to its service and repair facility. All reasonable costs of transporting the goods when a buyer cannot return them for any of the above reasons shall be at the manufacturer’s expense. The reasonable costs of transporting nonconforming goods after delivery to the service and repair facility until return of the goods to the buyer shall be at the manufacturer’s expense.

(d) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), if the manufacturer or its representative in this state does not service or repair the goods to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer shall either replace the goods or reimburse the buyer in an amount equal to the purchase price paid by the buyer, less that amount directly attributable to use by the buyer prior to the discovery of the nonconformity.

(2) If the manufacturer or its representative in this state is unable to service or repair a new motor vehicle, as that term is defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 1793.22, to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer shall either promptly replace the new motor vehicle in accordance with subparagraph (A) or promptly make restitution to the buyer in accordance with subparagraph (B). However, the buyer shall be free to elect restitution in lieu of replacement, and in no event shall the buyer be required by the manufacturer to accept a replacement vehicle.

(A) In the case of replacement, the manufacturer shall replace the buyer’s vehicle with a new motor vehicle substantially identical to the vehicle replaced. The replacement vehicle shall be accompanied by all express and implied warranties that normally accompany new motor vehicles of that specific kind. The manufacturer also shall pay for, or to, the buyer the amount of any sales or use tax, license fees, registration fees, and other official fees which the buyer is obligated to pay in connection with the replacement, plus any incidental damages to which the buyer is entitled under Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.

(B) In the case of restitution, the manufacturer shall make restitution in an amount equal to the actual price paid or payable by the buyer, including any charges for transportation and manufacturer-installed options, but excluding nonmanufacturer items installed by a dealer or the buyer, and including any collateral charges such as sales or use tax, license fees, registration fees, and other official fees, plus any incidental damages to which the buyer is entitled under Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.

(C) When the manufacturer replaces the new motor vehicle pursuant to subparagraph (A), the buyer shall only be liable to pay the manufacturer an amount directly attributable to use by the buyer of the replaced vehicle prior to the time the buyer first delivered the vehicle to the manufacturer or distributor, or its authorized service and repair facility for correction of the problem that gave rise to the nonconformity. When restitution is made pursuant to subparagraph (B), the amount to be paid by the manufacturer to the buyer may be reduced by the manufacturer by that amount directly attributable to use by the buyer prior to the time the buyer first delivered the vehicle to the manufacturer or distributor, or its authorized service and repair facility for correction of the problem that gave rise to the nonconformity. The amount directly attributable to use by the buyer shall be determined by multiplying the actual price of the new motor vehicle paid or payable by the buyer, including any charges for transportation and manufacturer-installed options, by a fraction having as its denominator 120,000 and having as its numerator the number of miles traveled by the new motor vehicle prior to the time the buyer first delivered the vehicle to the manufacturer or distributor, or its authorized service and repair facility for correction of the problem that gave rise to the nonconformity. Nothing in this paragraph shall in any way limit the rights or remedies available to the buyer under any other law.

(D) Pursuant to Section 1795.4, a buyer of a new motor vehicle shall also include a lessee of a new motor vehicle.

(e) (1) If the goods cannot practicably be serviced or repaired by the manufacturer or its representative to conform to the applicable express warranties because of the method of installation or because the goods have become so affixed to real property as to become a part thereof, the manufacturer shall either replace and install the goods or reimburse the buyer in an amount equal to the purchase price paid by the buyer, including installation costs, less that amount directly attributable to use by the buyer prior to the discovery of the nonconformity.

(2) With respect to claims arising out of deficiencies in the construction of a new residential dwelling, paragraph (1) shall not apply to either of the following:

(A) A product that is not a manufactured product, as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 896.

(B) A claim against a person or entity that is not the manufacturer that originally made the express warranty for that manufactured product.

(Amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 727, Sec. 1. (AB 242) Effective January 1, 2012.)

1793.22. (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Tanner Consumer Protection Act.

