Whirlpool, Kenmore Defective Control Panel Washer Class Action Settlement Reached

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.

Class Members who purchased Kenmore and Whirlpool brand washing machines that were made with allegedly defective control panels are asking an Illinois federal judge to approve the class action settlement reached with Sears Roebuck and Co. to resolve the issue.

The proposed washing machine class action lawsuit would give each Class Member up to $300 and would apply to two different groups of consumers.

The first group is a nationwide class and applies to those who purchased Kenmore brand washing machines and are suing Sears. This group is included in a larger washing machine class action lawsuit filed in an Illinois federal court that also claims that the Kenmore washing machines at issue also have a defect which causes mold to grow in the washing machines.

Whirlpool is the maker of the Kenmore brand washing machines sold by Sears.

The second group is part of the class action lawsuit filed by plaintiff Victoria Poulsen against Whirlpool Corp. This class action lawsuit was first filed in a California federal court, but it was transferred to an Ohio federal court as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) over the issue of mold growth in the affected washing machines. They also allege that the control panels on the washers are defective.

This class action settlement does not resolve the moldy washing machine allegations. It only applies to the alleged control panel defect.

Under the terms of the proposed deal, the agreement applies to a nationwide class of Kenmore washing machine owners and a California class of Whirlpool washing machine owners.

The Kenmore class is for customers who purchased the front-loading washing machines from June 8, 2004 through Feb. 28, 2006. It could apply to 450,000 Kenmore washing machines. It applies to specific models and serial numbers.

The Whirlpool class is for those who have Whirlpool front-loading washing machines that were purchased from May 25, 2004 through Feb. 28, 2006. It also applies to specific models and serial numbers.

The Class Members claim that the control panel defect results in the washing machine thinking there is an error that is in fact non-existent. However, the error it detects causes the washing machine to shut down.

In 2012, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the class certification granted by an Illinois federal court and said in the opinion that Sears allegedly had knowledge that the control panel was defective but made its customers pay for the repairs.

The proposed washing machine class action lawsuit would give Class Members at least $150 to pay for the washing machines to be repaired. If Class Members opt for having the machines repaired, there is no cap on how much they can receive.

If they choose to buy a new washing machine to replace the defective one, they can receive a maximum of $300 toward the new machine.

If a washing machine owner had their washer repaired within three years of when he or she bought the machine, the Class Member will receive a full reimbursement without any cap. If a class member had the machine repaired and has proof that it was repaired but no documents detailing the cost, then he or she can receive at least $150.

The plaintiffs are represented by Steven S. Schwartz of Chimicles & Tikellis LLP and James J. Rosemergy of Carey Danis & Lowe.

Sears is represented by Michael T. Williams, Joel Neckers and Theresa Wardon of Wheeler Trigg O’Donnell LLP and Bradley B. Falkof of Barnes & Thornburg LLP. Whirlpool is represented by Philip S. Beck, Rebecca Weinstein Bacon, John C. Fitzpatrick and Eric R. Olson of Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP.

The Sears Whirlpool Defective Control Panel Washing Machine Class Action Lawsuit is Butler et al. v. Sears Roebuck & Co. et al., Case No. 1:06-cv-07023, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.