Jeep Owners Motion for Class Certification in Bungled Recall Row

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 group of Jeep owners have requested class certification from a California federal judge in a lawsuit alleging that Fiat Chrysler botched repairs on its recalled vehicles.

Plaintiffs Lynn Grimstad and Mara Manuel have requested certification for three Classes in their proposed class action lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler Automotive US LLC.

The proposed Classes would include a nationwide Class as well as a California Class and an injunctive Class.

Grimstad and Manuel alleged that the injuries suffered by hundreds of thousands of potential Class Members all were initiated by the same software patch that was intended to repair manufacturing defects as part of a recall but ultimately ended up disabling the four-wheel drive capability on their vehicles.

“In the instant case, the common interest in assuring that defendant will cease to implement its defective . . . recall and cease to charge class members for futile repair attempts predominates over individual interests,” the plaintiffs’ motion for certification reads. “Their common interest in assuring that defendant ceases its implementation and ceases charging for futile repairs will predominate over any individual differences among them.”

In July 2013, Fiat Chrysler issued a recall of nearly 300,000 vehicles that included Jeep Grand Cherokees and Commanders following reports that the Jeep vehicles rolled away from drivers when the vehicles were parked.

It was determined that the vehicles placed in park would slip into neutral, and this defect stemmed from a faulty circuit board which was subject to fracture due to a hardware defect. The recall included vehicles of model year 2005 to 2010 Jeep Grand Cherokees as well as 2006 to 2010 Commanders, according to the class action lawsuit.

Fiat Chrysler recalled the vehicles to repair them free of charge, but the plaintiffs claim that the company misrepresented their actions because rather than fixing the issue, it installed a software patch that deactivated the four-wheel drive capability of the vehicles, causing other problems in its apparent “fix,” according to the claim.

The Jeep owners claim that they paid a premium for the four-wheel drive feature and now, due to the botched repair of the defect, are unable to sell the vehicles for what they should be worth. Grimstad and Manuel have brought forth counts of negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty and conversion, and seek a variety of damages as well as injunctive relief.

In May, Fiat Chrysler asked the judge to dismiss the proposed class action lawsuit for lacking basic allegations. As an alternative, Fiat Chrysler asked that the court transfer the case to a New York federal bankruptcy court since the vehicles in question were manufactured by Chrysler LLC, a currently defunct company.

Fiat Chrysler claims that it had simply carried out the fix as required by the Safety Act as a result of the “sale order” that was issued by a federal bankruptcy court following the purchase of Chrysler’s assets even though the defunct company was responsible for the manufacture of the parts.

The plaintiffs shot back at Fiat Chrysler saying the lawsuit had nothing to do with the defect itself but hinged on claims that Fiat Chrysler allegedly caused the damage to the vehicles when its recall “fix” disabled the capability of four-wheel drive on their vehicles, calling bankruptcy-related issues “absolutely irrelevant.”

The plaintiffs state that although the vehicles span a variety of years and have diverse feature options, the central claims all originate from the same issue, the software patch that Fiat Chrysler performed, caused the vehicles’ four-wheel drive capability, four-wheel lock capability and neutral shift capability to all become disabled.

At least 196,022 of the cars subject to recall had received the software patch as of October 2014, and since then, the number of owners receiving the apparent “fix” has likely increased substantially, according to the plaintiffs. As a result, the plaintiffs maintain that class certification offers the most reasonable way to address the claims.

The plaintiffs are represented by Anthony O. Egbase and Victor T. Orafa of A.O.E. Law & Associates.

The Jeep 4WD Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Grimstad, et al. v. FCA US LLC, Case No. 8:16-cv-00763, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

UPDATE: On May 3, 2018, two plaintiffs are asking a California federal judge to reject a bid by FCA US LLC to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging a purported “fix” for Jeeps that reportedly rolled away while parked actually created a new defect, reduced the functionality of the vehicles and reduced their value.