Jury awards 150-truck fleet upwards of $1M in case against Navistar’s MaxxForce engines

[kscarbel2]

Commercial Carrier Journal (CCJ)  /  March 5, 2019

Navistar, parent company of International Trucks, has been ordered by an Ohio-based jury to pay Dutch Maid Logistics, a 150-truck fleet out of Willard, Ohio, at least $1.3 million in damages relating to Navistar’s now-defunct MaxxForce engine line.

A Navistar spokesperson said the company is disappointed in the ruling and that Navistar is “reviewing its options” for proceeding.

Attorneys for Dutch Maid say the final settlement could reach upwards of $2 million, once payback for attorney’s fees has been calculated. The jury in Licking County, Ohio, common court awarded Dutch Maid $1.025 million in punitive damages and another $275,000 in damages for allegedly concealing MaxxForce engine defects that the company knew existed.

In August 2017, after Navistar was ordered to pay more than $30 million to 400-truck fleet Milan Supply Chain Solutions, the company denied allegations that it hid known defects from customers. Then, the company said in a statement that its engines had undergone millions of miles of testing and that the company was “confident, based on this testing, that the product would perform” properly. It also said it had successfully defended similar lawsuits.

Navistar in March 2016 reached a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission for $7.5 million to end a criminal probe into the accusations that it misled investors about the alleged defects of the MaxxForce line.

The company has since discontinued the manufacturing and sale of its MaxxForce engines and revamped its truck and engine lineup. Warrantable claims on the engines spurred billions of dollars in financial losses for the company between 2012 and 2016, though in more recent years the company has turned a profit.

Navistar was the only North American engine maker to opt to pursue exhaust gas recirculation — instead of the DEF-based aftertreatment system — to meet tighter federal emissions standards that took place in 2010. However, it abandoned its EGR-only strategy in 2012 and instead introduced new engines that use exhaust aftertreatment.

[DailyDiesel]

Send the bill directly to Daniel Ustian's attention.

[kscarbel2]

Navistar Gains Reversal of Massive MaxxForce Judgment

David Cullen, Heavy Duty Trucking (HDT)  /  August 20, 2019

A state appellate court on Aug. 14 reversed a judgment against Navistar Inc. that resulted from a lawsuit in which a motor carrier alleged that trucks it purchased powered by the MaxxForce 13L diesel engine were defective.

Two years ago, to the day, on Aug. 14, 2017, a Tennessee jury found against Navistar and awarded $10.8 million in actual damages and $20 million in punitive damages to Milan Supply Chain Solutions (formerly known as Milan Express), which had purchased 243 Navistar International ProStars with MaxxForce engines.

Tennessee-based Milan had alleged that Navistar had failed to disclose that the MaxxForce 13L engine, which used exhaust gas recirculation to meet 2010 emissions standards rather than the selective catalytic reduction used by other truck and engine makers, was launched with “serious known defects.”

The carrier also alleged that Navistar, while touting the quality of its testing program, knew that the testing had serious flaws, was incomplete at launch, and put the trucks into customers’ hands knowing that the customers would end up becoming the de facto test fleet for the new 2010-year model engine.

After that judgment, Navistar said in a statement that it would evaluate its options to challenge it, noting it had successfully defended similar claims in several jurisdictions, including dismissal of claims of fraud in courts in Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama, and Illinois.

On Aug. 14, 2019, the Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the 2017 decision. The appellate court stated that Navistar’s appeal “raised a plethora of issues for our consideration,” including one that hinged on the court’s reading of the “economic loss doctrine” for product liability cases  that is enshrined in Tennessee law.

What that boils down to is that in a product liability action, what a plaintiff can recover for purely economic losses is that defined in a contract (such as a warranty), not that resulting from a tort suit.

The appellate judges ruled that based on several findings, “including our conclusion that the asserted fraud claims are barred by the economic loss doctrine,” the court reversed the judgment award to Milan.

[kscarbel2]

Tennessee Supreme Court to hear fleet’s case against Navistar over MaxxForce EGR engines

Matt Cole, Commercial Carrier Journal (CCJ)  /  January 22, 2020

The Tennessee Supreme Court will hear an appeal in a case between Tennessee-based Milan Express and Navistar, the maker of International Trucks, over alleged defects in the company’s MaxxForce engine line.

In August 2019, an appellate court tossed a decision that required Navistar to pay Milan $30.8 million in damages to the fleet. Milan appealed the appellate court’s decision to the state’s highest court, which announced Jan. 16 it would hear the case.

Milan, a roughly 400-truck fleet out of Milan, Tennessee, purchased 243 International ProStar tractors equipped with MaxxForce engines in 2011 and 2012. A jury in 2017 sided with Milan in the case, awarding the carrier $10.8 million for compensatory damages related to repairs for the engines and $20 million in punitive damages.

A judge recently approved Navistar’s proposed settlement of $135 million that will be paid out to owners of certain International trucks equipped with defective model year 2011-2014 MaxxForce 11- or 13-liter engines. The Milan case has no bearing on the class action lawsuit. As part of the class action settlement, owners of affected trucks can choose to receive up to $2,500 in cash, up to a $10,000 rebate on a new Navistar truck with proof of ownership/lease, or up to $15,000 in repayment for repair costs for each affected truck they owned or leased.

[Bullheaded]

On 3/6/2019 at 1:00 PM, DailyDiesel said:

Send the bill directly to Daniel Ustian's attention.

Send the bill to the EPA and the government for forcing this crap to market, that is doing NOTHING to save the environment.

We could all be driving reliable trucks that get 10 MPG right now if it wasn't for this crap.

[DailyDiesel]

On 1/26/2020 at 8:47 AM, Bullheaded said:

Send the bill to the EPA and the government for forcing this crap to market, that is doing NOTHING to save the environment.

We could all be driving reliable trucks that get 10 MPG right now if it wasn't for this crap.

True, but Ustain repeatedly pushed the "magic pill" of EGR in the Maxxforce line despite his engineers telling him it was flawed product that would never work correctly.

Quote

The suits also point to confidential witness testimony in lawsuits claiming Navistar violated securities laws, who say chief engineers in the company presented to former Navistar President and CEO Dan Ustian their concerns with the engines but the company proceeded with them anyhow. Engineers for the company also told their supervisors that the level of EGR the company wanted — along with its fuel economy and performance parameters — “was not possible” per the “physics of EGR,” according to the lawsuit.

The company also halted any work on SCR as a fall-back and threatened to fire employees who discussed “alternate solutions to…EGR,” the lawsuit claims.

From this article as CCJ.com

So the end sum was Navistar trying to meet ridiculous government mandates with unreliable technology.