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.
UPDATE:
- This case was dismissed April 15, 2021.
A Colorado federal judge ruled that plaintiffs can proceed with a class action lawsuit over an alleged BMW engine defect which causes low oil levels.
Lead plaintiffs say that a defect in the twin turbocharged N63 engine causes them to use an excessive amount of oil in a class action lawsuit filed against the car maker.
The allegedly defective engines were installed in certain 2013 through 2015 model year BMW vehicles. According to the original complaint, BMW knew of the defect but failed to do anything about it or even warn consumers.
The BMW engine defect class action lawsuit contended with headwinds shortly after it was filed in March 2019, when the car maker asked for the complaint to be dismissed.
In January, U.S. Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak sided with plaintiffs in a finding which recommended that the class action continue.
Judge Varholak issued a report and statement indicating that the BMW engine defect is a potential danger because the excessive oil consumption can cause unexpected engine failure, putting vehicle occupants at risk.
In another recent ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Christine M. Arguello agreed with the magistrate judge’s findings, preserving BMW engine defect class action lawsuit claims that the car maker violated Colorado consumer protection laws and is in breach of warranty.
Each of the three plaintiffs, Matthew Ingram, Rachel O’Connor, and David Cruz, claim that they purchased BMWs with the twin turbo charged N63 engines with the alleged defect between 2013 and 2015. They say that they relied on the warranties provided by BMW when deciding to purchase their vehicles.
Specifically, the lead plaintiffs contend that they relied on BMW’s promise to repair or replace defective components in the vehicles during the first four years or 50,000 miles of their ownership. However, after their purchase, they claim that their vehicles exhibited the BMW engine defect – namely excessive consumption of oil.
Further, despite reporting the problem to BMW authorized dealerships, the plaintiffs say they were only told that excessive oil consumption was normal in the vehicles. They claim they were not offered the option for repair or replacement of the defective BMW engine.
The magistrate judge’s report pointed out that BMW issued several technical service bulletins over consumer complaints about excessive oil consumption by the N63 engine.
Further, the judge referenced a 2015 study on excessive oil consumption conducted by Consumer Reports included vehicles affected by the alleged BMW engine defect.
Judge Arguello agreed with the magistrate judge’s recommendation regarding the plaintiffs’ claims for breach of warranty and violation of Colorado consumer protection laws.
Additionally, the judge agreed with the finding that it was too early to determine whether a three-year statute of limitation, or deadline, applied to the class action lawsuit claims.
“Although factual development through discovery may show that plaintiffs should have known about the alleged defect when they purchased their vehicles based on, e.g. information that was publicly available at the time, that is not conclusively established by the allegations in the operative complaint,” wrote Judge Arguello in her order.
“Rather, viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, their allegations plausibly suggest that plaintiffs were unaware of the defect and defendant concealed the fact that the engines may have been defective.”
For its part, the car maker has objected to the conclusion that the BMW engine defect class action lawsuit is not barred by the statute of limitations.
BMW contends that the plaintiffs knew or should have known of the defect at the time they purchased their vehicles because of publicly available information about excessive consumption of oil claims. BMW also asserts that the plaintiffs have not sufficiently established that the company concealed the defect from them and other consumers.
Regarding the warranty claims, Judge Arguello likewise agreed with the magistrate judge’s finding to uphold the class action lawsuit at this point in the proceedings. BMW argued that the warranty does not cover the alleged engine defect, because it is a design, rather than manufacturing defect.
“At this point in the instant case, it is unclear what type of defect, if any, resulted in the excessive oil consumption of the N63 engine,” points out Judge Arguello in her order. Later, the order concludes, “Plaintiffs, in the First Amended Complaint, plead sufficient facts to support the claim that the defect was a manufacturing defect covered by the Warranty.”
Similarly, Judge Arguello upheld the magistrate judge’s recommendation regarding the BMW engine defect class action allegations, as well as rejecting the car maker’s argument that the plaintiffs had incorrectly asserted claims on behalf of the proposed Class, otherwise known as misjoinder.
Was your vehicle affected by the alleged BMW engine defect? Tell us what happened in the comment section below!
The plaintiffs are represented by Sergei Lemberg and Vlad Hirnyk of Lemberg Law LLC.
