Class Action Lawsuit, Launch Control /Void Warranty /Transmission Failure Options

[Trailblazer]

I have begun a class action against Nissan for issues relating to use of the launch control feature and denial by Nissan of warranty coverage.

AS A GENERAL GUIDELINE TO THOSE OF YOU INTERESTED IN JOINING THE CLASS ACTION:

Have you broken your transmission due to LC use and been denied repair under warranty? If you did, let me know by Private Message and I will send you my lawyer's contact information. He will want to talk to you immediately.

If not, just wait for a letter in the mail which every GT-R owner will eventually get from my attorney. It will give you the option of joining the class action at no cost to you. Each member of the class will share equally from the settlement.

Among other things, this is what I hope for everyone to achieve:

1. A decent money settlement. The resale value of all our cars have suffered from what Nissan has done to tarnish the reputation of this fine automobile.

2. A stronger, better, more reliable transmission, able to take the stresses of LC, as used in a non-abusive manner. Investigation into whether the present transmission has inherent structural defects and whether Nissan is using a proper lubricating transmission fluid.

3. Correction of the severe wheel hop, which certainly could be putting stresses on the transmission

4. Some legal opinion if Nissan can continue to use black box data to void our warranties. Is this a possible criminal violation of our privacy rights?

5. A Warranty on the entire powertrain, with proper use of LC, as defined in a detailed special addendum to the owner's manuals. Since the LC feature is programmed into every GT-R, there should be a protocol to be able to use it in a 'non-abusive' fashion. I don't know what 'abuse' means, since Nissan never bothered to address LC in any of its manuals. As I sadly learned too late, anyone using LC would be denied transmission repair under warranty.

6. A more reasonable approach to Transmission repairs. Nissan should be opening and evaluating these broken transmissions, which may just need a simple clutch repair, not a new 20k transmission.

This post has been edited by Trailblazer: Nov 19 2008, 10:05 AM

[jmunjr]

I have begun a class action against Nissan for issues relating to use of the launch control feature and denial by Nissan of warranty coverage. If anyone is sitting on a GT-R with a broken transmission, or haven't yet broken your transmission but are afraid to use 'launch control', you could speak to my lawyer and join the class action at no cost to you whatsoever.

I am not interested in the rest of you who think this case is a pile of hogwash. I have already heard what you have to say, and your opinion is irrelevant now.

But for those of you who feel you have been mislead and wronged by Nissan's sneaky policies to deny you use of a feature built into this car, please let me know by private message and I will refer you to my attorney. Thank you.

Umm, what part was sneaky? Convince me and I'll sign on!

[Trailblazer]

Umm, what part was sneaky? Convince me and I'll sign on!

It was sneaky and misleading:

1. For Nissan to promote and even supervise performance tests advertised in several important auto magazines and videos, using launch control to obtain maximum performance figures, in order to attain a competitive advantage over other supercars - and then not allow the owner to use this built-in feature without voiding his warranty.

2. To promote the Jay Leno video, using a Nissan representative to illustrate the launch feature and promise, "A perfect launch every time you do it", without a disclaimer that this action will void your warranty if you break something.

3. To never directly mention the 'launch feature' in any of the owners manuals, but yet program LC into every GT-R whereby one is required to turn off the VDC in order to activate it. Then to state in the manual that turning off the VDC will void your warranty - basically a sneaky and under-handed way of saying that one can't use LC. Can anyone give me another example in any other automobile where turning the VDC off or using a built-in feature voids the automobile's warranty??

4. For Nissan to refuse to crack open a broken transmission for a possible low cost repair, but rather to rely on arbitrary black box evidence of an owner's driving habits in order to deny him warranty coverage. Then expect him to put out 20k for a new transmission which very possibly could have inherent structural defects, including the use of an improper and poorly-lubricating transmission oil.

5. Failure of disclosure on the part of Nissan as relates directly to the 'launch function', and it's proper use. Rather than denying the existence of LC and banning its use for coverage under the warranty, Nissan should instead have given guidelines for its proper use, without denying claims if the tranny gives out.


To summarize:

LC was created to be used by the journalists only to boast about the GT-R's better performance numbers and beat their competitors. It was never intended to be used by customers purchasing the vehicle. Nissan boosted sales through false and misleading advertising, provided inadequate disclosure regarding the warranty as it relates to LC, and then used the black box recordings to deny repairs.