(b) It shall be presumed that a reasonable number of attempts have been made to conform a new motor vehicle to the applicable express warranties if, within 18 months from delivery to the buyer or 18,000 miles on the odometer of the vehicle, whichever occurs first, one or more of the following occurs:

(1) The same nonconformity results in a condition that is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if the vehicle is driven and the nonconformity has been subject to repair two or more times by the manufacturer or its agents, and the buyer or lessee has at least once directly notified the manufacturer of the need for the repair of the nonconformity.

(2) The same nonconformity has been subject to repair four or more times by the manufacturer or its agents and the buyer has at least once directly notified the manufacturer of the need for the repair of the nonconformity.

(3) The vehicle is out of service by reason of repair of nonconformities by the manufacturer or its agents for a cumulative total of more than 30 calendar days since delivery of the vehicle to the buyer. The 30-day limit shall be extended only if repairs cannot be performed due to conditions beyond the control of the manufacturer or its agents. The buyer shall be required to directly notify the manufacturer pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) only if the manufacturer has clearly and conspicuously disclosed to the buyer, with the warranty or the owner’s manual, the provisions of this section and that of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, including the requirement that the buyer must notify the manufacturer directly pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2). The notification, if required, shall be sent to the address, if any, specified clearly and conspicuously by the manufacturer in the warranty or owner’s manual. This presumption shall be a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of proof, and it may be asserted by the buyer in any civil action, including an action in small claims court, or other formal or informal proceeding.

(c) If a qualified third-party dispute resolution process exists, and the buyer receives timely notification in writing of the availability of that qualified third-party dispute resolution process with a description of its operation and effect, the presumption in subdivision (b) may not be asserted by the buyer until after the buyer has initially resorted to the qualified third-party dispute resolution process as required in subdivision (d). Notification of the availability of the qualified third-party dispute resolution process is not timely if the buyer suffers any prejudice resulting from any delay in giving the notification. If a qualified third-party dispute resolution process does not exist, or if the buyer is dissatisfied with that third-party decision, or if the manufacturer or its agent neglects to promptly fulfill the terms of the qualified third-party dispute resolution process decision after the decision is accepted by the buyer, the buyer may assert the presumption provided in subdivision (b) in an action to enforce the buyer’s rights under subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2. The findings and decision of a qualified third-party dispute resolution process shall be admissible in evidence in the action without further foundation. Any period of limitation of actions under any federal or California laws with respect to any person shall be extended for a period equal to the number of days between the date a complaint is filed with a third-party dispute resolution process and the date of its decision or the date before which the manufacturer or its agent is required by the decision to fulfill its terms if the decision is accepted by the buyer, whichever occurs later.

(d) A qualified third-party dispute resolution process shall be one that does all of the following:

(1) Complies with the minimum requirements of the Federal Trade Commission for informal dispute settlement procedures as set forth in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as those regulations read on January 1, 1987.

(2) Renders decisions which are binding on the manufacturer if the buyer elects to accept the decision.

(3) Prescribes a reasonable time, not to exceed 30 days after the decision is accepted by the buyer, within which the manufacturer or its agent must fulfill the terms of its decisions.

(4) Provides arbitrators who are assigned to decide disputes with copies of, and instruction in, the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission’s regulations in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as those regulations read on January 1, 1987, Division 2 (commencing with Section 2101) of the Commercial Code, and this chapter.

(5) Requires the manufacturer, when the process orders, under the terms of this chapter, either that the nonconforming motor vehicle be replaced if the buyer consents to this remedy or that restitution be made to the buyer, to replace the motor vehicle or make restitution in accordance with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2.

(6) Provides, at the request of the arbitrator or a majority of the arbitration panel, for an inspection and written report on the condition of a nonconforming motor vehicle, at no cost to the buyer, by an automobile expert who is independent of the manufacturer.

(7) Takes into account, in rendering decisions, all legal and equitable factors, including, but not limited to, the written warranty, the rights and remedies conferred in regulations of the Federal Trade Commission contained in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as those regulations read on January 1, 1987, Division 2 (commencing with Section 2101) of the Commercial Code, this chapter, and any other equitable considerations appropriate in the circumstances. Nothing in this chapter requires that, to be certified as a qualified third-party dispute resolution process pursuant to this section, decisions of the process must consider or provide remedies in the form of awards of punitive damages or multiple damages, under subdivision (c) of Section 1794, or of attorneys’ fees under subdivision (d) of Section 1794, or of consequential damages other than as provided in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.

