Ford Sued in PA 4/23/2013 - hybrid models don’t deliver on fuel-efficiency claims

[plus 3 golfer]

 

PHILADELPHIA (Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co. was sued by Pennsylvania car owners who said its hybrid models don’t deliver on fuel-efficiency claims.

Ford’s 2013 Fusion Hybrid and C-Max Hybrid models provide significantly worse fuel economy than the advertised 47 miles per gallon, according to a complaint filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.

The inaccurate representations allowed Ford to falsely claim that those models outperformed competing vehicles, according to the car owners.

“Plaintiffs are some of the tens of thousands of consumers who purchased a Fusion Hybrid or C-Max Hybrid, only to be stuck with under-performing, less valuable vehicles that inflict higher fuel costs on their owners,” according to the complaint. 

.... 

Estimates submitted by car owners to a fuel economy tracking Web site have averaged 38.5 mpg, according to the complaint. A 10-mpg difference can equate to about $1,800 in additional fuel costs over five years, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit, which seeks damages of at least $5 million, accuses Ford of fraud and violating the state’s unfair-trade practices and consumer protection laws.

 

Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20130423/OEM05/130429959/ford-hybrid-owners-sue-over-fuel-efficiency-rating-claims#ixzz2RTzsU3zK 

 

[DaveofDurham]

I love Philly, but it is the city that booed Santa Claus.

[Jus-A-CMax]

Here we go again. Dang...I think someone hates me...thats twice now I did not get this memo that the CMax is a 38.5 MPG car and the fact they scangauged it and all - what credibility!!!!!!!! Must stop photoshoping the Trip pictures, must stop photoshoping the Trip pictures.... :runaway:

[fotomoto]

If fuelly.com is your best evidence, you don't have much of a case.  Pretty much every car on that site including the mighty prius fall below the EPA average.  Also, the car was released in the fall/winter so numbers will be low and rise through the warmer months.  I do agree 47 highway is tough to match in the real world but is that lawsuit worthy?  No.  My wife average 39-41mpg in our prius which is an even bigger discrepancy.    :redcard:

[ArizonaEnergi]

Another class-action lawfirm hoping to make a quick buck.  Our country really needs "loser pays" in the lawsuit area.

[Jus-A-CMax]

If fuelly.com is your best evidence, you don't have much of a case.  Pretty much every car on that site including the mighty prius fall below the EPA average.  Also, the car was released in the fall/winter so numbers will be low and rise through the warmer months.  I do agree 47 highway is tough to match in the real world but is that lawsuit worthy?  No.  My wife average 39-41mpg in our prius which is an even bigger discrepancy.    :redcard:

Yep. Plus, these CMaxs are new, engine still not broken-in yet and the cold, so 2 bad = poor MPG. Contrast this with those of us in the warmer temps and/or doing lots of miles (recumpence), our MPGs are up there. So you're right, with summer coming (and more miles for the break-in) + temps = better MPG. Having said that, unfortunately, there are some who will not get even close, and these could be driver or car related.

 

39-41? I thought the almighty Prii was all 50+ MPGs, after all, they're suppose to be more aerodynamic, have smaller more FE wheels, less power, lighter curb weight, smaller tank etc etc etc etc.....

 

 

 

Another class-action lawfirm hoping to make a quick buck.  Our country really needs "loser pays" in the lawsuit area.

Its easier to sue than to understand your car or driving habits - mind you, as Rachel proved, even driving "normal" still gets you pretty good MPG above 40. We are a very knowledgeable lot over here  and we all share our experiences and findings to improve our FE so we have the power of a CMax community vs the single driver who has no idea and calls the lawyer, or the one who SPAM his displeasure across the Internet in an "open letter to Ford".

Edited April 25, 2013 by Jus-A-CMax

[JohnnOhio]

I must need glasses. I COULD SWEAR MY TRIP SCREEN SAYS 47.8 MPG AND MY LIFETIME SAYS 43.5MPG. I'll have to check and see where it says 38.5 mpg on my baby.

[Jus-A-CMax]

I must need glasses. I COULD SWEAR MY TRIP SCREEN SAYS 47.8 MPG AND MY LIFETIME SAYS 43.5MPG. I'll have to check and see where it says 38.5 mpg on my baby.

