Honda loses court case on Hybrid mileage

[Galo]

El shitto is gonna hit el fanno.
 
Never mind that Honda (along with everyone else) is required by law to use the US EPA estimates as its official fuel mileage figures, they lost this case.

http://wot.motortrend.com/civic-hybrid-owner-wins-small-claims-court-battle-against-honda-awarded-9867-164629.

Yeap, I can see the car companies turning around and suing the EPA for eveything they get sued for.

Whatta cluster fluk.....

[Rogue]

WTF is wrong with these people?  

Honda should appeal.

[phoenix]

page not found

from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02/honda-hybrid-lawsuit-heather-peters-wins_n_1248357.html

LOS ANGELES — Heather Peter's computer crashed under the onslaught of messages following her unique victory over Honda in small claims court – a win the California woman is hoping will lead other consumers to reject a class action settlement over defective hybrid cars.

Peters, who was at the center of a whirlwind as she welcomed camera crews to her home, said she has received more than 500 Facebook messages and had 6,000 hits on her website following a court decision awarding her $9,867 and finding Honda misled her into thinking her Hybrid could get 50 miles per gallon. She said the 2006 model, which she still owns, gets about 30 mpg.

Peters' win in small claims court was a unique end run around the class action process and set the stage for others to follow suit. She sees her victory as benefiting not just Honda owners but all consumers.

"To me this is really about the decline in customer service in America and how we have rolled over and accepted it for too long," she said. "People are mad as hell and they're not going to take it."

Class action lawsuits typically give small settlements to all members of the class. In the Honda suit, the company has offered $100 to $200 to each owner of an under -performing hybrid along with a $1,000 coupon to some toward purchase of a new car.

Peters, a former lawyer, said she is renewing her legal license after a 10-year lapse so she can consult with other Honda owners She said she is also posting all the paperwork from her small claims suit online as a guide for others contemplating such suits.

There appear to be many of them across the country, with Peters sharing dozens of e-mails sent to her by Honda owners who are opting out of the class action and filing their own suits.

But Professor Laurie Levenson of Loyola University Law School said Honda may have suffered something much worse than a possible flood of small claims actions.

"The worst part for Honda is they've been branded as committing fraud," she said. "That's not good for sales. It's a P.R. disaster and sometimes that costs more than the judgment."


One Honda owner in Texas was among those taking action.

"I have already sent in my letter opting out of the class action," said Darrell Stevens of Houston, Tex. who said in a phone interview that he has already filed his small claims action against Honda.

"The reason I'm doing this is it's just not fair what they're offering." he said. "I'm going to do what Ms. Peters did and present figures in court. I have no value left in the car. As soon as Ms. Peters won, there's no resale value for the car."

He said his hybrid gets 30 to 32 miles per gallon.

Honda said it will appeal Peters' judgment. She said she's confident she will win. She said more witnesses have been volunteering to help her, including a whistle blower from within Honda.

A legal expert sees Peters as in the vanguard of a consumer revolution on line

"What's new about this case is social networking," said Professor Howard Erickson of Fordham University Law School in New York.

"This is an example of how a revolutionary movement gets started," he said. "This is one individual fighting the powers that be and spreading the. Her website Don'tSettleWithHonda.com became a rallying point for dissatisfied Honda hybrid owners.

She has now decided to renew her legal license after a 10-year lapse in order to consult with other Honda owners on their legal actions.

Los Angeles Superior Court Commissioner Douglas Carnahan ruled Wednesday that the automaker misled Peters about the potential fuel economy of her hybrid car and awarded her $9,867, close to the maximum allowed by law.

"At a bare minimum Honda was aware that by the time Peters bought her car there were problems with its living up to its advertised mileage," Carnahan wrote in the judgment. He harshly criticized the company for making false promises it could not deliver.

Aaron Jacoby, a class action lawyer in Los Angeles, said Peters definitely put a new twist on small claims court. But he felt few people would have her dedication and the time to pursue a similar case.