(8) Requires that no arbitrator deciding a dispute may be a party to the dispute and that no other person, including an employee, agent, or dealer for the manufacturer, may be allowed to participate substantively in the merits of any dispute with the arbitrator unless the buyer is allowed to participate also. Nothing in this subdivision prohibits any member of an arbitration board from deciding a dispute.

(9) Obtains and maintains certification by the Department of Consumer Affairs pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 472) of Division 1 of the Business and Professions Code.

(e) For the purposes of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 and this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

(1) “Nonconformity” means a nonconformity which substantially impairs the use, value, or safety of the new motor vehicle to the buyer or lessee.

(2) “New motor vehicle” means a new motor vehicle that is bought or used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. “New motor vehicle” also means a new motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight under 10,000 pounds that is bought or used primarily for business purposes by a person, including a partnership, limited liability company, corporation, association, or any other legal entity, to which not more than five motor vehicles are registered in this state. “New motor vehicle” includes the chassis, chassis cab, and that portion of a motor home devoted to its propulsion, but does not include any portion designed, used, or maintained primarily for human habitation, a dealer-owned vehicle and a “demonstrator” or other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer’s new car warranty but does not include a motorcycle or a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Vehicle Code because it is to be operated or used exclusively off the highways. A demonstrator is a vehicle assigned by a dealer for the purpose of demonstrating qualities and characteristics common to vehicles of the same or similar model and type.

(3) “Motor home” means a vehicular unit built on, or permanently attached to, a self-propelled motor vehicle chassis, chassis cab, or van, which becomes an integral part of the completed vehicle, designed for human habitation for recreational or emergency occupancy.

(f) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall sell, either at wholesale or retail, lease, or transfer a motor vehicle transferred by a buyer or lessee to a manufacturer pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 or a similar statute of any other state, unless the nature of the nonconformity experienced by the original buyer or lessee is clearly and conspicuously disclosed to the prospective buyer, lessee, or transferee, the nonconformity is corrected, and the manufacturer warrants to the new buyer, lessee, or transferee in writing for a period of one year that the motor vehicle is free of that nonconformity.

(2) Except for the requirement that the nature of the nonconformity be disclosed to the transferee, paragraph (1) does not apply to the transfer of a motor vehicle to an educational institution if the purpose of the transfer is to make the motor vehicle available for use in automotive repair courses.

(Amended by Stats. 2000, Ch. 679, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2001.)

1794. (a) Any buyer of consumer goods who is damaged by a failure to comply with any obligation under this chapter or under an implied or express warranty or service contract may bring an action for the recovery of damages and other legal and equitable relief.

(b) The measure of the buyer’s damages in an action under this section shall include the rights of replacement or reimbursement as set forth in subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, and the following:

(1) Where the buyer has rightfully rejected or justifiably revoked acceptance of the goods or has exercised any right to cancel the sale, Sections 2711, 2712, and 2713 of the Commercial Code shall apply.

(2) Where the buyer has accepted the goods, Sections 2714 and 2715 of the Commercial Code shall apply, and the measure of damages shall include the cost of repairs necessary to make the goods conform.

(c) If the buyer establishes that the failure to comply was willful, the judgment may include, in addition to the amounts recovered under subdivision (a), a civil penalty which shall not exceed two times the amount of actual damages. This subdivision shall not apply in any class action under Section 382 of the Code of Civil Procedure or under Section 1781, or with respect to a claim based solely on a breach of an implied warranty.

(d) If the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action.

(e) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, if the buyer establishes a violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, the buyer shall recover damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and may recover a civil penalty of up to two times the amount of damages.

(2) If the manufacturer maintains a qualified third-party dispute resolution process which substantially complies with Section 1793.22, the manufacturer shall not be liable for any civil penalty pursuant to this subdivision.

