Amended Settlement in Klee v. Nissan

[TomT]

Mine stabilized around 272 Gids... I think part of the issue is that Nissan raised the maximum allowable voltage somewhat on the newer packs, but the older cars are not programmed for this and thus slightly undercharge the pack... The fact that a 100% charge shows a SOC in the lower 90s on Leaf Spy lends credence to this. The actual capacity, based on range, seems to be pretty much what I'd expect from a new battery however.

I'm still waiting for all the data to stabilize, but Leaf DD shows capacity steady at 66.1414 AHrs and 100% GIDS between 265 and 271. Seems low on GIDS for the much higher new AHr capacity, but perhaps it is just a difference in programming between 2011 and 2015 model year cars. We're just happy to have our range back.

 

[marccbr]

That's exactly why it is so ridiculous to use the bars as the measure for getting a battery. They can program those bars to be 50% before you lose the fourth bar or may be even 75% but they can't mess with the actual capacity of the battery.

 

[dhanson865]

Bars are not linear, the 1st one is 2x "thick" as the rest. So it's more like 13 bars total with the 2 topmost "fused" together.

It's 16 bars worth with the top bar being worth 2.4 normal bars and the 0th bar being worth 2.6 normal bars, leaving 11 bars in the middle.

capacity bars
100% to 85% = 12 bars (15% or 2.4 times a "normal" bar)
85% to 78.75% = 11 bars (6.25%)
78.75% to 72.5% = 10 bars (6.25%)
72.5% to 66.25% = 9 bars (6.25%)
66.25% to 60% = 8 bars (6.25%)
60% to 53.75% = 7 bars (6.25%)
53.75% to 47.5% = 6 bars (6.25%)
47.5% to 41.25% = 5 bars (6.25%)
41.25% to 35% = 4 bars (6.25%)
35% to 28.75% = 3 bars (6.25%)
28.75% to 22.5% = 2 bars (6.25%)
22.5% to 16.25% = 1 bar (6.25%)
16.25% to 0% = 0 bars (16.25% or 2.6 times a "normal" bar).

A car with 0 capacity bars might be drivable as a demo. It might go a couple of miles from a full charge to low battery warning and then skip VLBW and turtle or do both in a rapid succession before turning off.

Point is 100% / 16 = 6.25% which is how much a middle bar is worth.

Both the top bar and the lack of bars hold considerably more than a middle bar.

 

[Valdemar]

Well, all I can say counting bars will not make any difference in my case

 

[GRA]

That's exactly why it is so ridiculous to use the bars as the measure for getting a battery. They can program those bars to be 50% before you lose the fourth bar or may be even 75% but they can't mess with the actual capacity of the battery.

Believe me, that point was raised repeatedly here and AFAIR by the advisory group over the past three years. In fact, asking for a warranty based on % capacity rather than bars was near unanimous. Just be glad that other auto makers have given capacity warranties based on % and not bars or some other value subject to change at the whim of the company. Whether our protests here had anything to do with that, I can't say, but I very much doubt that such a slippery, undefined term as 'bar' will be legal for a warranty in future. Until such time as it's officially banned, people can always vote with their wallets, and let the passed-over company know why they did.

 

[Valdemar]

One subtle detail is that no other manufacturer actually provides a capacity gauge of any kind on their EVs, other than that %-based capacity warranty is definitely better.

 

[HighDesertDriver]

Mine stabilized around 272 Gids... I think part of the issue is that Nissan raised the maximum allowable voltage somewhat on the newer packs, but the older cars are not programmed for this and thus slightly undercharge the pack... The fact that a 100% charge shows a SOC in the lower 90s on Leaf Spy lends credence to this. The actual capacity, based on range, seems to be pretty much what I'd expect from a new battery however.

I'm still waiting for all the data to stabilize, but Leaf DD shows capacity steady at 66.1414 AHrs and 100% GIDS between 265 and 271. Seems low on GIDS for the much higher new AHr capacity, but perhaps it is just a difference in programming between 2011 and 2015 model year cars. We're just happy to have our range back.

Thanks for the feedback. Leaf DD reports our new battery SOC in lower 90s also, but I didn't have that data when the car was new so I can't directly compare. Based on the first 1000 miles, range seems to be a bit higher and that makes me glad, but it may be due to better driving technique compared to when we first got the Leaf. Either way, however, we're glad to just drive the car and use the A/C without mentally calculating if something needs to be turned off to make it home. Gids and remaining battery capacity are our final fuel gauge, not the GOM's estimate.

 

[pbjay]

Can i still qualify for a battery replacement as of today? I leased a 2011 Leaf and i just dropped another bar, now got 8 bars left. Can i still get the battery replaced?

 

[91040]

Yes, if
1. the P3227(?) software update has been or is done and there are only 8 capacity bars showing;
2. the previous owner did not opt out of the settlement;
3. a battery check by a Nissan dealer confirms the loss.

Oops. See what I forgot below! Thanks Tom.

Can i still qualify for a battery replacement as of today? I leased a 2011 Leaf and i just dropped another bar, now got 8 bars left. Can i still get the battery replaced?

 

[TomT]

And you are under 60,001 miles.

Can i still qualify for a battery replacement as of today? I leased a 2011 Leaf and i just dropped another bar, now got 8 bars left. Can i still get the battery replaced?

[/quote]

 

[TimLee]

^^^^ And has to be under five years from the vehicle in service date.

All 2011s still have time left.
But some will lose capacity warranty based on time December of this year.

Mine loses it on time May 17, 2016.
Have lost three at <28,000 miles.
But bar four may disappear a few days late.