The BMW Engine Defect Class Action Lawsuit is O’Connor, et al. v. BMW of North America, et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-03190, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
81 thoughts onBMW Engine Defect Class Action Preserved in Colo.
We bought a BMW M6 and only have 62,000 miles never raced the car it was totally babied and the engine seized O was told it needs a new engine. How can this be possible, all maintenance was kept up and only 62,000 miles this car was $130,000 car and this is the ultimate driving machine. BMW is terrible they do not stand by their product or their customers- Absolutely the WORST company ever!
I have a 2012 BMW 750 LI with 90,000 mIles that has a seized engine. Both the extended warranty company and BMW have refused to cover the costs of repair. The warranty company (Gold Standard) asked for oil change records. I provided oil receipts, dates and miles of oil changes and they still denied the claim and gave no reason. 1st claim was Nov 2021. At that time the motor was not seized but failed the oil consumption test. At Nielo BMW Roseville Ca. That is a known issue for this engine. There was a class action law suit for that issue. 2nd claim was denied in April 2022. At Roseville BMW.
2013 X5 in excellent condition. Took to dealership while still under warranty for burning oil. I was told it was within normal specifications. We’ve owned two other BMW’s with no oil usage at all. Engine malfunction light came on at 80,000 miles at dealership is telling me I need a new engine. They’ll pay a percentage of the new engine only if we agree to repair now. Won’t be available if we decline at this time. What a sham!
I have 2013 bmw f30 with the same problem the car will not start I was told I need a new engine.. all these snakes in suit out here .. can someone just fix my car for me please
I have a 2013 BMW X3 and in 11/2018 with 59,000 miles needed the engine replaced. BMW was thoughtful enough and gave us a BMW credit of half off only owing $7,300.00.
Should note – regular oil changes by BMW dealer and no warning up until driving and car completely shut off.
I have a 2013 BMW X5 that continuously runs low on oil. I had brought to the dealership several times within the 1st 3 years stating that my oil light keeps coming on too often, something must be wrong. They looked at it every time and stated that they could not find nothing wrong and that the oil just needed to be topped off. This happens with these type of cars, but i had a 2001 325xi that never had this issue. Since this continued to be a reoccurring theme almost every month, I began and still buy a place the oil in my self instead of wasting time at the dealership.
What is the next process to get this resolved?
We have a 2013 550 eye with a in 63 motor there was burning oil. BMW made a repair in October 2019 and we recently noticed that the vehicle was burning oil again. The car still runs and they have stated that the motor needs to be replaced at our expense
I have a 2013 BMW X5 550i. I was trying to contact BMW due to the excessive oil burn and see if there was something that could be done knowing that there was a class action lawsuit but not understanding what all was involved. All of a sudden today the vehicle needed oil as usual one quart low every three or four hundred miles except this time there was frothy foam in the oil indicating that there must be a leak and a head gasket or something. At this time I am at a loss I have barely accumulated 70,000 miles on this vehicle. It has been well taken care of and is one of four vehicles I own so it isn’t driven all the time. I absolutely love this vehicle except for the problems that I have. If there is anything that could be done please feel free to contact me at 812-890-7260 and I will gladly participate in any proceedings needed. I am wanting this motor to be replaced. Without having to pay the full amount of $12,000. I think it is absurd for any vehicle produced to not last 100,000 miles. Especially at $80,000 vehicle
Anthony I have the exact same problem except its 25,000 and the vehicle is only worth $9000.
Engine on my BMW x3 died in June. Had less than 75,000 miles. The car has been sitting in the Idaho Falls dealership still unfixed. After going back and forth, service at the dealership finally conceded that the car would be covered by this lawsuit since it was due to the timing chain breaking. Before proceeding they needed to clear it with BMW and have them do another inspection. BMW then changed their mind and said this was NOT due to timing chain but rather driver error! Lawsuit? Covering default engine? Apparently, BMW has complete control over this lawsuit and repairs since they can make the decision of what caused the problem. This is disgusting- lawyers got their money but my car is still not fixed and I am told “Oh well, there is nothing you can do.” What was the point of the class-action lawsuit? Was it to help the lawyers get money or protect the consumer? Any ideas how I can still fight this??