(3) After the occurrence of the events giving rise to the presumption established in subdivision (b) of Section 1793.22, the buyer may serve upon the manufacturer a written notice requesting that the manufacturer comply with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2. If the buyer fails to serve the notice, the manufacturer shall not be liable for a civil penalty pursuant to this subdivision.

(4) If the buyer serves the notice described in paragraph (3) and the manufacturer complies with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 within 30 days of the service of that notice, the manufacturer shall not be liable for a civil penalty pursuant to this subdivision.

(5) If the buyer recovers a civil penalty under subdivision (c), the buyer may not also recover a civil penalty under this subdivision for the same violation.

(Amended by Stats. 1992, Ch. 1232, Sec. 9. Effective January 1, 1993.)

2016 - 2017 Chevrolet Malibu Premature Piston Failure

A few weeks ago I wrote about 2016-2017 Chevrolet Malibu’s and how they’ve been experiencing issues with the pistons within their engine.

After more research, the problem appears to be more widespread than thought. The warranty extension regarding an update to the ECM can be found here.

Needless to say, replacing the pistons within an engine can be considered major work done to the vehicle, as well as alteration of the computer that runs the vehicle (ECM). If this work has been done, the vehicle will not operate the same as when it was purchased.

If you're in California and you’ve taken your Chevrolet Malibu or Chevrolet Cruze to a dealership for issues above, from engine failure, piston failure or any warranty condition, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone
2016 - 2017 Chevrolet Cruze and Malibu Piston Problems

Multiple owners of the 2016-2017 Chevrolet Cruze and Chevrolet Malbu owners have noted odd premature piston failure in their engines. GM is aware of the issue and issued a technical service bulletin that says:

Some customers may comment on a rough running engine with the Malfunction Indicator Lamp ON. Upon inspection, a technician may find DTC P0300 set along with a misfire low compression in one or more cylinders. This condition may be caused by a damaged piston.

That TSB is accessible here. Additionally, the warranty extension from GM is found below:

March 2017

This notice applies to your vehicle, VIN:______________________

Dear General Motors Customer:

We have learned that your 2016 or 2017 model year Chevrolet Malibu may have a condition that could cause your engine to perform poorly and oil consumption to increase. In addition, a service engine light may illuminate indicating an engine misfire. If the condition is present, and the engine is not repaired immediately, a piston may become damaged, and the engine may need to be repaired or replaced.

Your satisfaction with your Malibu is very important to us, so we are announcing a program to prevent this condition or, if it has occurred, to fix it.

What We Will Do: Your GM dealer will reprogram the Engine Control Module (ECM) and change the engine oil. This service will be performed for you at no charge until March 31, 2019.1 After that, any applicable warranty will apply.

What You Should Do: To limit any possible inconvenience, we recommend that you contact your dealer as soon as possible to schedule an appointment for this repair. By scheduling an appointment, your dealer can ensure that the necessary parts will be available on your scheduled appointment date.

Important: In the future, when replacing the engine oil for the 1.5L L4 turbo engine, GM strongly recommends dexos 1 approved ACDelco Full Synthetic 5W-30, Mobil 1 Full Synthetic 5W-30, or any other oil meeting dexos 1 second generation requirements.

Enclosed with this letter please find an owner manual supplement which updates the engine oil requirements for your vehicle. Please keep this insert with your important vehicle documents for reference.

If you have any questions or need any assistance, just contact your dealer or the appropriate Customer Assistance Center at the number listed below.

We sincerely regret any inconvenience or concern that this situation may cause you. We want you to know that we will do our best, throughout your ownership experience, to ensure that your GM vehicle [or if only one model involved, list name] provides you many miles of enjoyable driving.

Terry M. Inch

Executive Director

Global Connected Customer Experience

Enclosure

17019

If you're in California and you’ve taken your Chevrolet Malibu or Chevrolet Cruze to a dealership for issues above, from engine failure, piston failure or any warranty condition, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone
NHTSA opens investigation into 2017 Chrysler Pacifica

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has opened an investigation into complaints of stalling in 2017 Chrysler Pacificas.  In their own words, NHTSA says they'll open an investigation if "... enough consumers contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and file a report about the same problem with the same type of vehicle, the NHTSA may decide to open an investigation."  This can ultimately lead to a recall of those cars.  

