Class Action Against GM Claims ’10-’15 Cadillac SRX Headlights are Defective [UPDATE]
Last Updated on November 4, 2021
Davis et al. v. General Motors LLC
Filed: October 16, 2017 ◆§ 8:17-cv-02431-EAK-AAS
The lawsuit claims the headlights on class vehicles can 'abnormally and prematurely wear-out and fail' in part because of the sealing on the lights' housing units.
Case Updates
November 4, 2021 – Parties Reach Private Settlement
The parties in the case detailed on this page notified the court in November 2018 that they had reached a tentative settlement and would need 60 days to finalize the matter.
A document filed with the court the next month requested that the judge dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice and the proposed class members’ claims without prejudice, which indicates that the aforementioned settlement applied only to the individual plaintiffs.
Thus, those who the lawsuit was looking to cover, i.e., the proposed class members, remain free to pursue legal action against General Motors for the allegations detailed on this page.
General Motors LLC is the defendant in a proposed class action lawsuit filed by three plaintiffs on behalf of owners or lessees of 2010-2015 Cadillac SRX vehicles (class vehicles). The 50-page complaint alleges the cars contain a defect that can cause their headlights to “abnormally and prematurely wear-out and fail.” The plaintiffs claim the seals used by GM on the class vehicles’ headlights’ exterior housing units can prematurely deteriorate, which can allow moisture to accumulate from air flowing through their vents. Moreover, the headlight housing units allegedly also compromise the flow and exchange of air as a result of being improperly sealed, the lawsuit says, which can result in corrosion of lamp assembly components or electrical shortages.
The complaint claims the alleged defect creates a hazard for consumers because, as it progresses, the headlight problem can reportedly cause very dim light output from the bulbs or no light at all.
GM’s response to the alleged defect has been inadequate, the lawsuit argues, claiming the company’s Customer Satisfaction Program and several technical service bulletins have not done enough to alert proposed class members of the headlight problems. Further still, GM allegedly refuses to extend warranty coverage to class vehicles, leading owners and lessees to incur out-of-pocket costs for repairs.
“Beginning as early as 2010, through consumer complaints and dealership repair orders, among other internal sources, [General Motors] knew or should have known of the headlight defect in the class vehicles that adversely affects the drivability of the class vehicles and causes safety hazards,” the case argues. “Nevertheless, [the defendant] has actively concealed and failed to disclose this defect to [the plaintiffs] and class members prior to the time of purchase or lease and thereafter.”
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.