"I just don't think it's going to take off," he said. "There are a lot of class action cases out there. It would be hard to make a dent."

Richard Cupp, a Pepperdine University professor who had predicted Peters' victory, said others will likely be inspired to follow her example.

"I remember her saying at the beginning that she wanted to start a small claims flash mob," he said. "And I think that's what she did."

A judge in San Diego County is due to rule in March on whether to approve Honda's class-action settlement. Members of the class have until Feb. 11 to accept or decline the deal.

Late Thursday evening, Honda issued a lengthy statement insisting that the Honda Civic Hybrid has the capability to achieve 50 miles per gallon or more "in real world driving conditions."

The statement by Honda spokesman Chris Martin also attached numerous letters of commendation from satisfied Honda customers.

"American Honda believes that the judgment in this case is a radical and unprecedented departure from California and federal law... we intend to vigorously appeal this decision."

Honda defended the claims made in their advertising, which they say was accurate when the vehicles were sold and remains accurate today.

[antvq]

I say good for her.   The class action was $100 to the car owners and over 8 million to the lawyers.      

[Cablebandit]

I say good for her.   The class action was $100 to the car owners and over 8 million to the lawyers.      

Yeah I saw that on AOTS last night.  At least somebody was using their noodle.

[Rogue]

She thinks she's helping consumers by bringing down a company that is trying it's best to meet EPA/CAFE/CARB mandated standards and is offering high mileage alternatives.

She probably floors the accelerator in her car first thing in the morning before warm up, ignores tire pressures, loads her trunk with junk, speeds in the highway, then wonders why she can't meet the mileage rating.  

Clueless, dumb, greedy, gold digger.  Her lawyer is the same.

[antvq]

She thinks she's helping consumers by bringing down a company that is trying it's best to meet EPA/CAFE/CARB mandated standards and is offering high mileage alternatives.

She probably floors the accelerator in her car first thing in the morning before warm up, ignores tire pressures, loads her trunk with junk, speeds in the highway, then wonders why she can't meet the mileage rating.  

Clueless, dumb, greedy, gold digger.  Her lawyer is the same.

Small claims.  No lawyers allowed.  

Oh, and if you read the article you will find that issues with the batteries kept her from driving in electric mode.   Also, as evidence she provided all sorts of data points to back up her claim.

Gold digging?  $9800 is Gold Digging?    


You own Honda or are you just really grumpy today?

[Giaka]

I read that the woman what won the case (a lawyer) wants everyone to bail on the class action lawsuit and go to small claims. She said if only 75% won it would cost Honda upwards of 2 billion.  Can Honda afford that?

[Rogue]

Gold digging?  $9800 is Gold Digging?    


You own Honda or are you just really grumpy today?

So why didn't she get the batteries warrantied?

Instead she wants to bring down Honda and she wants EVERYONE to do it?

You agree with this?  I don't because I don't know what her REAL driving habits are and there isn't much of a way to prove it.  Maybe Honda can take the car back and see if the batteries are defective.  Why sue the whole company?  We all know how tricky it is to truly meet the EPA rating in the real world.  You have to REALLY drive it carefully under ideal conditions.  

Remember the Prius fiasco?  There are so many people out there just looking to cash in and that has been proven time and time again.  How do you know this woman is above all that?  Her efforts are noble and she should be believed on the basis of a small claims victory?  Everyone sue Honda and get your part of the cash cow!  Why not?  

[sfalexi]

I think it'd be funny if Honda just says, "Screw it.  America sues too much.  Shut down shop.  We'll stick to the rest of the world."  I'm sick and tired of people suing all the time.  Maybe she really did do everythign right to try to get 50 mpg, but for me personally, I just assume EVERY commercial has that fine print at the bottom that says, "Results not typical" (which almost every commercial does).

Alexi

[Giaka]

I think it'd be funny if Honda just says, "Screw it.  America sues too much.  Shut down shop.  We'll stick to the rest of the world."

Would remove 90% of the boring factor in motoring in America.

