– A Jeep corrosion warranty class action lawsuit has been dismissed, but the judge left the door open for the plaintiffs to amend and refile their peeling paint lawsuit.
Additionally, the judge ruled that the plaintiffs could refile previously dismissed claims from the Jeep corrosion warranty case.
According to the class action filed in 2021, 2018-2021 model year Jeep Wrangler vehicles and 2020-2021 Jeep Gladiator vehicles come with paint and corrosion warranties that are useless to customers.
The Jeep’s paint will reportedly bubble, flake, flake, blister, and corrosion and rust will appear. The corrosion warranty lawsuit alleges that Fiat Chrysler began using aluminum in the body panels and chassis to reduce weight.
The Jeep corrosion class action also claims that Chrysler knew about the problems long ago because dealers were issued technical service bulletins. These bulletins informed dealers how to respond to customer complaints and what to do regarding paint and corrosion problems.
According to the lawsuit, Chrysler issued TSB 31-001-18 in March 2018 entitled “Aluminum Body Panel Corrosion Repair” for the 2018 Jeep Wrangler. The bulletin covered “inspecting and, if necessary, removing corrosion and refinishing the suspect aluminum hood, door or tailgate panel.”
“Aluminum corrosion along the leading edge of the hood or other exterior surfaces of the doors or tailgates.” Remove [the] concerned panel” and “[g]Sand the corroded parts of the hood to bare aluminum using . . . a grinding wheel.” — TSB-31-001-18
That bulletin was later revised to include the 2018-2019 Jeep Wrangler’s ‘fenders’, and FCA also diagnosed the problem as ‘[a]aluminum corrosion along the leading edge of the hood or other exterior surfaces of the doors, fenders, or tailgates.”
The TSB was revised again to replace the affected aluminum panel as “severe pitting showed this [could not] be removed with sandpaper” after “removing the initial blistered paint from the panel surface with [the] grinding wheel.”
The Jeep corrosion warranty case further alleges that TSB 31-002-20 was issued and covers the 2020-2021 Jeep Wranglers and the 2020-2021 Jeep Gladiators.
According to the class action, the vehicles came with corrosion warranties to provide coverage for “sheet metal panels” for a period of 36 months with no mileage limit. The Jeep Corrosion Warranty also provided 60 months of extended warranty coverage for corrosion on “an exterior body sheet metal panel,” which FCA defined as “a panel that is finished and that a person can see as he walks around the vehicle.”
But the class action states that it is “common knowledge in the automotive industry that aluminum body panels do not perforate due to corrosion, and thus FCA knew that customers who purchased the Class Vehicles could never benefit from the CW to the extent that panel perforation was a requirement to obtain coverage.”
Jeep corrosion warranty lawsuit dismissed
Judge Matthew F. Leitman previously dismissed all but one wrongful enrichment claim. But FCA told the judge that the unjust enrichment claim should also be dismissed.
FCA argues that the owners who filed suit cannot pursue these claims, “because an express contract – governs the plaintiffs’ vehicle warranties[s] the rights and expectations of the parties regarding the vehicles, corrosion and repairs for corrosion.
According to the judge, the plaintiffs do not dispute the existence of these warranties, and in fact the owners admit that the warranty “explicitly excludes surface-level corrosion and only aesthetic corrosion, the type caused by the corrosion defect.”
“That concession is fatal to plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claims. Under well-settled law, plaintiffs may not recover for the corrosion defect based on an unjust enrichment theory where the parties expressly agreed that FCA did not warrant their vehicles against that defect.” — Judge Leitman
The judge noted that the Jeep warranty also includes a specific warranty regarding corrosion and FCA would “cover.”[] the cost of all parts and labor required to repair or replace sheet metal panels exhibiting holes, rust, or other corrosion.”
But the judge also found that the corrosion warranty also had an important exclusion for “[c]osmetic or surface corrosion.”
This is fatal to the remaining unjust enrichment claim because the plaintiffs admit that the damage is “merely superficial and aesthetic” and “is not covered by the [Warranty] or the corrosion guarantee.”
Although the judge dismissed the entire corrosion case, he says plaintiffs can file a motion to refile the Jeep class action, allowing owners to reinstate their negligence-based and fraud claims that were previously dismissed.
The Jeep corrosion warranty lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan: Orozco, et al., vs. FCA US LLC.
The plaintiffs are represented by Kopelowitz Ostrow Ferguson Weiselberg Gilbert and Gordon & Partners, PA
#Jeep #corrosion #warranty #lawsuit #dismissed