Fiat Chrysler Hit with Class Action Over ‘Inspection Provision’ Hidden in Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranties [DISMISSED]
Last Updated on May 8, 2023
Hightman v. Fiat Chrysler US Llc et al
Filed: September 24, 2018 ◆§ 3:18cv2205
Fiat Chrysler US (FCA) faces a lawsuit over its alleged breach of its Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranties for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep vehicles.
May 8, 2023 – Fiat Chrysler’s Hidden “Inspection Clause” Class Action Dismissed
The proposed class action lawsuit detailed on this page was dismissed with prejudice on August 10, 2022.
Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
In a 20-page order, U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez granted a motion from Fiat Chrysler US (FCA) to toss the case, stating that the plaintiff’s amended complaint did not adequately argue a breach-of-warranty claim.
A December 29, 2021 court document relays that the plaintiff’s other claims were dismissed or withdrawn in March 2020 after the case was transferred to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court the previous August. Judge Benitez, who noted in the four-page show-cause order that the plaintiff had “taken no action to prosecute the remaining claim” after more than a year had passed, ordered the woman to “show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed,” and a status conference was set for January 24, 2022.
After hearing the plaintiff’s arguments at the status conference, the judge ordered FCA to file a motion to dismiss, which the automaker submitted in February.
Judge Benitez granted FCA’s motion to dismiss in August 2022, and the case was closed the same day.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
A proposed class action filed in California challenges defendant Fiat Chrysler US LLC over its alleged breach of its Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranties for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep vehicles sold and delivered on or after July 26, 2007 (class vehicles). According to the lawsuit, owners of these vehicle models who bought Fiat Chrysler’s Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranty were saddled with a surprise “inspection clause” mandating that class vehicles undergo a powertrain inspection within 60 days of each five-year anniversary of the car’s in-service date. The problem, the suit says, is that Fiat Chrysler has “routinely voided” customers’ powertrain warranties due to their failure to undergo this inspection within the allotted timeframe.
The suit attempts to link Fiat Chrysler’s allegedly unscrupulous conduct to the supposed “financial freefall” the company found itself in during the first half of 2007. According to the case, the defendant, after laying off 13,000 workers and announcing plant closings, faced “significant backlash” from dealers laden with overstocked inventories. To ease dealers’ frustrations, Fiat Chrysler, knowing that powertrain warranties were a key motivating factor behind almost every vehicle purchase, announced soon thereafter that it would offer Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranties on 88 percent of its fleet models, the case says.
The defendant reportedly touted its Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranties in television and print advertisements as “the best warranty coverage in the business” and assured customers they’d be covered for the lifetime of their vehicles. Unfortunately, according to the lawsuit, Fiat Chrysler’s “peace-of-mind-reassurance” rang hollow once proposed class members uncovered the supposedly hidden inspection provision in their warranty agreements. From the lawsuit:
“FCA failed to provide Class members with the specific terms and conditions of the Lifetime Warranty prior to purchasing Class Vehicles. Moreover, the terms and conditions of the Lifetime Powertrain Warranty were not available on FCA’s website and FCA’s customer service department was “not empowered” to provide inquiring consumers with the terms and conditions of the Lifetime Powertrain Warranty. When consumers were finally provided with the terms and conditions after they had already purchased their Class Vehicle, the inspection clause – arguably the most consequential provision – was in fine print and indistinguishable from the surrounding terms.”
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.