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.
Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Subaru vehicle data collection class action lawsuit investigation
May 17, 2024 | Legal News
81 thoughts onBMW Engine Defect Class Action Preserved in Colo.
We own a 2013 X3 BMW. I don’t believe we are qualified now for this lawsuit (due to mileage), however, if we are, please add us. We continually had a “Drive Train Malfunction” alert display. Took it in multiple times and service writer continually indicated they could not determine cause as the drive train malfunction is a “generic” message that could be triggered fifty (50) different things in the car. Last week our vehicle died and after getting it towed to dealer they are stating that the timing chain mechanism failed and has metal shavings are now in the engine oil system which in turn has scored the entire engine. They offered to sell us a new and/or used motor for basically the same price. If we are eligible to participate in this lawsuit, please add us! We do not believe with mileage at 124K we are!
How do I join the lawsuit??
I purchased a 2013 BMW X5 50 I the day I purchase it I took it to BMW dealer to have it checked out and asked if there was any issues that I should know about the vehicle or his engine the dealership service told me that the vehicle was fine and there was not anything to worry about this was on or about December 2019 through January 6- 2020 . At the time my vehicle had hit 100,000 miles between that time and 132,000 milesI have been taking the car for repairs to Inskip BMW of Rhode Island. At 112,000 miles I ask my advisor at the BMW dealership about oil consumption because my car was consuming quite a bit of oil up till up to 6 quarts give or take in between oil changes I was told that it was perfectly normal for the engine to do so. I was not offered any oil consumption test or advise of anything other than it was normal considering I was told that by the BMW dealership I did not pursue the matter I was on 95 south August 2020 when in the left lane my vehicle shut off because my engine seized. I spoke to Bmw and since there was not anything of paperwork to prove that I complained about oil consumption other than the advisor telling me that it was normal I had to buy a brand new engine and replace it out of on my expense only.I was told that the problem was corrected in the new engine however the new engine is consuming oil again
Please add me to this lawsuit it was
2012 alpina b7 bmw failed to perform recall resulting in rod bearing failure due to oil starvation. Ccp was not performed or nhsta recall
Bmw dismissed my request for puma case. And failed to provide any recourse beside a 20k repair bill. Racial discrimination at its finest.
I purchased a 2011 BMW 550 I around March 2018 unaware of the internal engine leak when I purchased the car I took my car to BMW and that’s is when they told me that there was a class action lawsuit and that I would have to pay 25% for them to replace the engine which I did but I was unaware that the first engine that BMW put in my vehicle was a bad engine which caused all these major issues with my vehicle and repairs that I had to pay for due to this bad engine that they put in now not even nine months later my car was still calling for oil it seemed like every 2 to 3 weeks not even a week after I got my vehicle back it still was calling for anything oil contacted BMW and was informed that it was OK. Two weeks ago my car called for oil I put oil in the car and the next morning I woke up to engine oil on the ground and my garage, it was really bad. This year let alone I have came out of pocket close to around $8000 for that vehicle not even having it two years. I only had that car for about three months before I noticing black smoke coming out the tail pipe in the vehicle kept calling for engine oil.
Please add me to this class action lawsuit.
Abysmal customer service from BMW
Please add me to BMW 740li xDrive M Sport. The engine has seized. Don’t know what to do. Found out about the class action lawsuit from my friend brother that lives in Virginia.
I have the same problem with my x3 2014
I Have a 2006 bmw 650i that I bought two years ago that has been burning a quart of oil every 1000 miles. Does my vehicle apply to this
Please add me to BMW 740li xDrive M Sport. The engine has seized. Don’t know what to do. Found out about the class action lawsuit from my friends brother that lives in Virginia.
PLEASE AD ME TO CLASS ACTION
I bought and own my 1st bmw now and its a 2012 bmw 550i xdrive
I dont know anything about these cars and I keep having to add 1 quart of oil quit frequently the dealer said its because they are big turbos its normal. I start researching finally came across this I knew it was all a lie from.dealerahip they told me there Is no recalls no manufacture replacements or hidden recalls nothing at all. I am feeling ripped off badly I dont know what to do or who to call
PLEASE AD ME TO CLASS ACTION
I own my 1st bmw I dont know anything about these cars and I keep having to add 1 quart of oil quit frequently the dealer said its because they are big turbos its normal. I start researching finally came across this I knew it was all a lie from.dealerahip they told me there Is no recalls no manufacture replacements or hidden recalls nothing at all. I am feeling ripped off badly I dont know what to do or who to call
I own a 2013 BMW 550i, 74,000 miles; high oil consumption, some blue smoke at prolonged idle, low battery warning developed into sudden engine shutdown.
It is with BMW of San Luis Obispo now for 10 days, no action.
Well I just paid $1600 for a low oil pressure sensor because of the car saying add 1 quart of oil. Kept reading oil at minimal level. Drove to work about 10 miles still reading add 1 quart so I figured I needed to drive further but after driving 2 hours stilll…. same reading so I added another quart. Drove home. Next day when I started it up, the light was off. Drove 5 miles… back on!
Next day took it to BMW and was told it was the the oil sensor which was $900 for the part and $500 in labor
I drive a 2015 320i Sedan