LG Class Action Says Refrigerators Fail Within Few Years

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.

A class action lawsuit claims that a defect in LG refrigerators’ compressors causes the appliances not to function.

According to the LG class action lawsuit, this defect causes LG refrigerators to fail within a few years.

Plaintiffs Gary Sosenko, Diane Terry, and Michael Burrage say they purchased refrigerators from LG that are equipped with linear compressors, and paid between $1,400 and $7,000.

Allegedly, the refrigerators possess a defect in their linear compressor, the central component responsible for cooling.

The customers say that the manufacturer actively represented the refrigerators as long-lasting and effective, and did not disclose the defect.

The LG refrigerator class action states that each consumer made the choice to purchase their LG fridge over other models because they reviewed information provided by the company about the product.

The refrigerator owners say they didn’t see any disclosure about the defect, nor were they told that the refrigerators are prone to compressor failure.

According to Sosenko and other the plaintiffs, they spent significant time and money trying to fix their refrigerators, and in some cases, their food spoiled and they went without a working refrigerator while their refrigerator was being fixed.

The consumers claim that they were financially injured by the defect because had they known that the fridges were prone to failure, they would not have purchased them or would not have paid as much for them.

Additionally, the LG refrigerator class action claims that the plaintiffs were injured because they were forced to pay for repairs, had to pay for spoiled food, and went without a refrigerator.

According to Burrage, he contacted a repair person like the other consumers, and was explicitly told that the compressor should not have failed so quickly, and should have lasted at least 10 years before failing, instead of lasting only a few years as it had in his case. 

The LG refrigerator class action lawsuit notes that the National Association of Home Builders established that the average lifespan of a refrigerator is approximately 13 years, and LG reports that their refrigerators have a 20-year life span.

Sosenko, Terry, and Burrage say they specifically chose to purchase an LG refrigerator over other options because they prefer the features and aesthetics of the refrigerator to those of other refrigerators, and because LG advertises their refrigerators’ high quality and functionality.

However, the consumers claim that these representations are false, and if they encounter another LG refrigerator, they will not purchase it unless the company takes sufficient steps to “cure the defect and ensure the accuracy of its representations about its refrigerators.”

According to the LG fridge class action lawsuit, LG uses a different kind of compressor than most refrigerators and advertises the benefit of their compressor.

Allegedly, these compressors possess a more efficient mechanism that is “up to 25 percent quieter” than traditional compressors and possesses other attractive attributes. However, these compressors are reportedly more prone to failure than other compressors.

The LG refrigerator class action states that LG knew or should have known that the compressors fail prematurely but did not take sufficient action to correct the problem.

To support their claim that the company was aware of the defect, the plaintiffs note that many consumers have complained about the defect and that news stations reported on it.

The LG refrigerator owners are represented by Daniel C. Girard, Jordan Elias, Adam E. Polk, and Simon S. Grille of Girard Sharp LLP.

The LG Refrigerator Compressor Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Gary Sosenko, et al. v. LG Electronics USA Inc., Case No. 8:19-cv-00610, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.