|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 2639 | Automotive | 08/30/2004
A nationwide class action has been filed against automaker DaimlerChrysler AG and its U.S. subsidiary on behalf of owners of 1998 through 2003 model year Dodge Durangos, alleging that the vehicles have defectively-designed upper ball joints that wear prematurely and fail suddenly and violently. The action seeks a mandatory recall to install new upper ball joints on every Durango produced in those model years, and an award of restitution for the diminished value of the Dodge Durangos.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has commenced an investigation into the safety of the Dodge Durango upper ball joints, after four motorists reported that their upper ball joints were defective, and the defect caused them to lose control of their vehicles. The administration also received 81 complaints that the upper ball joints had worn prematurely and needed to be replaced. Up to 450,000 vehicles may be affected by this problem. At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Automotive Cases of Interest Does your GM vehicle make excessive engine noise? Several class actions have been filed against General Motors Corporation on behalf of purchasers of 1999 through 2003 model GM vehicles with a 3.1, 3.4, 4.8, 5.3, 5.7 (LS1), 6.0, or 8.1 liter engine that exhibits a loud noise due to piston slap, who allege that GM actively concealed the engine defect while continuing to advertise, market, and warrant that GM engines are free from defects. Some of the models that may have the defect are the Chevrolet Camaro, Corvette, Silverado, Tahoe and Surburban; GM Denali and Yukon; Cadillac Escalade and Pontiac TransAm. Numerous class actions have been filed against New Hampshire banks and credit insurance companies on behalf of persons who financed vehicles in New Hampshire, purchased credit life or credit disability insurance, and then paid off their loans early between 1999 and the present. The actions allege that the defendants failed to return the unused premiums in violation of New Hampshire insurance law. The parties have reached a final settlement apparently valued at $3 million in an action filed against Safeco Insurance Company of America and related companies on behalf of Montana customers who filed uninsured, underinsured and medical claims against the company from 1996 to the present. The action alleged that state insurance provisions prohibiting "stacking'' of multiple insurance policies were unenforceable. Persons eligible to participate in the settlement should contact attorneys for the class for more information as soon as possible. Federal credit and banking laws prohibit credit providers from discriminating based on ethnicity, national origin, or race. The parties have reached a tentative settlement in a nationwide action filed against General Motors Acceptance Corporation on behalf of African Americans who allege that, as a result of company policies, dealers routinely charged black consumers higher interest rates on auto loans than whites with similar financial histories in violation of the federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement should contact attorneys for the class for more information. A federal judge in Oklahoma will soon decide whether to grant class action status to lawsuits that claim General Motors (GM) sold pickups and sport utility vehicles with defective engines, the attorney representing car owners.
The lawsuit says that GM produced as many as 800,000 pickups and SUVs between 1999 and 2002 with a noisy defect referred to as piston slap, according to an attorney for the plaintiffs. A class action has been filed against the Ford Motor Credit Company on behalf of all Florida residents who leased cars from Ford between October 16, 1998, and October 16, 2003, and who paid "taxes" on itemized fees for wear and tear, excessive mileage and disposition of the vehicles at the end of their lease. The lessees claim that these "taxes" were merely hidden fees and that Ford either pocketed the "tax" money, or benefited from it prior to forwarding it to the Department of Revenue.
|
IT'S FREE
|
Class Action Lawsuit Center ||
Product Recall Center ||
Consumer Complaint Center ||
About LawCash
Link Exchange
Privacy Policy ||
Legal Policies ||
Terms & Conditions ||
Website Advertising Policy ||
Site Map ||
Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