This post has been edited by Trailblazer: Nov 19 2008, 03:44 AM

[JohnTurbo]

We all, obviously, see the point in what you're trying to claim. But it's going to be a nearly impossible legal challenge when Nissan had you sign an agreement that fully detailed that turning VDC off voided the warranty (unless in mud or snow) if something broke during that usage.

Many cars state all kinds of things for their marketing. It doesn't mean everything a car is capable of has to be legally covered by a warranty. Do you think a 200+mph top-end on many of today's sportscars is covered under warranty should you take the car to a track and come anywhere near that speed and have something break? Most warranties are immediately void if you take the car to a track (unlike the GT-R). And they know you can't legally do 200mph on a city road or highway. Yet they use this 200mph top-end speed as part of their marketing. Get the point? Never in the history of automobile manufacturing has a car included an all-inclusive warranty that covers ever possible use of the car according to its mechanical "capabilities."

LC *can* be used by customers all day long and *does* work. There is no disputing that. However, the documentation for the car clearly states it is not covered by the warranty if you use it and should something break.

With all of that being said, the only 'grey area' I can see in all of this is if the car was misrepresented to you in someway in a DIRECT manner. i.e. Nissan's rep sold you the car and made you believe the launch control had nothing to do with turning the VDC off, etc. And you only discovered the opposite AFTER you bought the car. However, even with that scenario I think an attorney would simply say why didn't you try and return the car after realizing it wasn't covered under warranty rather than waiting until you broke something that you "knowingly" agreed would void the warranty in writing at the time of purchase to then file legal action?

I think it will be a nearly impossible legal battle to win.

[NauAudiS6]

3. To never directly mention the 'launch feature' in any of the owners manuals, but yet program LC into every GT-R whereby one is required to turn off the VDC in order to activate it. Then to state in the manual that turning off the VDC will void your warranty - basically a sneaky and under-handed way of saying that one can't use LC. Can anyone give me another example in any other automobile where turning the VDC off or using a built-in feature voids the automobile's warranty??

No where did Nissan as an entity, or company, come out and claim these numbers using LC. It was the press that claimed them. How do you think Magazines come up with their times? Do you think they go "Hey, lets do a 2k rpm launch because it might ruin the consumers warranty if they try to match our acceleration times the same manner we conduct ours?" No they go "Hey lets take this to redline and drop the clutch and smoke this mothereffer while we're still allowed to drive it."

That brings me to my next point. Nissan has specifically stated "anything that breaks while VDC is off is not covered by the warranty." This leads me to my final point. Using any built-in feature in a reckless and abusive matter will void your warranty on said part on any car. Period. Such an example would be doing clutch-dump style launches in any car, another would be using LC on any car many times especially in a continuous manner. Let me ask you this. Lets say you sold some sort of electronic device. It's all the rage and everybody buys this thing, but there is an out break of them breaking because people are throwing them against the wall (even though you claim they're shock resistant). The people start asking for their money back for their broken devices. Would you give them their money back because they were broken outside of your specified use?

Your arguments are shakey at best, and I doubt they'll hold up in court unless you have one amazing lawyer. And please, don't ruin this car for those of us who are waiting to buy a GT-R. Just man-up if you did infact abuse your car.

This post has been edited by NauAudiS6: Nov 19 2008, 03:52 AM

[Trailblazer]

We all, obviously, see the point in what you're trying to claim. But it's going to be a nearly impossible legal challenge when Nissan had you sign an agreement that fully detailed that turning VDC off voided the warranty (unless in mud or snow) if something broke during that usage.

Many cars state all kinds of things for their marketing. It doesn't mean everything a car is capable of has to be legally covered by a warranty. Do you think a 200+mph top-end on many of today's sportscars is covered under warranty should you take the car to a track and come anywhere near that speed and have something break? Most warranties are immediately void if you take the car to a track (unlike the GT-R). And they know you can't legally do 200mph on a city road or highway. Yet they use this 200mph top-end speed as part of their marketing. Get the point? Never in the history of automobile manufacturing has a car included an all-inclusive warranty that covers ever possible use of the car according to its mechanical "capabilities."

LC *can* be used by customers all day long and *does* work. There is no disputing that. However, the documentation for the car clearly states it is not covered by the warranty if you use it and should something break.

