B0133 NO BATT CAPACITY WARRANTY

[braineo]

Checked Bloomberg and it seems Nissan made an offer that is being reviewed. Offer was not disclosed.

 

[oakwcj]

Checked Bloomberg and it seems Nissan made an offer that is being reviewed. Offer was not disclosed.

Mediation is a completely voluntary and strictly confidential process. Even the judge doesn't know the content of the communications, offers, and responses of the parties. If there is no agreement on a revised settlement between the parties, the case will return to the judge for a decision on whether to approve the existing settlement. Because the previous hearing was held before a different judge, the current judge can simply issue a ruling or decide to order another hearing. Just because the mediator is no longer involved doesn't mean that there won't be a revised settlement.

 

[mwalsh]

Judge Kozinski talking some about the Klee lawsuit during the NYU Law's recent Center on Civil Justice conference, 'The Future of Class Action Litigation':

http://www.law.nyu.edu/news/class-action-lawsuits-chief-judge-alex-kozinski" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jump to 10 minutes in on the video for the good stuff.


There is also a law360.com article that's a good read. Unfortunately I can't provide a link that will work without you having an account there, but you can see the whole thing by finding the article through Google. Google "Kozinski" and "Nissan" and the article should be like the fifth link down. It's entitled "Attys Tend To 'Buy Themselves Off' In Class Deals, Judge Says".

Edit: Oops...use "search tools" to limit searches to the past month.

 

[DaveEV]

Edit: Oops...use "search tools" to limit searches to the past month.

This search helps: https://www.google.com/webhp?q=site:law360.com+nissan+kozinski

The video from your first link is quite interesting - thanks!

 

[palmermd]

Interesting to hear the number of folks with the B0133. Apparently its about 110 per the video at around 14 minutes.

 

[mwalsh]

So since we counted only 60-some positive respondents in the thread we had going about opting-out, it would seem that even folks outside of MNL were confused/misled by getting the warranty notice 3 months ahead of finding out there was a class action (I recollect it being around 2 months, but will go with Judge Kozinski's number).

Unless, of course, not everyone who opted out from MNL felt comfortable about admitting it.

 

[vrwl]

It's been over a month since the last post, any updates to report? I'm one of the opt-outers, but I have not found out if I have the B0133 applied to my car or not.

 

[mwalsh]

Nothing new to report that I've heard.

 

[jeffreykb]

I am new here... and I have read some of this thread on the Nissan Leaf battery warranty, and I would like to thank the "pioneers" of mass produced EV ownership (and lease agreements).

It can be tough to own a vehicle that has an essential "expensive" part (large percentage of the MSRP) that could be considered a "wear" part (short life compared to the rest of the vehicle). I'm not sure if the comparison has been made here, but airplane/helicopter ownership is somewhat similar with the TBO (Time Between Overhaul) for the ICE engine. If you check the classified ads for a used airplane, the ad should have the number of hours of an ICE engine runtime left before an overhaul of the ICE engine is needed which dramatically impacts the asking price.

Based on the posts in this thread, Nissan seemed to overstate to the "pioneers" on the expected battery performance over the battery life. Hopefully the massed EV market will mature; and third party battery service centers and suppliers can support older EVs. In other words, I hope that a healthy aftermarket develops for EV owners as to an alternative to returning to new vehicle manufacturers for service.

I have not owned a new passenger vehicle in ~20 years. How you may ask (you should already know)? A substantial aftermarket industry exists for the conventional ICE passenger vehicle and overall ICE vehicle quality (knock on wood for my personal vehicles) has improved dramatically over the last 100 years. Even in the last 40 years, the "wear" parts (tires, lead acid battery accessory battery, brakes, etc.) have an improved life. It should noted that a significant portion of the automotive fleet in service is not serviced (or parts) by the original manufacturer. The point that I am attempting to make here...the "pioneers" should start encouraging Nissan to actively help develop the aftermarket industry for their mass produced EV. Until an aftermarket parts/service industry exists for massed produced EVs, owners will ONLY have the option to look to the original manufacturer for support of their aging vehicle, but maybe it is their goal to keep everything to themselves. Other industries seem to thrive by selling a product (the iPhone hardware comes to mind) that can not be serviced or difficult to service, but the cell phone and automotive industries are not the same.