[X1Glider]

She thinks she's helping consumers by bringing down a company that is trying it's best to meet EPA/CAFE/CARB mandated standards and is offering high mileage alternatives.

She probably floors the accelerator in her car first thing in the morning before warm up, ignores tire pressures, loads her trunk with junk, speeds in the highway, then wonders why she can't meet the mileage rating.  

Clueless, dumb, greedy, gold digger.  Her lawyer is the same.

Yeah, lots of variables there.  On the bike, I get 30 being a bastard and 40 being very nice.  In the Kia SUV, I get 17 being nice but 13 when floored during the daily commutes...11-12 with a dirt bike hanging off the back cruising down the interstate.

For me, this is more about not giving the lawyers a lot of easy money at the consumers' expenses.  It's the consumers that were expecting 20 mpg more, hoping to save on gas money.  

Let's just say for the sake of argument that her daily commute to work is 50 miles round trip andit was costing her an extra gallon of fuel each day.  That's approximately 3 bucks where I live.  261 work days later, that's $783 each year.  Over 5 years, the woman's extra fuel costs to get to work was then $3915.  Then there's weekend errands and visiting friends, maybe even a yearly lomg distance vacation in the car that could easily add another $500/year or $2500 over 5.  Now the total extra fuel is up to $6415.  Chances are that she'll keep the car a little longer now because who would buy a used one of these things, especially when a replacement battery for a "now old tech car" probably goes for $4000 installed.  So I really don't think being awarded nearly 10 grand is unwarranted.

But I understand where this could go.  As I've never once seen the advertised 21 mpg in my Kia over nearly 9 years, imagine if I and others like me were to sue over this.  In my Kia, over the past 100k miles, they would owe me 1904 miles worth of fuel at $3/gallon, which comes out to close to $336.  Multiply this by however many other Sorrento owners there are out there.  This could bankrupt a lot of companies.

[Cricket1]

I'm confused.

Doesn't the EPA grant the MPG ratings that the car MFG's MUST post on the window sticker? How does that make Honda liable? Shouldnt she be suing the EPA?

[darkstarmoto]

So why didn't she get the batteries warrantied?

Umm...Honda admits there is no way for the car to get 50MPG, hence the Class Action suit that was already in place. She just opted out of taking their pitiful "reimbursement" and went to small claims on her own. It's not like it's just her car...Honda knows it's mostly ALL of them from 06-08.

Quoted from LA Times:

"She said the fuel economy dropped below 30 mpg after a software update intended to prolong the life of the car's battery and improve performance was installed."

"Honda has acknowledged that the battery on the 2006 through 2008 Civic hybrids "may deteriorate and eventually fail" earlier than expected. When the battery pack can't be charged to full capacity, the car relies more on the gas engine and fuel economy suffers."

So Honda themselves made the situation worse with their own software update and using a battery pack that they are NOT covering under warranty.

I fail to see how that makes her the bad guy for not standing up for what she was promised when purchasing the car. On top of that now everyone knows the 06-08 Hybrids are crap and the trade or sale value is in the toilet. So she's out that money too.

[Rogue]

If the software update by Honda was designed to make the battery last longer, did Honda send a notice to all customers of their hybrid to let them know?

If this S/W update was designed to protect hybrid customers from premature battery replacement, then this is a good thing.  If the batteries failed too early, it may open up a whole rash of lawsuits again.  So damned if they do and damned if they don’t.   Where does it end?  

[phoenix]

a little background on EPA mileage numbers:

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06009.htm

The city and highway MPG estimates have been provided to consumers since the 1970s as a tool to help shoppers compare the fuel economy of different vehicles. Currently, EPA relies on data from two laboratory tests to determine the city and highway fuel economy estimates. The test methods for calculating these estimates were last revised in 1984, when the fuel economy derived from the two tests were adjusted downward—10 percent for city and 22 percent for highway—to more accurately reflect driving styles and conditions.

