Amended Settlement in Klee v. Nissan

[mwalsh]

So it's kinda better just to buy an entirely new pack (especially if you need the range), than work it under warranty, which may well just be getting a few modules replaced that barely pulls the pack up a few gids.
.

I don't think so, not for now at least. We haven't seen anyone needing warranty releif (except those unjustly blacklisted) get anything less than a new battery pack, and none of those have been less than a new lizard pack since they became available.

 

[TimLee]

So it's kinda better just to buy an entirely new pack (especially if you need the range), than work it under warranty, which may well just be getting a few modules replaced that barely pulls the pack up a few gids.
.

I don't think so, not for now at least. We haven't seen anyone needing warranty relief (except those unjustly blacklisted) get anything less than a new battery pack, and none of those have been less than a new lizard pack since they became available.

I think that is correct for capacity warranty relief.

There have been some people that had a cell go bad and Nissan replaced a cell or two under the standard warranty.

 

[Valdemar]

Any updates on this? Did anyone receive a new opt-out notice?

 

[kolmstead]

There was one person in the B0133 thread who reported seeing an official memo. However, nobody else has said a word, so I don't think the new letter has been sent out to class members yet.

-Karl

 

[Nubo]

The wheels of justice grind slowly. Bloody hell!

 

[mwalsh]

Yeah, I think we'd have heard from more than one person if something had happened.

 

[JupiterLEAF]

It's been very interesting to read most of the prior entries on this thread this evening, since I just had a new main battery installed this week. I did not know Nissan was in the process of essentially capitulating to the demands by owners that all warranty claims be fulfilled only by totally new batteries that would restore capacity to 12 bars, rather than attempting repairs to the original batteries or replacing them with "remanufactured" ones that restored capacity to only 9 or 10 bars.

From other threads I've been reading since I made my warranty claim a month ago when my Leaf's battery capacity dropped to 8 bars (at approx 31,000 miles), I assumed a new 2015 battery would be installed since that was what other claimants had been receiving. However, my dealer's service manager was unable to get any confirmation from Nissan corporate about what version would be sent. When the battery arrived, we examined it and agreed that it LOOKED brand new, but couldn't find any label or markings that would confirm it actually was a new 2015 battery. After installation, I do have 12 bars of capacity again and the GOM mileage estimates are similar to what they were when the car was brand new.

By the way, I had no trouble getting the warranty replacement accomplished, even though my lease was going to expire on March 8th. In fact, the no-cost installation of the new main battery together with Nissan's offer of a $6,000 reduction in the end-of-lease-buyout amount led me to purchase the car instead of returning it (which I was absolutely dead set on doing just 2 months ago).

What I still don't understand is how many of you have driven over 40,000 or 50,000 miles, in geography far more challenging than flat south Florida, and still have 9 bars (or more) of capacity left. From my experience with capacity loss for 3+ years, if I had tried to drive my Leaf another 10-20,000 miles with the original battery, I would have had only 6 or 5 bars left!

 

[TomT]

It's a curse!

IWhat I still don't understand is how many of you have driven over 40,000 or 50,000 miles, in geography far more challenging than flat south Florida, and still have 9 bars (or more) of capacity left. From my experience with capacity loss for 3+ years, if I had tried to drive my Leaf another 10-20,000 miles with the original battery, I would have had only 6 or 5 bars left!

 

[DaveEV]

What I still don't understand is how many of you have driven over 40,000 or 50,000 miles, in geography far more challenging than flat south Florida, and still have 9 bars (or more) of capacity left.

It's not the miles driven (or even how they are driven) that makes the biggest difference, it's the temperature of the battery pack over time that has the biggest effect on rate of capacity loss.

 

[mwalsh]

I assumed a new 2015 battery would be installed since that was what other claimants had been receiving. However, my dealer's service manager was unable to get any confirmation from Nissan corporate about what version would be sent. When the battery arrived, we examined it and agreed that it LOOKED brand new, but couldn't find any label or markings that would confirm it actually was a new 2015 battery.