Obviously you DID NOT GET the Memo jus like me  ;)

[MikeB]

First, despite a few 47mpg tanks from users, I think the C-Max really isn't a 47mpg vehicle. Experienced fuel economy testers have driven the C-Max and Prius V on identical roads under identical conditions (literally driving in a caravan and rotating drivers), and the Prius V did a good bit better than the C-Max. Make all the excuses you like, but the EPA test is supposed to be a level basis of comparison test, and the real-world experience shows that it's not functioning as intended. Sure, some of you can get 47mpg, but you're driving in a manner that should be getting you 52mpg. There's no question that the average performance of the C-Max is below the EPA number, and it's below the EPA number by a larger amount than some similar cars.

 

That said, I have a personal suspicion that the C-Max is simply more sensitive to cold weather than other cars. The engine can stay off longer due to a large lithium battery and higher all-electric top speed. With the engine off in cold weather, it can't get to a good operating temperature and stay there. So if a standard car might lose 5% due to the cold, we're losing 15% in the same conditions. So as warmer weather comes around, the discrepancy between EPA numbers and real-world will be reduced more than we expect. Testers like Consumer Reports applied a cold-weather compensation number to their test results, but their compensation number wasn't large enough since it underestimated the impact of the cold.

 

So, that still leaves up the question of the lawsuit, which I still think is bogus. Ford can't really advertise any numbers other than the EPA results, and the results they got are probably exactly what the test procedure produced. If anyone should be the target of a lawsuit, it would more likely be the authors of the EPA test procedure, but they probably have government immunity.

[armoredsaint]

i've been getting less than 35 MPG, but of course I drive it like a normal person and I am not a hypermiler or baby it.

[Edsel]

Please consider registering with Fuelly.  It would be nice to see what kind of number you get with normal/spirited driving.

 

 

 

i've been getting less than 35 MPG, but of course I drive it like a normal person and I am not a hypermiler or baby it.

[plus 3 golfer]

i've been getting less than 35 MPG, but of course I drive it like a normal person and I am not a hypermiler or baby it.

You may want to contact the law firm representing the plaintiffs.

 

We are asking owners of 2013 C-Max Hybrid and Fusion Hybrid models to contact us if you believe your vehicle is not achieving the miles per gallon that Ford claims.  

 

Read more: http://www.seegerweiss.com/news/ford_2013_c-max_and_fusion_hybrids_under_investigation_for_mileage_claims#ixzz2RVFREx15

[mtb9153]

Here we go again. Dang...I think someone hates me...thats twice now I did not get this memo that the CMax is a 38.5 MPG car and the fact they scangauged it and all - what credibility!!!!!!!! Must stop photoshoping the Trip pictures, must stop photoshoping the Trip pictures.... :runaway:

These lawsuits are ridiculous these are about owners who just don't take the steps necessary to get the mpg they are looking for.  The car can do it you just have to be willing to work at it.  I feel sorry for Ford.

[fotomoto]

 

 

39-41? I thought the almighty Prii was all 50+ MPGs, after all, they're suppose to be more aerodynamic, have smaller more FE wheels, less power, lighter curb weight, smaller tank etc etc etc etc.....

 

 

 

Oh, it can and will.  But in the hands of an ignorant driver or, in the case of my wife, someone who doesn't care nor pays the gas bills, it will get less.  In my hands, I could get 48-50mpg trying real hard and 44-46mpg without too much effort.  I suspect I will get 43-45mpg with the C-Max over a years driving.  Too much wind, heat and humidity (a/c use about 80% of the year) to get max numbers here.  Add in 75-85mph LEGAL interstate speeds here in Texas, there's no way I'll get 47 hwy! 

 

A couple of years ago a woman who owned a honda civic hybrid, couldn't reach the EPA estimates.  She sued in small claims court and won but I'm sure it was appealed.  

