Judge Gives Plaintiffs in Highlander Drive Shaft Suit Another Chance to Assert Claims

A proposed class action against Toyota alleging a steering defect in particular vehicle models was tossed out by a California federal judge while allowing the plaintiffs an opportunity to revise the claims raised in the complaint.

U.S. District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr. issued the 22-page order on Nov. 23, 2020, determining that the plaintiffs who filed the suit against the Japan-based car manufacturer lacked standing to raise claims concerning a defect in the Toyota Highlander drive shaft under the laws of states in which they do not reside.

The case was commenced in February 2020 by plaintiff Linda Drake, a California resident. Mike Heslop, an Illinois resident, was later added as a named plaintiff in an amended complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division, in June 2020.

Both Drake and Heslop claimed that problems with their Toyota Highlander drive shaft not only make the vehicle difficult to drive but are potential safety hazards, causing risk of injury. Drake and Heslop raised eight causes of action on behalf of themselves and the proposed Class asserting violations of consumer protection laws in California and Illinois, breach of warranty under state and federal laws, as well as unjust enrichment and fraud under various state laws.

Judge Finds Plaintiffs Lack Standing to Assert Claims on Behalf of the General Class

While the judge found that Drake and Heslop could raise the warranty, fraud, and unjust enrichment claims under California and Illinois law in the lawsuit, he determined that they had no standing to assert claims on behalf of the putative nationwide Class under the laws in other jurisdictions.

Likewise, Judge Blumenfeld held that Drake and Heslop could not bring their federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claims since they hinged on those made under state law. Granting leave to amend the federal claims, the judge noted that a Class under the Act must have at least 100 named plaintiffs.

Despite the lack of standing to bring the claims raised in the lawsuit, Judge Blumenfeld found that Drake’s allegations surrounding the Highlander drive shaft defect were sufficient and provided Toyota with the required notice as to the nature of the claim.

As for Toyota’s argument that Drake was time-barred in raising the issue of the defect, the judge said the timeliness issue could be addressed in the amended complaint.

However, the judge sided with Toyota concerning Drake and Helsop’s claim that the car manufacturer breached express warranty since the alleged defects purportedly arose outside the warranty period.

Judge Blumenfeld also tossed out a fraudulent concealment claim raised under California state law, while allowing the plaintiffs to revise a similar claim under Illinois law. Finding that the “economic loss rule” barred the California claim, the judge wrote, “To be clear, the Court does not rule that the complaint adequately states a claim for fraudulent concealment. Any amended complaint must cure the pleading deficiencies addressed above and otherwise properly allege a claim, which requires a duty to disclose (among other things).”

What Are the Alleged Highlander Drive Shaft Defects?

In the lawsuit, Drake contended that with just over 92,000 miles on the odometer, the used 2009 Toyota Highlander she purchased in 2012 began experiencing issues. Although she said she bought the vehicle with 37,000 miles on it, neither the test drive nor the sales associate revealed that the steering shaft was defective.

In the amended complaint, Drake referenced three occasions in 2015 her vehicle made” harsh noises” and had “gear-shifting issues.” Despite having brought the car to the dealership each time for repairs for the problem, she asserted that the Highlander drive shaft defect was only acknowledged in July 2017 once the 100,000 mile extended warranty she purchased had run out. Allegedly, the dealership quoted her $1,100 to replace the drive shaft, despite having failed to inform her that it needed replacing on any other occasion she brought the vehicle to the shop while it was under warranty.

Heslop experienced the same harsh noise when he turned the steering wheel in his 2012 Highlander, once the vehicle had reached 55,582 miles. He alleged that the dealership refused his request for warranty coverage and told him the sound “could not be replicated” when he brought the vehicle for an oil change. During a subsequent visit to the authorized dealer to have his oil changed, Heslop said he was informed the problem was “‘probably the intermediate steering shaft,’ and that they ‘always go bad’ in that model year,” as alleged in the complaint.

The amended complaint alleges that Toyota was aware of the Highlander drive shaft defect and issued Technical Service Bulletins acknowledging the issue and outlining the potential repairs.

The lawsuit also cites a number of complaints concerning the same issue made by consumers on message boards affecting Highlander models ranging from 2008 through 2013. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration lists hundreds of complaints from consumers concerning Highlanders manufactured during this time frame — many of which report the same kinds of noises stemming from the steering shaft as alleged in the complaint.

If you own a Highlander and have experienced drive shaft issues which may be defects, you may be entitled to file a lawsuit or join a class action lawsuit. An experienced class action attorney can advise you of your legal rights and remedies.

The Toyota Highlander Drive Shaft Defect Lawsuit is Linda Drake v. Toyota Motor Corp. et al, Case No. 2:20-cv-01421, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.