Certain General Motors Yukon SUVs Have Tail Light Defects, Car Owners And Others End Up Facing Heightened Security Concern
Yukon SUV models are involved in a recent class action filing arguing that the car manufacturer sold them despite knowing that they have faulty tail lights that affect the driver’s and passenger’s safety.
This Article Covers Multiple Cases
California Lawsuit Claims General Motors Should Be Held Responsible For Faulty Yukon Cars
Filed in a federal court in California, the GM Yukon Tail Light Class Action Lawsuit 2021 is suing the car company General Motors in court for various charges.
According to the case’s leading complainant Bruce Schramm, many car owners and leaseholders of later models of GM Yukon SUVs were forced to pay fees out-of-pocket to have the defective tail lights fixed.
It is said that GM already acknowledged the faulty car part in earlier makes, but the carmaker allegedly refused to admit that the faulty tail light issue is also present in some of the latest releases they had.
The said brake tail light defects on the said models pose a safety hazard to car owners. As a remedy, the broken rear-end lights need to be mended. In many cases, the repairs are costly, and owners end up paying for the costs.
Per the class action, there are possibly two reasons behind the said rear-end brake light issue. One of them is an allegedly defective LED (light-emitting diode) strip component used in the tail light. Additionally, it is also believed that a present broken circuit board is also to blame.
Plaintiff Bruce Schramm Shares His Ordeal, Wants Court To Take Action
Schramm shared that he owned a GM Yukon SUV 2017 model and experienced a faulty tail light. Both right and left lamps ended up being damaged, and he ended up paying for repairs to fix the concern. Due to how the lights were designed, they need to be replaced entirely.
The GM Yukon Tail Light Class Action Lawsuit is contending that present GM Yukon SUV customers would not have bought or paid for the vehicle had they known the issue surrounding the car models’ tail light issue. Furthermore, plaintiff Schramm contended that the defects plaguing his and other people’s cars ultimately diminish the perceived value of their vehicles.
The class action is asking the court to consider the formation of a Class group consisting of car owners and leaseholders of the following GM Yukon SUVs released in the years 2017-2019: Yukon Denali, Yukon Denali XL, Yukon, and Yukon XL.
GMC Yukon Class Action Should Be Dismissed – GM
The GM Yukon Tail Light Class Action Lawsuit should be dismissed for the one Yukon owner who filed the case allegedly doesn’t legally own the SUV, says GM.
Claims Made by Lead Plaintiff R. Small
Rhonda Small, the lead plaintiff, says she owns a 2017 GMC Yukon, which she acquired in February 2017, but after nearly four years, the passenger-side Yukon tail light failed and required replacement.
Small filed the GM Yukon Tail Light Class Action Lawsuit over allegations that the tail light assemblies are faulty in the 2017-2019 model:
- GMC Yukon
- GMC Yukon XL
- GMC Yukon Denali, and
- GMC Yukon Denali XL
As per the plaintiff, the tail lamps or their particular components within the tail lamp housing or assembly become inoperative.
The plaintiff states that the replacement of the GMC Yukon tail light costs $671.85, and for many years, GM has been aware of the problem.
The class action alleges the automaker is aware of the tail light problems based on GM’s special coverage adjustment (SCA) program.
GM allegedly is aware of the issues based on a number of complaints filed on the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) website about the questioned vehicles and lodged on online forums.
The lawsuit also alleges General Motors knows about alleged tail light defects based on the bench testing of the SUVs.
Taking the Yukons to a dealership for repairs or replacements would be a waste of time since replacement tail light parts are usually on backorder.
GM’s Motion for Dismissal
General Motors argues that the class action lawsuit should be dismissed because the plaintiff who sued is not the legal owner of the GMC Yukon she sued over.
According to GM, the plaintiff’s lawsuit has an overwhelming defect: she never purchased, or leased, or owned any of the stated vehicles in her class definition.
Attorneys for GM state the plaintiff doesn’t have the standing to press charges because GM’s records confirm that a corporate entity purchased and owns the 2017 GMC Yukon XL that the plaintiff claims to own. This means she allegedly lacks the standing to assert claims for a class of owners that she is not a member of.
GM also argues that she couldn’t have suffered any injury for a vehicle she doesn’t own and that she cannot assert claims for GMC Yukons beyond the 2017 model.
Moreover, GM added how the plaintiff admits that GM issued an extended warranty — a program called a special coverage adjustment — for the Yukon tail lights.
The GM Yukon Tail Light Class Action Lawsuit alleges that the SCA replaced faulty GMC Yukon tail lights for free, reimbursed owners as well as lessees who paid out of pocket for the Yukon tail light replacements and covered the said replacements for 6 years or 72,000 miles. However, the lawsuit states that GM didn’t include the 2017 GMC Yukon in its SCA program.
In its motion for dismissal, GM says that it is plainly false, GM has issued a revised SCA that extends the warranty program to the 2017 vehicles, namely:
- GMC Yukon
- Yukon XL
- Yukon Denali, and
- Yukon Denali XL
Further, GM states that the business that made the purchase of the GMC Yukon, allegedly owned by Small, received a notice of the tail light SCA extension in June 2020.
The non-ownership issue is allegedly enough to throw out the whole class action lawsuit. Moreover, General Motors also points out that the warranty claims failed because the plaintiff does not have a direct relationship with GM. Further, the plaintiff allegedly did not provide the pre-suit notice to the automaker.
Claims Against GM, Fails
According to GM, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claim also fails because it does not have 100-named plaintiffs, which is the minimum requirement for the class action lawsuits.
The motion to dismiss also argues that the plaintiff failed to file her claim within the applicable four-year limitations.
The motion also alleges the Yukon tail light replacement lawsuit never identifies any misleading statements by General Motors and allegedly provides no information about the vaguely-referenced “bench testing” performed by GM.
As for complaints to government agencies, GM argues that every referenced complaint post-dates the plaintiff’s vehicle purchase.
Editor’s Note on GM Yukon Tail Light Class Action Lawsuit 2021:
This class action feature discusses the latest legal case filed against car company General Motors, this time involving some models from their Yukon SUV car lineup. The case alleges that the company released certain Yukon that have defective tail lights. A class action was also filed against Hyundai over faulty wheels.
Case Name(s) & No.: Bruce Schramm v. General Motors LLC; Case No.: 2:21-cv-06463
Jurisdiction: United States (U.S.) District Court for the Central District of California
Products/Services Involved: Yukon Denali (2017-2019 models), Yukon Denali XL (2017-2019 releases), Yukon (2017-2019 makes), and Yukon XL (2017-2019 year models)
Allegation(s): A number of GM Yukon SUV models contained defects on their rear-end tail lamp components.
What are your thoughts on this piece? Please send us a message by clicking the ‘Contact Us’ button below! We’d love to hear back from you.