With all of that being said, the only 'grey area' I can see in all of this is if the car was misrepresented to you in someway in a DIRECT manner. i.e. Nissan's rep sold you the car and made you believe the launch control had nothing to do with turning the VDC off, etc. And you only discovered the opposite AFTER you bought the car. However, even with that scenario I think an attorney would simply say why didn't you try and return the car after realizing it wasn't covered under warranty rather than waiting until you broke something that you "knowingly" agreed would void the warranty in writing at the time of purchase to then file legal action?

I think it will be a nearly impossible legal battle to win.

John,

We have been through all of this in earlier threads - let's not hash it out over and over again. I don't agree with you, and the class action suit has already been started. I'm only interested in people who want to join the class.

Incidentally I have not broken my car YET, but I'm now afraid to use LC, the reason for which I bought the car. And yes, my salesman did set the buttons and let me launch my car 4 times on the test-drive. I was given no disclosure to sign and I DID TRY to return the car when I discovered 2 weeks later that people using LC were breaking transmissions and being denied warranty coverage, based only on arbitrary black box data. The dealership never responded to my emails and letters, so what choice did I have but to get a lawyer?

[gtrman]

No where did Nissan as an entity, or company, come out and claim these numbers using LC. It was the press that claimed them. How do you think Magazines come up with their times? Do you think they go "Hey, lets do a 2k rpm launch because it might ruin the consumers warranty if they try to match our acceleration times the same manner we conduct ours?" No they go "Hey lets take this to redline and drop the clutch and smoke this mothereffer while we're still allowed to drive it."

That brings me to my next point. Nissan has specifically stated "anything that breaks while VDC is off is not covered by the warranty." This leads me to my final point. Using any built-in feature in a reckless and abusive matter will void your warranty on said part on any car. Period. Such an example would be doing clutch-dump style launches in any car, another would be using LC on any car many times especially in a continuous manner. Let me ask you this. Lets say you sold some sort of electronic device. It's all the rage and everybody buys this thing, but there is an out break of them breaking because people are throwing them against the wall (even though you claim they're shock resistant). The people start asking for their money back for their broken devices. Would you give them their money back because they were broken outside of your specified use?

Your arguments are shakey at best, and I doubt they'll hold up in court unless you have one amazing lawyer. And please, don't ruin this car for those of us who are waiting to buy a GT-R. Just man-up if you did infact abuse your car.

+1

[M!!]

It was sneaky and misleading:

1. For Nissan to promote and even supervise performance tests advertised in several important auto magazines and videos, using launch control to obtain maximum performance figures, in order to attain a competitive advantage over other supercars - and then not allow the owner to use this built-in feature without voiding his warranty.

2. To promote the Jay Leno video, using a Nissan representative to illustrate the launch feature and promise, "A perfect launch every time you do it", without a disclaimer that this action will void your warranty if you break something.

3. To never directly mention the 'launch feature' in any of the owners manuals, but yet program LC into every GT-R whereby one is required to turn off the VDC in order to activate it. Then to state in the manual that turning off the VDC will void your warranty - basically a sneaky and under-handed way of saying that one can't use LC. Can anyone give me another example in any other automobile where turning the VDC off or using a built-in feature voids the automobile's warranty??

4. For Nissan to refuse to crack open a broken transmission for a possible low cost repair, but rather to rely on arbitrary black box evidence of an owner's driving habits in order to deny him warranty coverage. Then expect him to put out 20k for a new transmission which very possibly could have inherent structural defects, including the use of an improper and poorly-lubricating transmission oil.

5. Failure of disclosure on the part of Nissan as relates directly to the 'launch function', and it's proper use. Rather than denying the existence of LC and banning its use for coverage under the warranty, Nissan should instead have given guidelines for its proper use, without denying claims if the tranny gives out.


To summarize:

LC was created to be used by the journalists only to boast about the GT-R's better performance numbers and beat their competitors. It was never intended to be used by customers purchasing the vehicle. Nissan boosted sales through false and misleading advertising, provided inadequate disclosure regarding the warranty as it relates to LC, and then used the black box recordings to deny repairs.

WOW. YOU ARE SO SMART TO FIND OUT NOW. why weren't you smart enough to find out BEFORE you buy your GT-R?

Do you believe everything you read from journalists? how can that be considered as 'false and misleading advertising' by Nissan?

did you name all the magazines, journalists, and most importantly, Mr. Jay Leno in your lawsuit?

so when you were a kid and you use UUDDLRLR BABA and getting unlimited lives in your video game and then you toasted your SNES, nintendo has to pay for it?

or when you drink too much beer and voided your kidney and liver, the beer company has to pay because the beer girls are hot?

you forgot to mention the National Geographic video, with Mr. Carlos Ghosn said "YOU ARE A FAIL IF I SEE ONE ADVERTISING".

