Billion-dollar Lawsuit Accuses Ford of Falsifying Pickup Fuel Economy

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

As if preordained to coincide with Ford’s announcement of its electric F-Series prototype, news of a class-action lawsuit accusing the automaker of falsified fuel economy tests surfaced last night. The suit, filed on Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by Seattle law firm Hagens Berman, asks $1.2 billion in damages for customers it claims are overspending on fuel.

The legal action piggybacks on the Justice Department’s criminal investigation of Ford’s testing procedures for the 2019 Ford Ranger in April. However, the civil suit also ropes in the F-Series — claiming that customers could spend upwards of two grand in gas they never budgeted for.

“We did the math and based this lawsuit on our own independent research. Ford’s fuel economy promises are all smoke and mirrors,” Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman, told the Detroit Free Press. “Ford’s lies about the F-150 are masking the truth: Consumers are paying far more for these trucks than meets the eye. Over the lifetime of the vehicle, we believe F-150 owners are paying more than $2,000 more for fuel.”

While the race to achieve desirable fuel-economy targets have encouraged many automakers to cut conners from time to time, Ford has yet to be proven guilty of flubbing its truck data. That said, it’s been getting slapped with some ugliness in regard to how it does its business of late. Earlier this month, we discussed an extremely critical report (also from the Free Press) outlining the way it handled issues with the DSP6 gearboxes that went into the Focus and Fiesta. While we sympathize with the problems the company was confronted with, it was the worst kind of publicity for an automaker.

The Detroit outlet said Ford spokesman T.R. Reid reported the automaker had not yet been served the filing as of Monday, adding “what was announced today appears to be similar to two other filings by the same law firm in the same court. I’d ask you not to confuse claims with merit.”

However the Free Press suggests there is merit to the civil suit:

On Feb. 21, 2019, Ford said its employees, through an anonymous reporting process, had raised concerns about the way Ford calculated road loads, which are used to provide the Environmental Protection Agency with vehicle miles per gallon ranges.

At that time Ford said it had begun an internal investigation into whether its vehicles have worse gas mileage and emit more pollutants than car, truck and SUV labels state, going back to 2017 models.

“Our investigation continues into how Ford estimates road load as part of the U.S. fuel economy and emissions certification process,” Kim Pittel, the company’s vice president of sustainability, environment and safety engineering, said at the time.

The anonymous report was made in September 2018.

The Department of Justice is focusing its efforts on exactly this, hoping to determine if Ford manipulated data or testing procedures — specifically via the intentional reduction of rolling resistance. According to the suit, plaintiffs conducted their own tests using EPA-mandated coastdown procedures and found that Ford overstated the fuel economy in its F-150 trucks by 15 percent for highway mileage and 10 percent for city mileage. But, as this is a civil suit seeking 1.2 billion in damages, it would be surprising to hear anything else.

That’s not to presume its research is phony, but the testing procedures will have to hold up under enhanced scrutiny to be taken seriously. Any truly damning evidence will likely come from the DOJ probe, however. That investigation is still ongoing but Ford has already said it “cannot provide assurance [the probe] will not have a material adverse effect” on the company. It’s currently cooperating with the Justice Department while continuing its own internal investigations into the possibility of incorrect mathematical calculations impacting the mileage and emissions data submitted to regulators.

[Image: Ford Motor Co.]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 70 comments
  • TomLU86 TomLU86 on Jul 25, 2019

    Matt51, tankinbeans, scottdude, thanks for your inputs. I did a search for top tier gas stations in the Detroit area. Nearest me, I found a Sunoco station I know well--but the pump say 10% ethanol! I also found Marathon, which I don't use normally. So maybe I should use Costco premium, since BP and Mobil have ethanol. What's interesting is that my 86 GTI's mileage seems to have dropped in the past 10 years. I attributed this to maybe driving it less, maybe the engine just isn't as good at GTI number one (which I sold at 144k miles in 1999). But now, I'm thinking, it might be that the gas has changed... Anyway, thanks for your comments. As my time and motivation allows, I'll do some more checking into this.

    • ToolGuy ToolGuy on Jul 25, 2019

      tomLU86, How many miles are on your '86 GTI?

  • Matt51 Matt51 on Jul 25, 2019

    Tom, top tier refers to an added cleaning package. It still has ethanol. https://toptiergas.com/licensed-brands/ For no ethanol gas locations: https://www.pure-gas.org/

  • Varezhka I have still yet to see a Malibu on the road that didn't have a rental sticker. So yeah, GM probably lost money on every one they sold but kept it to boost their CAFE numbers.I'm personally happy that I no longer have to dread being "upgraded" to a Maxima or a Malibu anymore. And thankfully Altima is also on its way out.
  • 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.
Next