Toyota Soy-Coated Car Wires Class Action Lawsuit Gets Dismissed

Toyota managed to dodge a class action lawsuit alleging soy coated wiring in some of its vehicles attracts vermin who chew through them causing significant damage.

Lead plaintiffs state in the Toyota car wires class action lawsuit that their vehicles sustained serious damage to the electrical wiring systems after rodents, such as rats, chewed through wires.

The plaintiffs claim that the wires are enticing because they are coated in a material derived from soy.

The Toyota car wires class action lawsuit states that the soy coating on the wiring constitutes a design defect and breach of warranty and also violates state consumer protection laws. However, Toyota argues that it should not be held responsible for damage to cars caused third parties, even rodents.

U.S. District Court Judge Andrew J. Guilford agreed with the car maker, finding that the claims in the Toyota car wires class action lawsuit constitute a design defect.

“Only after the rats do their work does the vehicle become inoperable (if at all),” noted the judge in his order dismissing the Toyota car wires class action lawsuit. “Plaintiffs are, in effect, asking the court to stretch the implied warranty of merchantability to include some promise that no external actor will later harm plaintiffs’ vehicles. The court declines to extend the doctrine so far.”

The claims made under state consumer protection laws in the Toyota car wires class action lawsuit were dismissed by the judge. Although the plaintiffs allege that Toyota should have disclosed the soy coated wiring to them and other owners and lessees of affected vehicles, the judge said that the plaintiffs had not established what, if anything, Toyota should have disclosed.

“Plaintiffs’ complaint includes several consumer complaints from several different Toyota owners alleging rodent damage to several different parts of their vehicles. And this damage wasn’t always connected to soy-based parts,” notes the judge in his order. “Considering this considerable variance, it isn’t clear that Toyota could have specifically articulated any increased ‘risk’ to any particular part of plaintiffs’ vehicles because of the soy coated wiring.”

The judge also dumped Toyota car wires class action lawsuit claims that the car maker violated the implied warranty of merchantability, again pointing out that vermin had damaged the cars, but the cars were still drivable when they were sold.

The plaintiffs’ claims that Toyota breached express warranties was similarly tossed.

“Plaintiffs allege that the decision to use soy wiring is a problem across the board — not that any individual wire was anomalously defective,” stated the order dismissing the Toyota class action lawsuit.

The Toyota class action lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice, which means that the plaintiffs will not be permitted to amend their complaint.

The plaintiffs are represented by Benjamin F. Johns and Andrew W. Ferich of Chimicles & Tikellis LLP.

The Toyota Car Wires Class Action Lawsuit is Heber, et al. v. Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc., et al., Case No. 8:16­-cv­01525, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.