Nissan did not do any advertising on the GT-R.

[Trailblazer]

[quote name='NauAudiS6' date='Nov 19 2008, 01:46 AM' post='373978']
No where did Nissan as an entity, or company, come out and claim these numbers using LC.

REALLY?! Did you read the Motor Trend test, where Nissan senior project engineer Bruce Robinson was on hand to observe the test:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...test/index.html

Why don't you check out the difference between and LC and non-LC launch:
0-60 3.2 sec LC vs 4.0 sec non-LC
1/4 mile 11.6 sec LC vs 12.2 sec non-LC

Oh, and how about the video on Nissan own web site, where Nissan's CEO Carlos Ghosn claims 3.5 sec 0-60. Why don't you find me an expert driver from Nissan (or any driver) who will come on over and drive my bone stock GT-R 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, without use of LC, fancy tuning or stickier tires?

This post has been edited by Trailblazer: Nov 19 2008, 10:08 AM

[toprpm]

No where did Nissan as an entity, or company, come out and claim these numbers using LC.

REALLY?! Did you read the Motor Trend test, where Nissan senior project engineer Bruce Robinson was on hand to observe the test:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...test/index.html

Why don't you check out the difference between and LC and non-LC launch:
0-60 3.2 sec LC vs 4.0 sec non-LC
1/4 mile 11.6 sec LC vs 12.2 sec non-LC

Oh, and how about the video on Nissan own web site, where Nissan's CEO Carlos Ghosn claims 3.5 sec 0-60. Why don't you find me an expert driver from Nissan (or any driver) who will on come over and drive my bone stock GT-R 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, without use of LC, fancy tuning or stickier tires?

We received your note.

Who want to join you will PM you.


So don't try to fight back, as those who replay against you are or may be a NISSAN employe having enough time to call anyone fighting for his right a kid.


I agree on all what you said. and wish you best luck and wish you win it. as you will win it for all of us.

[NauAudiS6]

No where did Nissan as an entity, or company, come out and claim these numbers using LC.

REALLY?! Did you read the Motor Trend test, where Nissan senior project engineer Bruce Robinson was on hand to observe the test:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...test/index.html

Why don't you check out the difference between and LC and non-LC launch:
0-60 3.2 sec LC vs 4.0 sec non-LC
1/4 mile 11.6 sec LC vs 12.2 sec non-LC

Oh, and how about the video on Nissan own web site, where Nissan's CEO Carlos Ghosn claims 3.5 sec 0-60. Why don't you find me an expert driver from Nissan (or any driver) who will come on over and drive my bone stock GT-R 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, without use of LC, fancy tuning or stickier tires?

Yes I have read that review. Now please, tell me where Bruce is quoted as saying "By using the LC feature, you can get the GT-R to 60mph in x.xx seconds." Now show me where Nissan as an Entity and as a Company states anywhere in their own press releases and literature that using LC can get your car to 60 in x.xx seconds. If you've ever read the fine print on factory-stated performance figures they usually say, used in lehman's terms here, "These performance figures are the best times we've gotten, where the conditions were perfect to repeat said figures. Do not try on your own, and if you do try to repeat them but can't reproduce said times we're not held responsible."

In this situation, at best, you'll lose. Meanwhile Nissan says your warranty is still void b/c you've driven with VDC off, Bruce gets scolded for stating "false information," Nissan still does not aknowledge the use of LC, and you possibly piss off anybody who wants to willingly use LC despite it's "dangers" if Nissan disables LC on all cars. Your problem lies with the dealership, who falsely represented features of your car that are not aknowledged by Nissan Motor Company Ltd, and sold you a car under false pretenses. That also wont hold up in court because you don't have a legal document from the Dealership saying "Use LC as many times as you want, it's ok cause we say so."

This post has been edited by NauAudiS6: Nov 19 2008, 05:32 AM

[outlawz]

I have begun a class action against Nissan for issues relating to use of the launch control feature and denial by Nissan of warranty coverage. If anyone is sitting on a GT-R with a broken transmission, or haven't yet broken your transmission but are afraid to use 'launch control', you could speak to my lawyer and join the class action at no cost to you whatsoever.

I am not interested in the rest of you who think this case is a pile of hogwash. I have already heard what you have to say, and your opinion is irrelevant now.

