Amended Settlement in Klee v. Nissan

[Armand]

+1

I am one of those owners with only relatively moderate mileage on the car and who found the car to no longer have the range that I needed due to significant degradation. I would not have been covered under the warranty due to hitting 60K at about month 54 or so... I believe that there are more than just a "few" of us in this camp...

The only exception are the few packs out of warrantee due to having over 60k miles, and AFAIK, all owners of these LEAFs (such as TaylorSF with what, ~130k miles?) still find their OE packs to have useful capacity and range, resulting in the fact that no LEAF owner out of ~175,000 worldwide has bought a replacement for their OE pack (again, AFAIK, though a few have said they intend to buy one) to date.

 

[TomT]

What is the link to the web version? I didn't receive anything and want to make sure that it is clear for a future owner (if he/she is unlucky enough to get my car)...

Unless the web method gives adequate confirmation of submission?

 

[mwalsh]

What is the link to the web version? I didn't receive anything and want to make sure that it is clear for a future owner (if he/she is unlucky enough to get my car)...

Page 16 of this thread, last post.

 

[QueenBee]

What is the link to the web version? I didn't receive anything and want to make sure that it is clear for a future owner (if he/she is unlucky enough to get my car)...

Page 16 of this thread, last post.

I could never find a way to submit online (as in not mailing the form in)? Did you?

 

[ttweed]

I could never find a way to submit online (as in not mailing the form in)? Did you?

I believe you MUST mail the physical form to qualify for the opt-in. Registered mail is probably preferred, with return receipt requested if you really want to be sure it got there and be able to prove it.

TT

 

[mwalsh]

Huh. Sorry, guys. I am 95% positive the letter talks about being able to file online. I guess not. I didn't attempt thusly, because I always planned on mailing it in. I'll take another look when I get home tonight.

 

[TomT]

Nope, I just printed it out and mailed it in... I didn't bother to certify or register it since I don't really have a dog in the fight anymore...

I could never find a way to submit online (as in not mailing the form in)? Did you?

 

[keydiver]

I could never find a way to submit online (as in not mailing the form in)? Did you?

No, I could not either. I guess what they *meant* to say was that you could download the opt-in pdf from the Court Documents, fill it out, and then email it to [email protected]

Opt-in to the Settlement: If you want to receive both the initial Settlement benefits as well as the additional Settlement benefits, you must complete and sign the form enclosed with the Opt-In Notice and mail it to the Claims Administrator in enough time to ensure the Claims Administrator receives it by no later than April 30, 2015. The Opt-In Notice and enclosed form can be reviewed and printed on this website under the Court Documents tab on the left hand side of the homepage.

For more information about this settlement and details of your rights and choices, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions page. You may also contact the Settlement Administrator at 1-855-396-2118 or by e-mail at [email protected].

 

[Moof]

I am curious how all the used cars fit in. It seems like you are already included in the class simply by buying one, having never agreed nor disagreed with the suit. Doesn't sit right in my feeble head.

 

[davewill]

I am curious how all the used cars fit in. It seems like you are already included in the class simply by buying one, having never agreed nor disagreed with the suit. Doesn't sit right in my feeble head.

Well, you're buying AFTER all of this has come out, so you're presumably making a conscious choice to buy the car knowing the battery's weaknesses and Nissan's remedies. If you bought before the settlement, and let Nissan know you now own the car, you should have received the same paperwork original owners did. I realize that many (most?) used LEAF buyers won't be aware, but that isn't Nissan's fault.

 

[bowthom]

Hello,
I'm sitting here looking at the form and I'm thinking I might remain opted out. Not sure really.
1. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to trip the warrantee. After 40k miles and 50 months my Leaf is still at 11 bars & 84% capacity.
2. Maybe I'll end up suing to force them to sell me a replacement battery in 4 years. Not sure if the claims / issues of this settlement would overlap the possible future one. Worrisome since the current settlement indemnifies Nissan and their dealers about battery issues.

Opinions anyone?

 

[Reddy]

Hello,
I'm sitting here looking at the form and I'm thinking I might remain opted out. Not sure really.
1. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to trip the warrantee. After 40k miles and 50 months my Leaf is still at 11 bars & 84% capacity.
2. Maybe I'll end up suing to force them to sell me a replacement battery in 4 years. Not sure if the claims / issues of this settlement would overlap the possible future one. Worrisome since the current settlement indemnifies Nissan and their dealers about battery issues.

Opinions anyone?

You won't have enough degradation in 10 mo to be worth it, especially in Portland. Keep your ability to sue at a later date if something else happens to the battery. Here's my 2 cents (and our temps are a bit higher than yours):
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=18905&p=416914#p416914

 

[mwalsh]

"You may also submit this form online at http://www.nissanleafsettlement.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"

Yeah, these lawyers are top notch. :?

 

[leafkabob]

I am curious how all the used cars fit in. It seems like you are already included in the class simply by buying one, having never agreed nor disagreed with the suit. Doesn't sit right in my feeble head.

Well, you're buying AFTER all of this has come out, so you're presumably making a conscious choice to buy the car knowing the battery's weaknesses and Nissan's remedies. If you bought before the settlement, and let Nissan know you now own the car, you should have received the same paperwork original owners did. I realize that many (most?) used LEAF buyers won't be aware, but that isn't Nissan's fault.

