Class Action Lawsuit Targets Gas Mileage of Older GM Crossovers

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

It looks like a gas card mailout didn’t take all the heat off of General Motors.

After compensating owners of its full-size 2016 crossovers in the wake of the recent fuel economy controversy, a class action lawsuit filed in a California court is pointing the finger at older models and demanding the automaker pay up.

Back in May, GM revealed an “inadvertent error” caused incorrect EPA fuel economy ratings to show up in the window stickers of 2016 Chevrolet Traverse, Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia crossovers. The stickers overstated the vehicles’ mileage by one to two miles per gallon. After a stop sale order, a label swap and the hasty rollout of a customer compensation plan, GM’s woes weren’t over.

A report in Consumer Reports questioned the fuel economy readings of older versions of the afflicted models, which have the same powertrain as new models. The publication looked back at previous tests and found the real-world mileage of the models were two to three miles per gallon below their EPA rating, or similar to the revised economy of the 2016 models.

The class action lawsuit, first revealed by GMInsideNews, targets 2009–2016 versions of the Lambda platform triplets and accuses GM of “deceptive marketing.” The suit alleges the models don’t achieve the advertised 19 mpg combined fuel economy rating, and that the automaker essentially charged a “price premium” for the vehicles.

The plaintiff and class members’ argument is the same one laid out by Consumer Reports — that the older vehicles “all have substantially the same engines, weights, sizes and shapes and, thus, should achieve substantially identical gas mileage.”

Because the suit covers millions of vehicles sold since “at least the beginning of 2009,” potential damages are pegged at more than $5 million.

In response to the report questioning the mileage of its older vehicles, GM stated that “no other models or model years were affected.”

[Source: GMInsideNews]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 14 comments
  • DeadWeight DeadWeight on Jun 20, 2016

    OMG, I SAW A BUICK ENVISION COMMERCIAL TONIGHT!!! It featured a suburban white couple who had a toddler that was finding it difficult to fall asleep, so dad took him out for night time car ride IN HIS CHINESE PARTS-COMPRISED AND CHINESE ASSEMBLED BUICK ENVISION THAT GENERAL MOTORS NEVER ONCE MENTIONS IS 100% A CHINESE VEHICLE THROUGH AND THROUGH. It a not a your fader's Bruick!!!

  • Traversebill Traversebill on Jul 05, 2016

    Ok, so I get the letter from GM about the settlement for my 2016 Traverse. On that site they suggest that you look at 3 lawsuits that have been filed. Some in CA and one that mentions older models going back to 2009. I had a 2010 and 2013. My question is: if I take the gift card for the 2016 am I still eligible for a lawsuit for the earlier models? I didn't see anything in the disclaimer and agreement for the gift card. Will there be notice of a class action lawsuit coming for the older models? You have until the end of July to take the $900 card.

  • Tassos Under incompetent, affirmative action hire Mary Barra, GM has been shooting itself in the foot on a daily basis.Whether the Malibu cancellation has been one of these shootings is NOT obvious at all.GM should be run as a PROFITABLE BUSINESS and NOT as an outfit that satisfies everybody and his mother in law's pet preferences.IF the Malibu was UNPROFITABLE, it SHOULD be canceled.More generally, if its SEGMENT is Unprofitable, and HALF the makers cancel their midsize sedans, not only will it lead to the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST ones, but the survivors will obviously be more profitable if the LOSERS were kept being produced and the SMALL PIE of midsize sedans would yield slim pickings for every participant.SO NO, I APPROVE of the demise of the unprofitable Malibu, and hope Nissan does the same to the Altima, Hyundai with the SOnata, Mazda with the Mazda 6, and as many others as it takes to make the REMAINING players, like the Excellent, sporty Accord and the Bulletproof Reliable, cheap to maintain CAMRY, more profitable and affordable.
  • GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
  • Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
  • Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
  • Wjtinfwb Not proud of what Stellantis is rolling out?
Next