The city and highway tests are currently performed under mild climate conditions (75 degrees F) and use acceleration rates and driving speeds that EPA believes are generally lower than those experienced by drivers in the real world. Neither test is run with the use of accessories, such as air conditioning. The highway test has a top speed of 60 miles per hour, and an average speed of only 48 miles per hour.

Since the mid-1990s, EPA's emission certification compliance regulations have required the use of three additional tests which capture a much broader range of real-world driving conditions; specifically: high-speed, fast-acceleration driving and the use of air conditioning and colder temperature operation (20 degrees F). Not only do these conditions impact the amount of air pollutants a vehicle emits, they also have a significant impact on a vehicle’s fuel economy. However, they are not currently required to be used to measure fuel economy.

In my skeptical point of view, many hybrid cars are developed to achieve high economy numbers at or below 60 mph, while 95% or more of interstate driving is at speeds much higher than this.  The fuel economy numbers are bogus. but when that is the primary selling feature, I believe we all have the right to call them out on it.

[Kootenanny]

As I understand it, carmakers have to use mileage figures as documented during specified EPA test procedures.  I think it could be called "common knowledge" that those figures, obtained under ideal laboratory conditions, are seldom going to be achieved in the "real world."  Nonetheless, the published mileage figures SHOULD be good for comparison purposes, as they are (supposedly) obtained under identical conditions.

As I see it, a car that is advertised as getting 50 mpg had sure better get better mileage than any car advertised as getting 40 mpg.  Is this true in this case?  I think a part of the problem here is that carmakers may well be designing cars to get excellent mileage during the EPA test procedure, at the expense of good mileage in the real world (sorta like sportbike makers might tune their bikes for maximum peak HP at the expense of rideability, so they can advertise higher HP numbers...).  A car getting barely half the mileage it is rated for is definitely a sign of something wrong.

And beyond mileage, a car buyer might have an expectation they are being "environmentally conscious" by purchasing a hybrid.  The cars are advertised with this expectation, and I think a case could be made that this advertising itself is a bit misleading.  For example, I have never seen any hybrid car advertised as only getting the rated mileage in stop'n'go commuter traffic--but  it is obvious on the face of it that is where they're going to perform best (for extended highway travel, there is no way they're going to perform substantially better than a modern, efficiency-oriented ICE powered vehicle...).  For many hybrid buyers, I think ownership is as much about politics as anything else...and this brings a whole new set of issues into a lawsuit such as this.

[darkstarmoto]

If the software update by Honda was designed to make the battery last longer, did Honda send a notice to all customers of their hybrid to let them know?

If this S/W update was designed to protect hybrid customers from premature battery replacement, then this is a good thing.  If the batteries failed too early, it may open up a whole rash of lawsuits again.  So damned if they do and damned if they don’t.   Where does it end?  

Most likely no Honda did not send out notices to their customers (none that I could find online). As with most car companies they issue a Technical Service Bulletin to their dealerships which instruct them on what to do if a customer comes in and complains about a specific issue. The S/W update from what I have read on Honda forums appears to be just telling the car to run on the gas engine more often to lower the complications of the battery.  

You're right...damned if they do, damned if they don't BUT damned because they rushed a product to market without enough life testing to be sure their claims about the car could not be contested.

Cliff Note Edit: Honda knows they have defective batteries (costing about $4000) but instead of replacing those they do a $3 software update to hopefully extend the battery replacement beyond warranty period. In the meantime customer pays for this by getting MUCH lower MPG than advertised which was likely the reason they bought the car in the 1st place. Yeah that's fair.  

[Rogue]

So the plaintiff claims Honda “was aware” that her hybrid could not achieve the claimed 51 mpg.

Honda releases a statement saying it can achieve the rated mpg.  Is this after the S/W upgrade?  I don’t know.  Only Honda knows.  The EPA says it can so…..

Who are we to believe?  

[Justin]

This may be one suit where I actually side with the plaintiff. The car is not as advertised based on the evidence I see. She opted out of the class action lawsuit and used the small claims process that was available to her to get more.  The difference between 30 and 50 Mpg in costs can be huge for a commuter.