Members of the class are all owners of a 2011 or 2012 Leaf. If you own one of those models, you are a member of the plaintiff class.

 

[oakwcj]

Hello,
I'm sitting here looking at the form and I'm thinking I might remain opted out. Not sure really.
1. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to trip the warrantee. After 40k miles and 50 months my Leaf is still at 11 bars & 84% capacity.
2. Maybe I'll end up suing to force them to sell me a replacement battery in 4 years. Not sure if the claims / issues of this settlement would overlap the possible future one. Worrisome since the current settlement indemnifies Nissan and their dealers about battery issues.

Opinions anyone?

We're basically in the same EV. What's so shocking about your stats and mine is that they strongly suggest that not a single owner with less than 60k miles at 5 years will have the 80% capacity that Nissan cited as a reasonable expectation in the disclosures we signed. Only those who stay out of the settlement will have the right to sue on battery capacity claims, which means no class actions. What aggravates me most about this case, as a lawyer, is that the plaintiffs' attorneys were so sloppy and hasty that they didn't conduct any meaningful discovery. If they had taken their time, instead of accepting an offer that Nissan was going to make even in the absence of litigation, they could have obtained the necessary data to establish Nissan's breathtaking material misrepresentations about battery capacity. Then they could have negotiated a fairer, and better, settlement based on pro rata capacity losses. But, I'm philosophical about all this. I knew I was taking some risks, and paying too much, as an early adopter, but I wanted that damn car. And it still works for me 90% of the time, even down one bar. I'm staying out of the class, both because it will do me no good to opt-in, and because there is some slight chance that new evidence that Nissan's misrepresentations were knowing and deliberabe may emerge over time.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

I don't have my Leaf any more, but I wonder if it would make sense or if it's even possible for me to opt back in, just in case I pick up a used Leaf in the near future. The thinking would be to remove the black mark against my name, just in case they really do decide the opt-out goes with the person and not the VIN.

 

[TomT]

It is not much of a consideration for me as I do not expect to own another
Leaf (or any Nissan, for that matter) in the future based on the way that I/we were treated...
Nissan did nothing to warrant my repeat business or recommendations to others...

I don't have my Leaf any more, but I wonder if it would make sense or if it's even possible for me to opt back in, just in case I pick up a used Leaf in the near future.

 

[TimLee]

What's so shocking about your stats and mine is that they strongly suggest that not a single owner with less than 60k miles at 5 years will have the 80% capacity that Nissan cited as a reasonable expectation in the disclosures we signed. Only those who stay out of the settlement will have the right to sue on battery capacity claims, which means no class actions. What aggravates me most about this case, as a lawyer, is that the plaintiffs' attorneys were so sloppy and hasty that they didn't conduct any meaningful discovery. If they had taken their time, instead of accepting an offer that Nissan was going to make even in the absence of litigation, they could have obtained the necessary data to establish Nissan's breathtaking material misrepresentations about battery capacity. Then they could have negotiated a fairer, and better, settlement based on pro rata capacity losses. But, I'm philosophical about all this. I knew I was taking some risks, and paying too much, as an early adopter, but I wanted that damn car. And it still works for me 90% of the time, even down one bar. I'm staying out of the class, both because it will do me no good to opt-in, and because there is some slight chance that new evidence that Nissan's misrepresentations were knowing and deliberabe may emerge over time.

Well stated.
The negligence of the attorneys that handled the class action is incomprehensible.
They completely disregarded any effort to provide compensation for about 80% of the class.
Most likely 80% of the class will not qualify for battery replacement under the capacity warranty.
With the original settlement they got nothing.
The settlement primarily compensates high miles per year drivers like tokenride (one of the two plaintiffs) in Pomona, CA who put 40,000 miles on LEAF in 27 months and got a new although unlikely heat resistant chemistry battery.
And he and the other Arizona plaintiff each get $5,000.

Only because of Judge Kozinski's objection and the court ordered mediation do the members of the class that were originally receiving nothing now get $50.

Everyone recognizes that Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which authorizes class actions, is badly flawed. The Center on Civil Justice’s fall 2014 conference — The Future of Class Action Litigation: A View from the Consumer Class — is a startling summary of its shortcomings.
Kozinski sat down with University Professor Arthur Miller who worked on writing Rule 23.
See http://www.law.nyu.edu/news/class-action-lawsuits-chief-judge-alex-kozinski" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Keep in mind there are only about 190 that Opted Out.
Everyone else is stuck with the sorry class action settlement.
Those that have no chance to qualify for battery replacement should probably stay Opted Out.
But I am skeptical of much chance for compensation from small claims court or separate suit.

For me I am in the two bars lost, 25,000 miles, 13 months to lose two more area.
Without a three month road trip to Phoenix my chances of qualifying are less than 5%.

 

[GoingGreener]

By staying opted-out, might there be anything else (besides the battery replacement if qualified, the $50/3 mths of fast charging) that opt-outters be excluded from?

Say if there's a future recall of the traction batteries, or if they start a battery replacement program, can they offer those just to the "class"?

 

[TimLee]

Decided to Opt Back In.
Chances are pretty low to qualify but they aren't zero so decided better to take the $50 and the chance versus considering separate court action.

Also still some chance for at least partial remedy for quite a few weak cells.