Hyundai named in class action lawsuit over engine defect

This is a class action on behalf of current or former owners and/or lessees of a 2011 – 2015 Hyundai Sonata with a 1.6- liter turbo Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) 4-cylinder engine.


As alleged, each Subject Vehicle is equipped with a 1.6-liter turbo Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) 4-cylinder engine. Upon information and belief, under normal use and with proper maintenance, the engines in Subject Vehicles suffer from inadequate engine oil lubrication, which causes the engines and their subject components to wear prematurely and ultimately cause catastrophic engine failure.

The connecting rod bearings within Subject Vehicles additionally suffer from failure caused by metal debris circulating within the engine via the engine oil. The oil contamination and inadequate engine lubrication cause the connecting rod bearings to break and release even more metal debris into the engine oil. Consequently, contaminated oil begins to recirculate throughout the engine, causing further engine damage and eventual catastrophic engine failure.


Hyundai named in class action lawsuit over defect in powertrain


Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of all similarly situated persons in the United States who purchased or leased 2017 Hyundai Santa Fe vehicles that were designed, manufactured, distributed, marketed, sold and leased by Defendant Hyundai Motor America.

According to the complaint, beginning in 2016, if not before, Defendant knew that the Class Vehicles contain one or more defects that cause, among other problems, significantly delayed acceleration, loss of power, or rough shifting (“Powertrain Defect”). The Powertrain Defect has been documented to occur without warning during vehicle operation and poses an extreme and unreasonable safety hazard to drivers, passengers and pedestrians. Numerous Class Vehicle owners have reported a significant delay in the Class Vehicle’s response while attempting to accelerate from a stop and/or while cruising in situations that require the ability to accelerate rapidly (e.g., merging on to the highway, changing lanes, etc.). Other Class Vehicle owners have reported jerking, lurching, and/or engine revving associated with the delayed acceleration.


Hyundai named in class action lawsuit over defective engines


This consumer class action arises from defective Theta II engines found in hundreds of thousands of Hyundai and Kia vehicles in the United States.

As alleged, the Theta II engine’s fuel injection system causes contaminants to enter the engine’s oil supply. Initial symptoms of the Defect include a knocking noise from the engine, a reduction in engine power, and engine stalling events (the “Defect”). When the level of contaminants in the oil supply sufficiently thicken the Theta II engine’s oil supply, the engine fails, leading to an immediate loss of engine power and power steering. The Defect thus creates a safety hazard for not only the vehicle’s occupants but the occupants of nearby vehicles. Countless consumer complaints to Hyundai, Kia and traffic safety authorities detail the safety risks and economic burdens of vehicles prone to total and unexpected engine failure.

The only remedy for the Defect is replacing the engine with another defective Theta II engine. Though the Defect is covered by Defendants’ written 10-year, 100,000 mile powertrain warranties, Defendants routinely deny warranty coverage to engines consumed by the Defect by blaming the engine-killing oil sludge on inadequate maintenance or the use of aftermarket oil filters.

Between 2015 and 2017, Defendants recalled 1.5 million vehicles with Theta II engines in North America. Each recall addressed knocking noises, engine stalls, and sudden engine failures. Though the recalls cover Theta II engines manufactured over a five-year period in at least two continents, in each instance, Defendants attributed the recall to the same underlying cause: leftover metal debris in the engine from the manufacturing process.

Reports suggest that in 2016, a Hyundai engineer informed the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) that Defendants have long been aware that the Theta II engines possess a design flaw affecting all Theta II engines. These reports are consistent with the experience of Plaintiff and countless other owners and lessees of vehicles with defective Theta II engines that have not been recalled (the “Class Vehicles”). Non-recalled Theta II engines are failing because of the Defect in numbers that in some cases exceed the failure rates of recalled vehicles.

This case seeks protection and relief for owners of the Class Vehicles for the harm they have suffered, and the safety risks they face, from Defendants’ unfair, unlawful, and deceptive trade practices.


Hyundai named in class action lawsuit over defect in steering mechanism in Accent and Elantra vehicles

Plaintiffs filed this class action on behalf of a class of Hyundai Accent and Elantra owners alleging the vehicles were sold with a faulty steering mechanism.  According to the complaint, a defect in Hyundai’s steering mechanism causes the power steering to stop working suddenly, causing the wheel to lock or become difficult or impossible to turn at all.