Edited April 25, 2013 by fotomoto

[Jus-A-CMax]

Oh, it can and will.  But in the hands of an ignorant driver or, in the case of my wife, someone who doesn't care nor pays the gas bills, it will get less.  In my hands, I could get 48-50mpg trying real hard and 44-46mpg without too much effort.  I suspect I will get 43-45mpg with the C-Max over a years driving.  Too much wind, heat and humidity (a/c use about 80% of the year) to get max numbers here.  Add in 75-85mph LEGAL interstate speeds here in Texas, there's no way I'll get 47 hwy! 

 

A couple of years ago a woman who owned a honda civic hybrid, couldn't reach the EPA estimates.  She sued in small claims court and won but I'm sure it was appealed.  

It was, a CA case but that was Honda completelly d*cking around with her and her car and she got fed up. Hondas are notorious, the joke among appaisers here is that these hybrid can't climb any real grades, avoid like a plague.  However, I think her case got overturned and not sure where it went. It was small claims and < $10,000. 

[roninsd]

Another Tort case to make a few bucks (and a lot of bucks for the lawyers). 

[Wingrider01]

It was, a CA case but that was Honda completelly d*cking around with her and her car and she got fed up. Hondas are notorious, the joke among appaisers here is that these hybrid can't climb any real grades, avoid like a plague.  However, I think her case got overturned and not sure where it went. It was small claims and < $10,000. 

 

 

Many states allow either party to appeal a small claims court decision within a short period of time, usually between 10 and 30 days. In some states, appeals must be based solely on the contention that the judge made a legal mistake, and not on the facts of the case.

 

Other states have their own unique rules. In California, for example, a defendant may appeal a small claims court decision to the Superior Court within 30 days and receive a new trial -- in which the judge addresses both the law and the facts of the case. And except in very limited circumstances, a plaintiff may not appeal at all.

 

In CA, it is possible that the suite was  $10,000 (effective January 1, 2012), except that a plaintiff may not file a claim over $2,500 more than twice a year. Limit for local public entity or for businesses is $5,000. $6,500 is the limit in suits by an individual against a guarantor that charges for its guarantor or surety services.

 

While I am not happy with a number of issues with the car and 8 trips to the service department to resolve issues that are still occurring over the 7 months I have owned the car, the crass action suites over the mileage are plan stupid and a play for the lawyers to cash in on a easy settlement - they get paid by the company being sued no matter if they win the case or not. The only one that loses in a crass action suite is the people.

Edited April 28, 2013 by Wingrider01

[wab]

“Plaintiffs are some of the tens of thousands of consumers who purchased a Fusion Hybrid or C-Max Hybrid"

 

Question for Wingrider01, I asked my wife... she wasn't sure, maybe by the end of the yr when Ford has sold " tens of thousands" :

 

Is this statement grounds for a lawsuit?

 

[fotomoto]

 a play for the lawyers to cash in on a easy settlement - they get paid by the company being sued no matter if they win the case or not. The only one that loses in a crass action suite is the people.

 

 

This.   

 

I recently received a "settlement" in the mail over a class action suit concerning satellite internet bandwidth, promises, claims, and throttle back policies.  The check was for $5.  Well, I feel vindicated......  <sarcasm>

[ScooterS]

The real test is whether Ford followed the EPA testing requirements. If they did, the suit should have no merit.  If they didn't, that is a different story.

 

If the EPA standards don't reflect real-world driving, then they need to be revised. Car-makers are bound to follow the current standards or they may run afoul of the EPA.

 

I'm in the 42 MPG club.  I'd love to get 47. However, 42 is a lot better than my last car.

[Laurel]

We love our SEL, but after 5 months of owning it we certainly have learned it is totally weather dependent in the area of mileage.  We can get great mileage on warm days, but we are just starting to see good weather now.  Our life time average is 6.6 L which is about 35 mpg US.  We do get great trips of 4.0 L and even as low as 3.6 L. and with current temperatures in the 12 C range, we average about 5.6 L. I think when summer comes we will be in the 4.0 L range for sure.  And we do drive very conservatively--no rabbit starts and we watch the empower religiously for braking and getting it into EV.  We are happy as clamswith the car.  However, I think Ford needs to explain the impact of weather and driving style on customers before they buy--then they are informed and can't say they were lied to.