In the meantime, hopefully Nissan will realize that they need to FULLY support the "pioneer" owners, and standby their statements on expected battery life AND performance with their checkbook. If Nissan decides to continue to do the minimal required by a court/legal decision(s), the Leaf will have a tough road ahead to get vehicle owners like myself to purchase their product. It should payoff for Nissan in the long run to go above and beyond for the "pioneers". While a Chevy Volt is a different product, GM seems to be winning on going above and beyond for their "pioneers" based on my readings of a Chevy Volt forum. However as you know, no aftermarket of parts/service exists for the Volt yet either. It would seem to me that GM believes to a greater extent that legal paths to support the Volt pioneers is a "dead end road" (pun intended). The current Leaf owners seem to go out their way to be a great owner of Nissan's EV product, and promote EV ownership (and lease agreements).

 

[Anonymous]

Just an update - yesterday we got an official paper stating that they are going to now look to close this case after a second mediation that includes a free month of charging in D.C. only locations or a $50 voucher for dissenters and the full warranty that was given in the sticker to them too. At least that is what I could glean from the lawyer speak. Maybe someone with better lawyer talk could explain it better, but I haven't seen anyone post on this for a long time - has this thread moved? Thanks.

 

[mwalsh]

Just an update - yesterday we got an official paper stating that they are going to now look to close this case after a second mediation that includes a free month of charging in D.C. only locations or a $50 voucher for dissenters and the full warranty that was given in the sticker to them too. At least that is what I could glean from the lawyer speak. Maybe someone with better lawyer talk could explain it better, but I haven't seen anyone post on this for a long time - has this thread moved? Thanks.

Yeah, it kinda got going in the "Klee amendment" thread. There's slightly more to the warranty now, at least as I read it - it looks like it may be a brand new battery of the latest applicable technology rather than a used "rebuilt" to 9 bars or better pack.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=18905" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[kolmstead]

It's been a couple of weeks since centralpaleaf posted that he/she had received info on the new battery capacity loss settlement. Haven't seen a word since then... has anyone else received a letter? I'm guessing not, or there would be a lot more discussion. Maybe centralpaleaf got notification in some other manner, such as talking with a dealer.

A service rep confirmed that my dealer failed to perform first annual mandatory battery usage report, even though I took the car in and specifically requested it. So Nissan may have an out on my car's battery warranty, assuming I get the chance to opt back into the settlement. Got 5 stars on second, third and fourth reports.

46.11 Ahr today; 50-55 miles max range. Good thing we're having a warm winter. Didn't use heater at all yesterday, but a stiff headwind sucked the battery down to LBW by the time I got home. 36 miles...

-Karl

 

[mwalsh]

It's been a couple of weeks since centralpaleaf posted that he/she had received info on the new battery capacity loss settlement. Haven't seen a word since then... has anyone else received a letter? I'm guessing not, or there would be a lot more discussion. Maybe centralpaleaf got notification in some other manner, such as talking with a dealer.

A service rep confirmed that my dealer failed to perform first annual mandatory battery usage report, even though I took the car in and specifically requested it. So Nissan may have an out on my car's battery warranty, assuming I get the chance to opt back into the settlement. Got 5 stars on second, third and fourth reports.

Not heard anything else myself.

Do you have any paperwork for that missed battery check at all? I didn't get a 5-star report for the second battery check, but you can be sure I have the work order saying that's what my car was at the dealer for. Any blowback from Nissan on a missed report that would preclude me from getting a warranty replacement and you can be sure that dealership would be in small claims for the entire cost of one.

 

[DaveEV]

The whole requirement for a missed "battery check" is total BS, anyway. It's not like they can prove that the "battery check" actually does anything to keep the battery working "normally"!

 

[TimLee]

The whole requirement for a missed "battery check" is total BS, anyway. It's not like they can prove that the "battery check" actually does anything to keep the battery working "normally"!

A lawsuit based on silly irrelevant non-issues :?:
I cannot even imagine that

 

[keydiver]

A service rep confirmed that my dealer failed to perform first annual mandatory battery usage report, even though I took the car in and specifically requested it.

I take it from that statement that you did have an appointment at the dealer on your one year anniversary, right? I think that is important, if you have paperwork to prove that you took it in to the dealer at the specified intervals, and it is entirely the dealer's fault that the battery test was missed. I don't see where Nissan would have a leg to stand on in court.