Nissan Reaches Settlement in Defective LEAF Battery Class Ac

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

atlleaf

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
55
Location
Atlanta, GA
Nissan Reaches Settlement in Defective LEAF Battery Class Action

Nissan North America Inc. reached a class action settlement Monday over allegations that its electric-powered Nissan LEAF cars contain defective batteries that cause them to prematurely lose battery life and driving range. Under the deal, Nissan will expand its warranty for its 2011-2012 model year LEAF cars to cover battery capacity loss and repairs.

Nissan LEAF owners sued the automaker in September 2012, alleging that Nissan failed to disclose in its advertising that owners should avoid charging the battery beyond 80 percent in order to mitigate battery damage. Nissan also failed to disclose that the LEAF’s estimated 100-mile driving range was based on a fully charged battery – which directly contradicts Nissan’s own recommendation for an 80-percent max battery charge.


The class action lawsuit further accused Nissan of hiding a design defect in the LEAF’s battery system that causes the electric car to suffer “widespread, severe and premature loss of driving range, battery capacity and battery life.”

Nissan maintains that the class action lawsuit is without merit, but has agreed to expand the warranty coverage for 2011-2012 model year LEAF cars to add battery capacity loss to its existing limited warranty for up to 60 months or 60,000 miles. The new warranty will also require Nissan to repair the battery to at least 70 percent of its full capacity. If repair is not possible, Nissan agreed to replace the defective LEAF battery with a new or remanufactured one.

Class Members will be automatically included in the Nissan LEAF battery settlement unless they choose to opt out. About 18,588 people will be covered by the class action settlement, according to a motion filed July 3.

A preliminary approval hearing will be held August 12, 2013. Notice of the Nissan LEAF class action settlement will be mailed once the agreement is finalized.

The Plaintiffs are represented by Jordan L. Lurie, Andrew Sokolowski and Tarek Zohdy of the Initiative Legal Group, APC.

The Nissan LEAF Battery Defect Class Action Lawsuit Settlement is Humberto Daniel Klee, et al. v. Nissan North America, Inc., et al., Case No. 12-cv-08238, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Western Division.

-------- 2nd story ---

http://www.law360.com/articles/455764/nissan-expands-leaf-warranty-in-10m-battery-defect-deal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Law360, New York (July 09, 2013, 1:54 PM ET) -- In a proposed settlement valued at more than $10 million, Nissan North America Inc. on Monday agreed to expand the warranty for its 2011-2012 LEAF cars to settle a putative class action alleging that the vehicle's electric-powered battery lost capacity over time at an unreasonable rate.

Under the deal, which still needs approval from the California federal court, Nissan will add battery capacity loss to its existing limited warranty for up to 60 months or 60,000 miles. The new warranty will require repairs to restore the battery to at least 70 percent of its full capacity. If repair is not possible, Nissan agreed to replace the malfunctioning battery with a new or remanufactured one.

“While it is not uncommon in automotive defect class actions … to drag on beyond the time that class members actually still own their cars, here the settlement negotiations yielded a solution that benefits 2011-12 model year LEAF drivers while they still own and operate their cars,” the plaintiffs said in their motion for preliminary settlement approval.

The motion also called for the conditional certification of the class as all current and former owners of the 2011-2012 Nissan LEAF throughout the U.S., which Nissan estimates to be about 18,588 people.

While Nissan maintained its belief that the initial suit is without merit, it said it had conducted sufficient outreach with the plaintiffs and that both parties deemed the settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate.

The parties reached agreement on the outlines of a settlement as early as December, after which the plaintiffs carried on with over five months of discovery to confirm with the putative class members that the settlement terms were agreeable.

All class members will be automatically included in the settlement unless they choose to opt out and Nissan will mail notice of the new warranty once the agreement is finalized.

Named plaintiffs Humberto Daniel Klee and David Wallak filed their first complaint in September, followed by an amended complaint in December. The complaint alleged that the LEAF suffered from a thermal management defect, that its lithium-ion battery loses capacity over time at an excessive rate when operated in a high temperature environment and that the vehicle does not have the driving range represented by Nissan.

The complaint sought injunctive relief in the form of a new or extended warranty to cover the lithium-ion battery's shortcomings.

The schedule for final approval of the settlement in Monday's motion provides that the agreement could be approved by the court before the end of the year.

Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday.