The faulty steering mechanism is found on at least the following models: Hyundai Accent (model years 2013-2016) and Hyundai Elantra (model years 2013-2016), collectively defined as the “Vehicles.” Hyundai’s defective steering mechanism severely inhibits drivers’ ability to react to and/or avoid other cars, pedestrians, or obstacles. The Vehicles’ steering defects have been the subject of a large number of consumer complaints.

The complaint contends that Hyundai has long known about the problem but has not notified consumers. Previous Hyundai models had the same or a similar defect, which Hyundai was slow to acknowledge. Indeed, in 2016, Hyundai issued a recall concerning a similar defect in 2011 Sonata vehicles. The steering problem was caused by conflicting steering wheel input data which caused the power steering to turn off.


Hyundai settles engine defect class action


This settlement resolves lawsuits that were filed against Hyundai Motor America and Hyundai Motor Company alleging that an engine defect caused stalling, engine noise, or oil lamp illumination in the 2011-2014 Hyundai Sonata with a 2.0 liter or 2.4 liter gasoline direct injection engine.

The settlement extends the Powertrain Warranty for the engine short block assembly. It also provides cash reimbursements for certain repairs and repair-related expenses, such as rental cars and towing. The settlement also provides cash reimbursement for certain trade-ins and sales of unrepaired vehicles.

To qualify you must have bought or leased a “Class Vehicle,” which are 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 model year Hyundai Sonatas with a Theta II 2.0 liter or 2.4 liter gasoline direct injection engine.

To file a claim or get additional information, visit the settlement website at

Hyundai named in class action over undisclosed defect in the engine’s rotating assembly of 2011- 2015 Hyundai Sonatas




Plaintiff and the class members she proposes to represent are owners or lessees of 2011- 2015 Hyundai Sonatas that were manufactured with an undisclosed defect in the engine’s rotating assembly. The rotating assembly cannot withstand the long-term stress generated within the Sonata’s combustion chambers and fails within the useful life of the engine (most failures occur between 60,000 to 90,000 miles). When the rotating assembly fails, it does so without warning and causes the engine to seize suddenly—leaving Sonata drivers without power and struggling to maneuver the vehicle to safety.

As alleged, rather than addressing this safety problem by warning drivers and recalling its dangerous vehicles, Hyundai has concealed the problem from consumers and implemented a concerted practice of denying warranty coverage for failed engines. Hyundai tells Sonata owners that they must submit a complete record of the vehicle’s maintenance history before making a warranty claim—even though it knows that Sonata engines fail regardless of owner maintenance and that the faulty rotating assembly is responsible. For those warranty claims that are submitted, Hyundai’s practice is to deny them based on inadequate maintenance records or improper maintenance. Hyundai denies that engine failures are widespread in Sonata vehicles and blames its customers for the problem—forcing them to pay as much as $10,000 for an engine replacement.

Plaintiff seeks to certify a class action against Hyundai for violating California’s consumer protection laws. Among other things, Plaintiff seeks an order requiring Hyundai to immediately disclose the existence of the rotating assembly defect and its associated risks to all existing and prospective customers, to repair the defect and all resulting damage in Sonata vehicles free of charge, and to cease selling Sonatas through its dealerships until the defect is repaired.




Hyundai Motor America recalls 2008-2010 Elantra vehicles over failure in electronic power steering

Hyundai Motor America is recalling certain model year 2008-2010 Elantra vehicles manufactured June 1, 2008, to April 30, 2010, and 2009-2010 Elantra Touring vehicles manufactured November 1, 2008, to April 30, 2010. The electronic power steering (EPS) electronic control unit (ECU) may sense a discrepancy in the steering input signals and, as a result, disable the steering power assist.

If power steering assist is lost, greater driver effort would be required to steer the vehicle at low speeds, increasing the risk of a crash.

Approximately 204,768 vehicles are affected by the recall.