A 2015 pack would have required a fitting kit for an older LEAF, containing the following part numbers:

740D0-3NF1A
01125-N0111
24220-7S020
297C1-3NF0A
748N2-3NF0A
748N3-3NF0A

That's the easiest way to know which you got.

As further information, the 2015 pack part number is 295B0-3NF9E and the older pack part number is 295B0-3NA7A.

 

[matth]

Yup, something like that. Who knew Nissan based their estimate on 7500 annual miles in the NW region.

I'm considering opting out of the settlement. I lost my first bar in December 2014, and will surely lose bar 2 and possibly bar 3 before 5 years of ownership have passed.

While Nissan's statement in the owner's manual that one should generally expect 80% capacity after 5 years was not a guarantee, it surely must be expected to mean something, perhaps average performance. If any owner should have thought it would apply, I would expect to fall into that category. I live in the cool part of the SF Bay Area, have driven significantly less than 20K miles on my Leaf, and rarely QC. If I will have lost much more than 20% after 5 years, I imagine that nobody will retain 80% after 5 years. It seems to be that the handful of people in my situation might be more successful than the whole class of 2011 owners were. If the Nissan 80% statement means anything, I must prevail.

Thoughts?

 

[Valdemar]

Because you lost the 1st bar after more than 3 years it actually sounds like you'll be close to the 80% mark after 5 years, unless your usage pattern or climate changes.

 

[matth]

Because you lost the 1st bar after more than 3 years it actually sounds like you'll be close to the 80% mark after 5 years, unless your usage pattern or climate changes.

My usage is slightly increasing, I think. I think I will be at more than 80% loss in less than 2 more years.

Your point is well taken. Without 80%+ loss, there will be no case. Nonetheless, the fundamental question I raise is at least worth exploring--for those who are in "ideal" battery life situations, but who lose at least 20%, is there not a stronger case?

 

[Nubo]

Yup, something like that. Who knew Nissan based their estimate on 7500 annual miles in the NW region.

I'm considering opting out of the settlement. I lost my first bar in December 2014, and will surely lose bar 2 and possibly bar 3 before 5 years of ownership have passed.

While Nissan's statement in the owner's manual that one should generally expect 80% capacity after 5 years was not a guarantee, it surely must be expected to mean something, perhaps average performance. If any owner should have thought it would apply, I would expect to fall into that category. I live in the cool part of the SF Bay Area, have driven significantly less than 20K miles on my Leaf, and rarely QC. If I will have lost much more than 20% after 5 years, I imagine that nobody will retain 80% after 5 years. It seems to be that the handful of people in my situation might be more successful than the whole class of 2011 owners were. If the Nissan 80% statement means anything, I must prevail.

Thoughts?

My thoughts are that it's taken forever for the class action to come to conclusion. What's the opt-out plan? Personally file a separate suit? Not sure how it could possibly be worth the time and hassle. But I have a very low tolerance of bureaucracy and legal wrangling.

 

[91040]

Unless the amended settlement allows claimants to opt out, you are too late. That had to be done prior to the original court date.

As one who opted out, there are options available to me that members of the class lost.

Yup, something like that. Who knew Nissan based their estimate on 7500 annual miles in the NW region.

I'm considering opting out of the settlement. I lost my first bar in December 2014, and will surely lose bar 2 and possibly bar 3 before 5 years of ownership have passed.

While Nissan's statement in the owner's manual that one should generally expect 80% capacity after 5 years was not a guarantee, it surely must be expected to mean something, perhaps average performance. If any owner should have thought it would apply, I would expect to fall into that category. I live in the cool part of the SF Bay Area, have driven significantly less than 20K miles on my Leaf, and rarely QC. If I will have lost much more than 20% after 5 years, I imagine that nobody will retain 80% after 5 years. It seems to be that the handful of people in my situation might be more successful than the whole class of 2011 owners were. If the Nissan 80% statement means anything, I must prevail.