The opening investigation report can be found here.

If you’ve taken your Chrysler Pacifica to a dealership for issues relating to stalling (or any other concern), we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

 

Another Nissan CVT Class Action (Versa)

Nissan has had some issues with their CVT transmissions.  I wrote about the warranty extension that Nissan issued to only some of its CVT owners, as well as a class action regarding the CVT transmission in Nissan Sentras AND a completely different class action that settled regarding the Nissan Pathfinders.  Now, Nissan is facing another class action regarding that same transmission in 2012-2013 Nissan Versas, with the Class Vehicles defined as: 

"...all current and former owners and lessees of 2012 and 2013 Nissan Versas that are equipped with CVTs that allegedly fail within and shortly after the warranties expire."

The class action alleges that the Nissan Versa will fail to accelerate and experience 'complete transmission failure' that consumers will later have to pay out of pocket for, which can cost in the thousands of dollars.  

The Nissan Versa CVT lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Michael Knotts, et. al., v. Nissan North America, Inc.

If you’ve taken your CVT equipped Nissan Versa to a dealership for issues above, from transmission stalling, transmission failure, overheating, or any other warranty concern, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

 

Chevrolet Equinox / GMC Terrain Catalytic Converter Warranty Extension

I wrote about a warranty extension for Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain owners here, where General Motors offered owners of 2010-2012 Equinox and Terrain owners a completely free warranty extension covering oil consumption issues.  Along that same road, General Motors has also issued a warranty extension for 2010-2011 Chevrolet Equinoxes and Terrains with 2.4L engines regarding the catalytic converter.  This is good news because it means that if your car has fewer than 120,000 miles and your vehicle requires a catalytic converter replacement, you can have that done at a GM dealership at no cost to you.  The bulletin is titled 15810-01: Special Coverage – Catalytic Converter Replacement – 2010-2011 Chevrolet Equinox & GMC Terrain and is copy / pasted below:

Condition: On some 2010-2011 model year Chevrolet Equinox and GMCTerrain vehicles that are equipped with a 2.4L engine (RPO LAF), a malfunction-indicator light (MIL) may illuminate due to thermal damage or face erosion of the catalytic converter.

Special Coverage Adjustment: This special coverage covers the condition described above for a period of 10 years or 120,000 miles (193,000 km), whichever occurs first, from the date the vehicle was originally placed in service, regardless of ownership.

Correction Replace the catalytic converter. The repairs will be made at no charge to the customer.

If you own a 2010-2012 Chevrolet Equinox or GMC Terrain and have experienced any issues related to excessive oil consumption, stalling, poor engine performance, camshaft actuator failure or any other concern that was covered under the manufacturer's warranty, please contact us immediately at 424-299-4447 for a free consultation for information regarding your vehicle and a potential lemon law claim!

 

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone
Chrysler is recalling approximately 50,000 Pacifica minivans

Per the NHTSA recall notice

Summary

Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain 2017-2018 Chrysler Pacifica vehicles equipped with the 8-passenger seating option. In certain passenger seating and vehicle situations, the second-row center seating position seat belt buckle could cause the left outboard seat belt to become unlatched.

Remedy

Chrysler will notify owners, and dealers will install a shorter second-row seat belt buckle, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin October 20, 2017. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is T54.

Common Chevrolet Cruze and Impala issues

Several owners of 2011-2014 Chevrolet Cruze vehicles are complaining that their vehicles have various issues, including water pump failure, overheating, transmission issues, engine issues, PCV replacement, loss of throttle, oil leaks, illumination of the check engine light and turbo problems.  I've written about the Chevrolet Cruze problems here as well.  

Additionally, owners of 2008-2014 Chevrolet Impala vehicles are complaining that their vehicles have various problems, including engine failure, the vehicle not starting, grinding from the transmission or engine, and severe vibrations.  