[Wingrider01]

The real test is whether Ford followed the EPA testing requirements. If they did, the suit should have no merit.  If they didn't, that is a different story.

 

If the EPA standards don't reflect real-world driving, then they need to be revised. Car-makers are bound to follow the current standards or they may run afoul of the EPA.

 

I'm in the 42 MPG club.  I'd love to get 47. However, 42 is a lot better than my last car.

 

If it makes it to court the chances of whether or not they followed the steps right will mean little - it is up to 12 to decide and each and every one of them will have their own judgment and feelings to follow, would love to see even 40, I see 32-34, not really that much between the mileage I have documented for my previous Escape and this one

[plus 3 golfer]

Actually, I'm not sure it's really about Ford following the EPA procedures correctly to get 47 mpg (I'm assuming Ford did).  It's about Ford misleading the consumer in the C-Max  commercials / ads to gain an unfair advantage over its competition and "dupe" the consumer.  I believe the suit hinges on fair trade and consumer protection statutes.  The commercial about C-Max beating the Prius V in MPG is well done, cleverly constructed but IMHO could mislead the consumer .  Yes, in small print, for a short period of time there is an EPA reference and mileage disclaimer. 

 

I believe it will be virtually impossible for the plaintiffs to prevail unless during discovery (should the suit proceed), data surfaces that Ford went forward with commercials knowing that the "average consumer" will have a difficult time achieving 47 mpg and the average owner of a C-Max won't beat the average owner of the Prius V in MPG.  I also believe that statements to the public in late 2012 and the FE explanation document to dealers in February 2013 indicate that Ford knew the 47 MPG number used in their ads / commercials would be hard to achieve for the average consumer.  Are consumers not to operate their vehicles during the winter, not use a/c, not drive above 65 mph and so forth?  I believe the complaint will likely indicate Ford should have know these facts about FE even if they didn't prior to the commercials.   The question then becomes what is an acceptable deviation from the 47 mpg before the commercials might be deemed misleading.   Again, one can look at the Prius V as an example since Ford used it in their commercials.

 

Of course, as Wingrider01 says when one lets "12 to decide and each and every one of them will have their own judgment and feelings to follow", the outcome is likely anything but certain.

[Tom]

My fuel experience today: 53.5 MPG.

 

Details: Traveled 40 miles in 60+ degree weather and used AC.  I drove the speed limit using cruse control.  No "sweet spot"

as was not over 60 MPH.  Almost 2,000 miles on C-Max. Flat to gently rolling terrain.

[plus 3 golfer]

My fuel experience today: 53.5 MPG.

 

Details: Traveled 40 miles in 60+ degree weather and used AC.  I drove the speed limit using cruse control.  No "sweet spot"

as was not over 60 MPH.  Almost 2,000 miles on C-Max. Flat to gently rolling terrain.

That's great.  

 

As I've said many times, getting 50+ isn't a problem under the right conditions. 

 

At the end of the day, what matters with respect to the suit is the average fuel economy of the fleet over a long period of time.  If the C-Max fleet FE were nearer 47 mpg or maybe even slightly above the Prius V, there would likely be little basis for the suit.  The question is how far away does actual have to be from 47 mpg to be material.  Currently, fuelly shows 165 - 2013 C-Maxs at 38.7 MPG and 23 - 2013 Prius V at 42.5 MPG.  Fueleconomy.gov shows 84 -2013 C-Maxs at 38.6 MPG and 9- 2013 Prius Vs at 39.1 MPG.   So let's round to 39 for the C-Max and 41 for the Prius V.   The combined EPA rating of the C-Max is 47 MPG and the Prius V is 42 MPG.  IMHO, this is the fundamental issue in the suit as to whether Ford misled consumers ------- the C-Max is 39 actual vs 47 in the commercial and the Prius is 41 actual vs 42 in the commercial.

 

It will likely be a good while should the suit actually go to trial.  There should be significantly more FE data available by then and perhaps the FE of the C-Max fleet will increase after a few years of operations and surpass the Prius V.   What will a jury think when they watch the C-Max vs Prius V commercial I linked to above should the actual FE numbers stay the same. 

Edited April 28, 2013 by Plus 3 Golfer