Class Action Over “Smart” Keys Rolls Against Toyota

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Last week, in a class action lawsuit filed against Toyota Motor Corp. in 2010, the plaintiff argued that the motor company’s Smart Key system violates anti-rollaway regulations.

Lead plaintiff Jeffrey Sachs filed the class action lawsuit in 2010 alleging that Toyota sells cars that don’t prevent drivers from exiting the vehicle while it is still running. Over the past five years, an additional Class representative has been added and the plaintiffs are seeking Class certification. The plaintiffs allege that Toyota violated federal safety regulations by selling Toyota and Lexus models with the “Smart Key” system.

Last Tuesday, the plaintiffs and Toyota attended hearings over whether the Smart Key system violated federal anti-rollaway standards that are designed to prevent theft and roll-aways. The class action hearing was held in Los Angeles.

During the hearing, representatives for the plaintiffs argued that the Smart Key system allows drivers to leave while the vehicle while it is still in drive. The plaintiffs’ representatives argued further that this is a clear violation of federal anti-rollaway laws. They also pointed out to Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jane L. Johnson that the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has never signed off on the Smart Key system, and that Toyota has “purposefully avoided” asking the agency for an interpretation letter.

“The NHTSA has not determined that the Toyota Smart Key system complies with FMVSS 114,” said a representative for the plaintiff during the hearing. “The NHTSA does not certify compliance, it’s not part of their job.”

The plaintiffs’ representatives also showed video of automotive engineer Neil Hannemann, the plaintiffs’ expert witness, getting into a 1964 Chevrolet Impala, turning off the engine with the car in drive and then getting out with the keys in his hand. He then watches it roll down an incline. When the experiment was repeated with a Class representative’s 2012 Highlander, the vehicle also rolled down an incline, even though the keys were no longer in the vehicle.

“I call it ‘Back to the Future,’” she said. “We don’t have Marty McFly with us, but we have two cars, one from 1964, one from 2012, that do the same thing.”

Representatives for Toyota argued that if the Smart Key system was found to violate federal rollaway regulations, “enormous implications” including a “massive recall” would follow.

Toyota’s representative contended that Toyota has not been avoiding the NHTSA, but has actually addressed the Smart Key system with the agency and argued that the agency authorized the system because it is safe. The representative also pointed out that the “key” in the Smart Key system is an electronic code that remains with the vehicle even after the key fob is taken by the driver.

“What plaintiffs are trying to do is impose liability on Toyota’s engineers for thinking ahead and implementing a theft prevention immobilizer in this scenario where the key code remains in the engine system,” argued the representative for Toyota during the hearing.

The plaintiffs are represented by Christine Spagnoli of Greene Broillet & Wheeler LLP and Gabriel Barenfeld and Gretchen Nelson of Kreindler & Kreindler LLP.

The Toyota Smart Key Class Action Lawsuit is Jeffrey Sachs, et al. v. Toyota Motor Corp., et al., Case No. BC443701, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.