If you’ve taken your Cruze or Impala to a dealership for issues above, from engine stalling, abnormal oil consumption, engine / transmission failure, PCV failure, , we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

Nissan CVT Warranty Extension

Nissan and the issues with it's CVT transmission are pretty well known (See here, here and here).  However, if you do own one of the following Nissan vehicle's equipped with a CVT transmission, the good news is that Nissan issued a warranty extension for your CVT transmission to 10 years or 120,000 miles, which ever comes first. 

  • 2003-2010 Nissan Murano
  • 2008-2010 Nissan Rogue
  • 2009-2010 Nissan Cube
  • 2007-2010 Nissan Sentra
  • 2007-2010 Nissan Versa 1.8SL
  • 2007-2010 Nissan Maxima
  • 2007-2010 Nissan Altima
  • 2007-2010 Nissan Altima Coupe
  • 2007-2010 Nissan Altima Hybrid

You can click here for more information from Nissan's website. (Edit: 4/30/2018 - Nissan has since taken this webpage )

If you're in California and you’ve taken your CVT equipped Nissan vehicle to a dealership for any issue, ranging from transmission stalling, transmission failure, overheating, or any other warranty concern, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

 

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone
Equinox Oil Policy Change: GM alerts 779,000 owners to need for more-frequent oil changes

Given the issues with oil consumption and the 2.4 liter engine in Equinoxes and Terrains, I figured this news article would be relevant to post again right now: 

GM alerts 779,000 owners to need for more-frequent oil changes

DETROIT -- General Motors is warning owners of almost 800,000 2010-12 vehicles that they may need oil changes more frequently than their onboard oil monitoring systems are telling them.

After high warranty claims on several models with four-cylinder engines, GM will reprogram software to make oil change warning lights go on sooner.

The change only affects 2010-2012 Chevrolet Equinox, GMC Terrain and Buick LaCrosse and Regal models with 2.4-liter LAF and LEA four-cylinder engines.

GM sent letters asking 778,956 owners of those vehicles to take them back to dealerships. The service will be done at no charge until Feb. 28, 2015.

"Even if they were out of warranty, they would still be good to have this done through that period," said GM spokesman Alan Adler. "After that, the dealers have discretion to make the customers happy."

The program involves vehicles in the United States as well as any affected vehicles that were exported.

"It is a U.S. program but exported vehicles would be treated the same," Adler said.

Adler said the changes resulting from the software reprogramming would not be dramatic.

Owner's manuals say the engine oil and filter must be changed at least once a year. Further guidance appears on a display screen that expresses remaining oil life as a percentage. Driving style and environment play a role in the readings.

GM began updating the software in December after noticing warranty claims for worn-out balance chains. The chains link the crankshaft and the balance shaft -- "just like the chain on your bicycle goes from the pedals to your back wheel" -- and make noise when they're worn, Adler said. The company declined to disclose the number of claims.

Product investigators found that recalibrating the oil-life monitor will help the chains last longer, Adler said.

The monitor "tells you when you should change your oil. It might be 5,000 miles, it might be 7,000 miles. It's going to vary based on how you drive your car," Adler said.

"Those intervals between oil changes were longer, but now they're going to be a little shorter because we have to find the right balance between how long the parts last and how much lubricant the vehicle needs."

Adler said the program is not a recall because it does not involve a safety issue.

Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety in Washington, said a safety recall never expires, as opposed to the limited time frame of a voluntary equipment-modification program that does not involve a safety issue.

Said Ditlow: "A customer satisfaction program is something that each manufacturer at its discretion decides to implement."

Hat tip to Automotive News.

Another Dodge Durango and Jeep Grand Cherokee Recall (Brakes)

Fiat Chrysler Auto (FCA) issued another huge recall on a series of vehicles it already issued a recall on.  No word yet on how long it'll take FCA to get these components in stock, especially given FCA's track record of not having recall components in stock and getting fined by NHTSA for that.  In pertinent part, the Detroit Free Press says [bold font edits are mine]:

Fiat Chrysler announced it is recalling more than 700,000 Jeep and Dodge sport-utility vehicles to resolve a potential problem with the vehicles’ brakes that can make it difficult to stop.

The action affects Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Durangos from model years 2011–14 with about 646,000 of those vehicles in the U.S. 