The plaintiffs are represented by Jordan L. Lurie and Tarek H. Zohdy of Capstone Law APC.

Nissan is represented by Paul J. Riehle of Sedgwick LLP.

The case is Klee at al. v. Nissan North America Inc. et al., case number 2:12-cv-08238, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.



--------

Looks like the only reason we got a 2011/12 extended battery capacity warranty, is because of this suit.

not because nissan was nice to its owners.

How do we opt out?
 
atlleaf said:
Nissan Reaches Settlement in Defective LEAF Battery Class Action

Nissan North America Inc. reached a class action settlement Monday over allegations that its electric-powered Nissan LEAF cars contain defective batteries that cause them to prematurely lose battery life and driving range. Under the deal, Nissan will expand its warranty for its 2011-2012 model year LEAF cars to cover battery capacity loss and repairs.

Nissan LEAF owners sued the automaker in September 2012, alleging that Nissan failed to disclose in its advertising that owners should avoid charging the battery beyond 80 percent in order to mitigate battery damage. Nissan also failed to disclose that the LEAF’s estimated 100-mile driving range was based on a fully charged battery – which directly contradicts Nissan’s own recommendation for an 80-percent max battery charge.


The class action lawsuit further accused Nissan of hiding a design defect in the LEAF’s battery system that causes the electric car to suffer “widespread, severe and premature loss of driving range, battery capacity and battery life.”

Nissan maintains that the class action lawsuit is without merit, but has agreed to expand the warranty coverage for 2011-2012 model year LEAF cars to add battery capacity loss to its existing limited warranty for up to 60 months or 60,000 miles. The new warranty will also require Nissan to repair the battery to at least 70 percent of its full capacity. If repair is not possible, Nissan agreed to replace the defective LEAF battery with a new or remanufactured one.

Class Members will be automatically included in the Nissan LEAF battery settlement unless they choose to opt out. About 18,588 people will be covered by the class action settlement, according to a motion filed July 3.

A preliminary approval hearing will be held August 12, 2013. Notice of the Nissan LEAF class action settlement will be mailed once the agreement is finalized.

The Plaintiffs are represented by Jordan L. Lurie, Andrew Sokolowski and Tarek Zohdy of the Initiative Legal Group, APC.

The Nissan LEAF Battery Defect Class Action Lawsuit Settlement is Humberto Daniel Klee, et al. v. Nissan North America, Inc., et al., Case No. 12-cv-08238, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Western Division.




--------

Looks like the only reason we got a 2011/12 extended battery capacity warranty, is because of this suit.

not because nissan was nice to its owners.

How do we opt out?


And I thought auto makers were good people. :lol: :lol:
 
GeekEV said:
Either way, I see it as a fair result...
How is a mere 70% a fair result? Plenty of people have dropped to that in the first 2 years of ownership. 70% of 73 miles is a measly ~ 49miles range from a FULL charge on a car that retailed in the $30K range.
 
This settlement is FANTASTIC news for Nissan. Any future challenge is stopped in its tracks!!!!

Bravo again, Nissan. Nothing actually fixed, no real money spent, no admitted culpability, everything under the carpet with NDA's.

Bravo!!!
 
TonyWilliams said:
This settlement is FANTASTIC news for Nissan. Any future challenge is stopped in its tracks!!!!

Bravo again, Nissan. Nothing actually fixed, no real money spent, no admitted culpability, everything under the carpet with NDA's.

Bravo!!!

we can still exempt ourselves.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/09/25/nissan.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
atlleaf said:
TonyWilliams said:
This settlement is FANTASTIC news for Nissan. Any future challenge is stopped in its tracks!!!!
Bravo again, Nissan. Nothing actually fixed, no real money spent, no admitted culpability, everything under the carpet with NDA's.
Bravo!!!
we can still exempt ourselves.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/09/25/nissan.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I couldn't open it with Firefox but it worked fine with Chrome.
 
Wow. Just when I thought Nissan couldn't sink any lower... The whole "we'll extend the battery warranty out of the goodness of our heart", a complete and utter sham.

My lease terminates next April. I'll be saving a few extra duckets to get the RAV4 EV. Similar companies like Toyota and Honda know how to foster good relationships with their customers - hence their success. May Nissan choke on my 2/3rd's capacity paperweight.
 