Something not quite right about a five year old car with 35,000 miles needing a $6,000 repair.

How vehicles used to be three or four decades ago.
The fuure is now and it looks a lot like the past

 

[vrwl]

The new settlement notice with an opt-in form came in the mail today. The deadline for submitting the form by mail or online is April 30, 2015. If you don't want to opt back in, you don't have to do anything. The terms of the settlement are exactly the same we were told about at the beginning of this thread. I will probably stay out of the settlement for aesthetic reasons. There is no chance that I'll qualify for the capacity warranty and I've only QC'd about 25 times in four years, so the card wouldn't provide me much value. But it is a welcome development for people who opted-out impulsively and might have cost themselves the chance to get a free lizard battery. Maybe I should move to Phoenix for a year.

I moved exactly 1 year prior to this notice being sent. Thus, the USPS mail forwarding service had apparently expired because I never got the new settlement notice. Just found this thread yesterday, so I guess I'm screwed for opting back in. I sent emails yesterday to the settlement email address listed on their website to ask what can be done, but so far no answer.

 

[JPWhite]

I'm a little late to the party here and have read the thread.

Has anyone received their NCTC cards in the mail for activation yet?

 

[Nubo]

Something not quite right about a five year old car with 35,000 miles needing a $6,000 repair.

How vehicles used to be three or four decades ago.
The fuure is now and it looks a lot like the past

Not entirely unexpected. Early-adopter risk. We're 5 years into "modern" electric vehicles. And even LEAF, which seems to have had the most egregious battery degradation of the pioneers, already appears to have been significantly improved. Gen 1 was good enough to get the ball rolling and competition is sprouting up. The future is gonna' be pretty cool.

 

[Evoforce]

I know for sure now, that subsequent owners, will not get any benefit from this lawsuit. It is completely disgusting. I own two of these and I tried to get them to add people like my situation to the negotiation for settlement and was ignored. Only original owners or leasers will get a paltry check or charge card. Attorneys got rich we got screwed

 

[DaveEV]

Any idea when the check or charge card is going to go out?

The longer it takes, the fewer original owners will be left.

I have to say that the amended settlement is barely any better than the original.

 

[Evoforce]

drees"]Any idea when the check or charge card is going to go out?

The longet takes, the fewer original owners will be left.

I have to say that the amended settlement is barely any better than the original.[/quote]

No, and they probably don't know yet either. Whether you still own the car is irrelevant. original owners and lessor will get paid whether they still have the car or not...as long as they know the address where to send the settlement proceeds.

 

[leafkabob]

I know for sure now, that subsequent owners, will not get any benefit from this lawsuit. It is completely disgusting. I own two of these and I tried to get them to add people like my situation to the negotiation for settlement and was ignored. Only original owners or leasers will get a paltry check or charge card. Attorneys got rich we got screwed

What benefit did you try to get that was refused?

 

[sub3marathonman]

I know for sure now, that subsequent owners, will not get any benefit from this lawsuit. It is completely disgusting. I own two of these and I tried to get them to add people like my situation to the negotiation for settlement and was ignored. Only original owners or leasers will get a paltry check or charge card. Attorneys got rich we got screwed

What benefit did you try to get that was refused?

You know, I'm wondering that too!

Talk about a tough crowd, EVoforce stated he purchased two 2011 used LEAFs. But, looking at his data, "2011 Leaf Purchased 4/28/15 @ 24,000ish miles and 12 bars (lizard battery exchanged Dec. 2014 at 22,273 miles) Leaf number 4368" so one LEAF did get a major benefit from the lawsuit. Now, I don't know if EVoforce had to pay the higher price for a used LEAF with a newly exchanged battery, but even Evoforce stated it was "a paltry check or charge card" for those who don't qualify for a battery exchange. And, it sure seems likely to me that the other 2011, with 9 bars now but in Arizona, has a fairly decent chance of qualifying for a battery exchange too.

And, as a bit of clarification, I too think it was a terrible, unfair, legal settlement, as the easiest thing to have done was require a battery test at five years (or sooner) and give a prorated credit towards the battery exchange cost. And no, in my opinion, the "paltry check" was not even close to fair compensation for losing out by a mile or a month on a $6K battery exchange. IMHO people should consult an attorney before accepting such a pittance for staying party to this settlement, if it is not possible to opt out now. Unless of course if your LEAF was going to still have over 80% capacity after the allotted miles/time, in which case those owners were "enriched" when they didn't deserve it.

 

[TimLee]

... I too think it was a terrible, unfair, legal settlement, as the easiest thing to have done was require a battery test at five years (or sooner) and give a prorated credit towards the battery exchange cost. And no, in my opinion, the "paltry check" was not even close to fair compensation for losing out by a mile or a month on a $6K battery exchange. IMHO people should consult an attorney before accepting such a pittance for staying party to this settlement, if it is not possible to opt out now. Unless of course if your LEAF was going to still have over 80% capacity after the allotted miles/time, in which case those owners were "enriched" when they didn't deserve it.

Unfortunately the option to Opt Out is past, and to try to sue against the gross inequity of the Class Action system is a truly up hill battle.

The gross inequity of the Class Action system is what the Judge who objected was so irritated about.

But only he and one or two other objectors knew that the only real way to preserve fairness in a Class Action was to Object.

But even he, the lead judge of a Federal district court accomplished little, but his effort was noble.

Now he doesn't even have a LEAF.

The early adopter LEAF purchasers are the ones stuck with the results of their early adopter zeal.

But a few maybe 10% to 15% are getting compensation.
More compensation than a fair pro-rated compensation.

That's how equity in life goes sometimes.