But for those of you who feel you have been mislead and wronged by Nissan's sneaky policies to deny you use of a feature built into this car, please let me know by private message and I will refer you to my attorney. Thank you.

what do you want as compensation from nissan?

[REK125]

While our country has evolved into a litiginous society in which everyone threatens suit over every perceived wrong, I believe Trailblazer has some validity to his argument. I have never used LC and never intend to do so. However, the promotional material used by Nissan was misleading. Having to sign an agreement before taking possession of the car could be viewed as coersion. Exploiting LC for promotional purposes and then threatening to void a warranty if VSC is turned off (a prerequisite for using LC) is absurd. Nissan cannot have it both ways.

This post has been edited by REK125: Nov 19 2008, 06:23 AM

[Goodwood]

Class action!? Ya, GL with that. Doesn't a class action suit require a significant group of people to participate in to work? What do you have, two litigants? You are wasting your time and your money. C'mon man, sell your car and get on with the business of living.

This post has been edited by Goodwood: Nov 19 2008, 06:25 AM

[Scotts-GTR]

If I sign on, what is in it for me? What do I get out of it if we win?

[jaspergtr]

perhaps the ability to break a transmission under warranty, and have it replaced by nissan.

[toprpm]

perhaps the ability to break a transmission under warranty, and have it replaced by nissan.

Which we all want

To be able to drive with worry free from breaking it.

To be able to beat any car from 0-60, WHICH the only thing that it can do well other than tracking it.

[tekknikal]

We have been through all of this in earlier threads - let's not hash it out over and over again. I don't agree with you, and the class action suit has already been started. I'm only interested in people who want to join the class.

thread cleaned.
from here forward, please restrict this topic to people interested in joining the class action lawsuit and discussion related to that.

[amfaster]

That brings me to my next point. Nissan has specifically stated "anything that breaks while VDC is off is not covered by the warranty." This leads me to my final point. Using any built-in feature in a reckless and abusive matter will void your warranty on said part on any car. Period. Such an example would be doing clutch-dump style launches in any car, another would be using LC on any car many times especially in a continuous manner. Let me ask you this. Lets say you sold some sort of electronic device. It's all the rage and everybody buys this thing, but there is an out break of them breaking because people are throwing them against the wall (even though you claim they're shock resistant). The people start asking for their money back for their broken devices. Would you give them their money back because they were broken outside of your specified use?

Your arguments are shakey at best, and I doubt they'll hold up in court unless you have one amazing lawyer. And please, don't ruin this car for those of us who are waiting to buy a GT-R. Just man-up if you did infact abuse your car.

How could he ruin the car? At the least, people with broken cars will get to find out what broke and why. At the most, they get hit with a false advertising and the LC is removed, which for the people who call LC abuse and would never do it anyways, is irrelevant. Nissan isnt going to need to change anything else. If these guys somehow win, and Nissan has to replace the broken trannies, you can certainly kiss LC goodbye IMO.Anyone know if the full drivetrain warranty is reinstated upon repair? So if any related parts outside the gearbox were to fail, would they still be covered? If not that could really hurt resale value.

This is the U.S., and corporations have gotten sued over lesser wrongs. Like electronics companies (panasonic, etc) getting sued because people were using the navigation systems while driving and crashing because they couldnt multi-task. Now you have to hack the navs to put in addresses while driving.

Just a thought.

AM

[anthonyf]

I agree with Trailbazer and feel frustrated that the LC features is basically a warranty voiding tool. Why include the a specific feature on the car and threaten warrenties if we actually want to use it. I don't think using a specific feature on the car could be considered abuse, or if it is why did Nissan include it? For the press to get 3.2 - 3.5 0-60?

Nissan has been very careful to not to explicitly claim that 0-60 time in advertising, but many Nissan people have claimed it including Ghosn.

0-60 is not the only or even main reason I bought the car, however this reputation of glass tranny (true or false) will hurt the value of the car. That is the main loss to us all.

Nissan need to come clean, about the situation, they have not explicitly stated do not use the LC, but indirectly banned its use. I believe Nissan needs to admit, what we all know, that you cannot use the LC, therefore you cannot achieve a sub 4 second 0-60. Since the LC would probably considered a journalist only feature, that has created expectations for the car that owners cannot replicate, without risking 20k each and every use.

I cannot understand why owners would not want at least a more explicit statement and cheaper / free correction of any tranny issues.