And I thought auto makers were good people. :lol: :lol:
My lease terminates next April. I'll be saving a few extra duckets to get the RAV4 EV. Similar companies like Toyota and Honda know how to foster good relationships with their customers - hence their success. May Nissan choke on my 2/3rd's capacity paperweight.

It's amazing how naive people can be.
 
FWIW, Nissan has sometimes responded to common problems and complaints in a positive manner. The 03 and 04 350Z were known for their infamous front tire feathering issue. They ended up putting out a TSB, extended the warranty 2x on this issue which entitled many folks, including me to get their front tires replaced for free along w/a free alignment.

They've also added extended warranties for a # of issues like those listed at http://www.nissanassist.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. You can use http://web.archive.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; to go back in time as I believe some items were removed, once their warranty extensions expired.
 
AP1 said:
It's amazing how naive people can be.

It's equally amazing how brave people get behind a keyboard.

Instead of vomiting up insults, how about you try (if possible) to intellectualize your thoughts?
 
cwerdna said:
FWIW, Nissan has sometimes responded to common problems and complaints in a positive manner. The 03 and 04 350Z were known for their infamous front tire feathering issue. They ended up putting out a TSB, extended the warranty 2x on this issue which entitled many folks, including me to get their front tires replaced for free along w/a free alignment...

It's funny you mention that. I too, had that issue with my 04 350Z Roadster, and like you, knew about the TSB. However, after calling it into NNA I spent a Saturday going to three different dealers before I could get one to agree to replace a single tire. I also had to get the soft top replaced twice, the leather steering wheel replaced, and the driver side window motor replaced -all within three years on their supposed FLAGSHIP product made in Japan.
 
^^^
IIRC, I'd gone to Falore Nissan (before it became Sunnyvale) and they looked the tires (I believe per the criteria in the TSB) and got the tires replaced. I didn't have the Roadster, so no soft top. Both my power windows failed at almost the same time. Those were replaced under warranty.

FWIW, most things that went wrong on my Z were all under warranty, fortunately. But yeah, my mom's 96 Toyota Camry V6 which she had from 96 until early 08 (when it was totaled) was a lot more reliable than my 04 350Z that I had from late 03 to mid-2011.

My experiences w/the Z, my former Maxima along w/my parents' experience w/their 07 Altima Hybrid are overall decent enough that leasing a Leaf is still high up on my list. Hope to have in a few weeks, assuming I can get a good/decent 2 year lease deal. Looking forward to free juice at work. :D Won't need to charge much at all at home, probably almost never on weekdays due to my short commute (~12 miles, one way, w/not much highway).
 
In case the gist of Tony's comment was missed, he was being sarcastic... :roll:

TonyWilliams said:
This settlement is FANTASTIC news for Nissan. Any future challenge is stopped in its tracks!!!!
Bravo again, Nissan. Nothing actually fixed, no real money spent, no admitted culpability, everything under the carpet with NDA's.
Bravo!!!
 
z0ner said:
Wow. Just when I thought Nissan couldn't sink any lower... The whole "we'll extend the battery warranty out of the goodness of our heart", a complete and utter sham.

My lease terminates next April. I'll be saving a few extra duckets to get the RAV4 EV. Similar companies like Toyota and Honda know how to foster good relationships with their customers - hence their success. May Nissan choke on my 2/3rd's capacity paperweight.

Honda isn't really any better, at least if you're the owner of a 2006-2008 Honda Civic Hybrid. The class action suit due to a software update causing reduced battery range (and this increasing fuel consumption) resulted in these owners getting:

1. $100 cash
2. $1000 off towards the purchase or lease of another new Honda product within 12 months of issuance IF you get rid of the car, or $500 if you don't
3. An additional 12 month/12k extension of the original battery warranty

https://hchsettlement.com/Home.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Although Toyota is paying something like $1.5B as part of its settlement of the unintended acceleration claims, for the longest time it denied there was a problem with its cars.
 
As a former Honda Civic Hybrid owner, please never claim Honda is good to owners with battery issues. I had to complain to the BBB and file a complaint with the Attorney General to get a new battery at 60k. The software update reduced me at least 5% and I sold the car for less than a non hybrid would sell for.

All deals involve negotiations with all parties. Nissan could have been thinking that a capacity warranty was a good idea anyway and worked it into the settlement. It isn't like the judge made up the warranty - Nissan made it up and offered it as part of a settlement.

BTW - I never got $100 cash for my troubles on the battery issue....
 
Back
Top