Thoughts?

My thoughts are that it's taken forever for the class action to come to conclusion. What's the opt-out plan? Personally file a separate suit? Not sure how it could possibly be worth the time and hassle. But I have a very low tolerance of bureaucracy and legal wrangling.

 

[JupiterLEAF]

I assumed a new 2015 battery would be installed since that was what other claimants had been receiving. However, my dealer's service manager was unable to get any confirmation from Nissan corporate about what version would be sent. When the battery arrived, we examined it and agreed that it LOOKED brand new, but couldn't find any label or markings that would confirm it actually was a new 2015 battery.

A 2015 pack would have required a fitting kit for an older LEAF, containing the following part numbers:

740D0-3NF1A
01125-N0111
24220-7S020
297C1-3NF0A
748N2-3NF0A
748N3-3NF0A

That's the easiest way to know which you got.

As further information, the 2015 pack part number is 295B0-3NF9E and the older pack part number is 295B0-3NA7A.

Thank you! All of the bracket kit part numbers match what's listed on my service order. The main battery assembly, however, is listed as part number 295B0-3NF9D and not -3NF9E. Nevertheless, I'm now fully convinced it is a 2015 main battery that was installed.

 

[Valdemar]

Unless the amended settlement allows claimants to opt out, you are too late. That had to be done prior to the original court date.

Some here thought there will be a new opt-out opportunity. I hope they were right...

 

[91040]

Seemed to me that only those who had opted out would be given the "opportunity" to opt in. Would be great if you are correct.

Unless the amended settlement allows claimants to opt out, you are too late. That had to be done prior to the original court date.

Some here thought there will be a new opt-out opportunity. I hope they were right...

 

[mwalsh]

The main battery assembly, however, is listed as part number 295B0-3NF9D and not -3NF9E. Nevertheless, I'm now fully convinced it is a 2015 main battery that was installed.

It is apparently available in both D and E flavors, but I have no idea what difference there is (if any). At first blush I think it would be easy to say revision numbers, but it could just as easily be for a Nissan internal process (like accounting).

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

It's been very interesting to read most of the prior entries on this thread this evening, since I just had a new main battery installed this week. I did not know Nissan was in the process of essentially capitulating to the demands by owners that all warranty claims be fulfilled only by totally new batteries that would restore capacity to 12 bars, rather than attempting repairs to the original batteries or replacing them with "remanufactured" ones that restored capacity to only 9 or 10 bars.

From other threads I've been reading since I made my warranty claim a month ago when my Leaf's battery capacity dropped to 8 bars (at approx 31,000 miles), I assumed a new 2015 battery would be installed since that was what other claimants had been receiving. However, my dealer's service manager was unable to get any confirmation from Nissan corporate about what version would be sent. When the battery arrived, we examined it and agreed that it LOOKED brand new, but couldn't find any label or markings that would confirm it actually was a new 2015 battery. After installation, I do have 12 bars of capacity again and the GOM mileage estimates are similar to what they were when the car was brand new.

By the way, I had no trouble getting the warranty replacement accomplished, even though my lease was going to expire on March 8th. In fact, the no-cost installation of the new main battery together with Nissan's offer of a $6,000 reduction in the end-of-lease-buyout amount led me to purchase the car instead of returning it (which I was absolutely dead set on doing just 2 months ago).

What I still don't understand is how many of you have driven over 40,000 or 50,000 miles, in geography far more challenging than flat south Florida, and still have 9 bars (or more) of capacity left. From my experience with capacity loss for 3+ years, if I had tried to drive my Leaf another 10-20,000 miles with the original battery, I would have had only 6 or 5 bars left!

how much wear and tear happens when preheating or cooling? after all, betting car is not always plugged in or what about sitting in a traffic jam on a 95º day? not many miles accrued then right? ya, miles mean next to nothing when evaluating degradation. That should be obvious considering my LEAF would have likely gone about 56-60,000 miles before losing its FIRST CP...