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.
Electrolux must face a consumer class action lawsuit alleging certain dishwasher models unexpectedly overheat, causing fires, flooding, and significant harm to consumers and their property.
Back in July, Electrolux motioned to dismiss the complaint arguing the plaintiffs failed to plead specific fraud claims.
But U.S. District Judge John Z. Lee disagreed with the appliance maker and partially denied the dismissal bid, stating lead plaintiff Teresa Elward presented sufficient arguments for breach of implied warranty and merchantability.
In his 12-page order, Judge Lee told the parties that Elward’s specific examples of consumers’ dishwashers catching on fire, causing flooding, or engulfing the entire dishwasher and surrounding areas in flames pointed to Electrolux’s knowledge of the defect since at least 2007.
Furthermore, the judge concluded that the plaintiffs’ specificity in arguing the dishwashers only lasted up to two years before overheating instead of the 11 years Electrolux advertises, was satisfactory.
Electrolux had argued that the plaintiffs’ fraud claims must be dismissed because they failed to plead with particularity.
But Judge Lee found that Elward addressed the “who, what, when, where and how” standard and provided sufficient details that Electrolux knew of the alleged dishwasher defect and yet concealed the serious safety risks it posed.
However, Judge Lee did grant Electrolux’s motion to dismiss unjust enrichment claims on the grounds Elward treated the claims as a stand-alone cause of action and could not show improper conduct. He also held that Elward was not entitled to declaratory or injunctive relief.
Elward brought the class action lawsuit against the appliance maker in Nov. 2015, stating that she and other consumers purchased defective Electrolux dishwashers sold under its own brand name as well as other brand names including Frigidaire, in which the electrical systems overheat and spontaneously ignite.
She contends that Electrolux was aware of the problem and received numerous complaints from customers but opted to not warn owners in the United States that the dishwashers posed serious safety risks.
According to the lawsuit, Electrolux reportedly recalled several models of its dishwashers in the United Kingdom and Australia, due to concerns about the appliances catching on fire, but has not issued a similar recall in the U.S.
Additionally, the lawsuit states that even when consumers contacted Electrolux to make warranty claims, Electrolux routinely charged them a fee to inspect their dishwashers, allegedly knowing that the dishwasher could not be repaired and that Electrolux would not be offering a replacement.
Elward contends Electrolux’s practice of manufacturing and selling dishwashers with electrical system defects which could cause serious harm and property damage violates the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
Elward is represented by Edward A. Wallace, Amy E. Keller and Adam M. Prom of Wexler Wallace LLP, Arthur Stock and Shannon Carson of Berger & Montague PC, and Gregory F. Coleman and Lisa A. White of Greg Coleman Law PC.
The Electrolux Defective Dishwasher Class Action Lawsuit is Elward, et al. v. Electrolux Home Products Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-09882, in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