The company said a mistake installing the brake-booster shields may allow water intrusion, which can cause corrosion and freezing, impacting the functionality of the brakes. Signs of a problem include excessive brake-pedal firmness, activations of the anti-lock brakes and illumination of a warning light.

It isn’t the first time FCA has tried to resolve the problem. In fact, the installation of the shields was supposed to eliminate the issue in 2014. However, some weren’t installed correctly the company discovered reviewing warranty data.

If you’ve taken your Grand Cherokee or Durango to a dealership issues that were covered under the manufacturer's warranty, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

2012-2017 Nissan Sentra CVT Class Action Filed

In early September another consumer class action in California was filed against Nissan alleging the CVT transmissions in 2012-2017 Sentra’s are prone to premature failure.  I say another because there was an entirely different class action filed in 2016 alleging that the JATCO manufactured CVT transmission in 2013-2014 Nissan Pathfinders and 2014 Infiniti QX60’s that recently settled (under that settlement, class members received an extended warranty on the transmission.  Whether that is a good settlement is up for debate).  

Here, the crux of the new class action is similar to the old in that the CVT transmission will fail due to overheating, which allegedly is too small to cool the CVT transmission.  The issue is fairly well documented on NHTSA and Nissan has known about this issue for awhile based on Technical Service Bulletins they’ve issued before, found here:

Ostensibly, Nissan has known about this issue for quite some time.  If you're in California and you’ve purchased a CVT equipped Nissan and you’re experiencing issues, you may be entitled to a refund!  Individual actions, as opposed to class actions, are preferable as the potential reward can be much greater and, since each case is unique in it's own right, individualized attention can be given to each matter.

If you’ve taken your CVT equipped Nissan Sentra to a dealership for issues above, from transmission stalling, transmission failure, overheating, or any other warranty concern, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!
 

 

 

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone
2010-2017 Chevrolet Equinox Oil Consumption Class Action Filed

Hot on the heels of a recent post regarding Oil Consumption in 2012 Chevrolet Equinox's, on September 23, 2017 a law firm (not Valero Law, APC) in California filed a class action against General Motors for, you guessed it, oil consumption.  The substance of the class action is alleged as: 

[.....] the Class Vehicles need the proper amount of engine oil in order for their engines and
related parts to function properly and safely.  

The Oil Consumption Defect is a safety concern because it prevents the engine from maintaining the proper level of engine oil, causing excessive oil consumption that cannot be reasonably anticipated or predicted. Therefore, the Oil Consumption Defect is unreasonably dangerous because it can cause engine failure while the Class Vehicles are in operation at any time and under any driving conditions or speeds, exposing the Class Vehicle drivers, their passengers, and others who share the road with them to serious risks of accidents and injury.

Because the Oil Consumption Defect can cause the Class Vehicles to consume unacceptably high amounts of engine oil, the rate of oil consumption for some Class Vehicles can be
as high as one quart of oil per 1,000 miles driven. The Oil Consumption Defect thus requires the addition of substantial amounts of oil between scheduled oil changes and can even result in engine damage. As a result of the Oil Consumption Defect, its potential safety hazards, and GM’s refusal to  acknowledge and fix the problem, many consumers have resorted to purchasing an extra supply of oil and carrying it with them at all times when driving. 

The complaint can be found here.

Individual actions, as opposed to class actions, are preferable as the potential reward can be much greater and, since each case is unique in it's own right, individualized attention can be given to each matter.

If you're in California and you’ve taken your Equinox or Terrain to a dealership for issues above, from engine stalling, abnormal oil consumption, high pressure fuel pump failure, balance shaft chain failure or engine failure, we can help you…. AT NO COST TO YOU!  Valero Law, APC is a California consumer protection firm dedicated to protecting the lemon law rights of California consumers and ALL cases are taken on a contingency basis, meaning if there is no recovery, there is absolutely no fee to you!  Feel free to call at 424-299-4447 for a free case evaluation!

In the alternative, if you're in a state other than California, you can contact class counsel at 888-333-8996 and here.

 

Name *
Name
Phone
Phone