oakwcj
Well-known member
I'm going on memory here, but one of Alex Kozinski's arguments at the settlement approval hearing last year was that the proposed settlement was a sham precisely because the battery capacity warranty announcement preceded the settlement agreement. Nissan's lawyers responded that the warranty would not include those who opted out. Kozinski then filed a supplemental brief urging the judge not to allow Nissan to take this route in a belated attempt to make the settlement appear to have some meaningful provisions. The last I heard the parties had agreed to mediation over the settlement. I would guess that if the settlement is changed and approved, one of the provisions would be that the capacity warranty would be extended to those who opted out. But that's just a guess. Only a small number of owners opted out. Of those, an even smaller number would ever be eligible for the capacity warranty. It's hard for me to believe that Nissan would really want to argue that they weren't eligible because they opted out of a lawsuit months after receiving the warranty notification letter which, as others have pointed out, is unconditional, and couldn't possibly have referred to a settlement agreement that didn't even exist at the time. Of course, the logical conclusion of Nissan's little stunt is that, if the settlement isn't approved, it would take away the capacity warranty from everyone. They're obviously not about to do that. There is no final settlement yet. It's completely unlawful for Nissan to take away an unconditional warranty from people who have opted out of an unapproved settlement.