Hyundai named in class action lawsuit over false and deceptive conduct associated with sale of Blue Link Telematics System


The class action lawsuit challenges the unlawful scheme engaged in by Defendant Hyundai Motor America (hereinafter “Defendant” or “Hyundai”) in the selling and continued servicing of its telematics remote monitoring feature, “Blue Link Telematics System.” The term “telematics” refers to the branch of information technology that deals with the long-distance transmission of computerized information. The term has evolved to refer to automobile systems that combine global position satellite tracking and other wireless communications for automatic roadside assistance and remote diagnostics, first popularized by General Motors Corporation with its OnStar system.

Beginning in 2011, Hyundai introduced the Hyundai Blue Link Telematics System in certain models of its 2012 model year line-up, including the popular Hyundai Sonata. According to Hyundai, the Blue Link system “uses an enhanced cellular network, with automatic roaming, that optimizes connections and prioritizes emergency requests.” With Blue Link, Hyundai customers get automatic emergency assistance in the event of a collision, point-of-interest search and navigation assistance, the ability to remotely operate various vehicle features, and self-diagnostic vehicle reports. Though Hyundai owners must subscribe in order to receive the benefits of the Blue Link system, all necessary hardware for the Blue Link system is a “standard feature” included in the sale price of Blue Link equipped Hyundai vehicles.

Purchasers of Blue Link equipped Hyundai vehicles were provided with a trial subscription period ranging from 3 months to one year free of charge. Following the expiration of the free trial period, Hyundai owners had the option to pay for continued Blue Link subscription service or to pay nothing and allow the Blue Link subscription service to lapse. If Hyundai owners either did not subscribe to Blue Link or thereafter allowed their subscription to lapse, Hyundai provided a telephone number that the vehicle owner, or any subsequent owner of that vehicle, could call in order to reactivate the Blue Link service for a “nominal connection fee.”

At no time from 2011 through the end of 2014, did Hyundai inform purchasers of its Blue Link equipped vehicles that if owners did not subscribe to the Blue Link subscription service, the Blue Link Telematics hardware would be rendered nonfunctional and would require replacement at the customer’s expense if they, or a subsequent owner of the vehicle, desired to reactivate the Blue Link subscription service at a later time.

As alleged, on or about January 7, 2015, Hyundai notified owners of its Blue Link equipped vehicles whose Blue Link subscription services had been inactive for more than one year, that “If you do not reactivate your Blue Link services by January 15, 2015, your current Blue Link system in your vehicle will be permanently disabled.” In the same notice, Hyundai informed said owners that “[reactivating your Blue Link services after it is disabled will require a hardware change, dealer-assisted installation, and will cost a minimum of $500 to replace the telematics unit plus any applicable subscription fees.”

In threatening to permanently disable the Blue Link Telematics hardware, Hyundai forced owners of its Blue Link equipped vehicles to choose between: a) subscribing to the Blue Link service, that they previously had been informed was optional; or b) allowing the Blue Link Telematics hardware that they had purchased with their vehicles to be rendered non-functional, thereby devaluing their vehicles, and requiring a significant additional expense in the event they, or any subsequent owner, desired to avail themselves of the Blue Link subscription service.

As alleged, Hyundai’s actions constitute a breach of contract terms of the sale of Blue Link equipped Hyundai vehicle as provided for in the Monroney Sticker affixed to such vehicles which included as a “STANDARD FEATURE” the “Hyundai Blue LinkTM Telematics System.” It also constitutes a breach Hyundai’s representation to owners, as set forth in Hyundai’s Blue Link Handbook, that if they declined enrollment in the Blue Link subscription service, the Blue Link service could later “be reactivated by the owner or subsequent owners” for “a nominal reconnection fee.”



Hyundai Motor Corp. and Kia Motors settled a class-action lawsuit alleging gas mileage ratings were overstated for $395 millon

After an investigation by the Environmental Protection Agency, Hyundai and Kia Motors agreed to restate expected gas mileage in November 2012 for 1.1 million vehicles in North America. The automakers admitted they after overstated mileage claims on vehicle window stickers for 900,000 vehicles in the United States. The settlement impacts about 600,000 of Hyundai’s 2011-13 models and about 300,000 of Kia‘s 2011-13 models in the U.S.

Hyundai and Kia agreed to provide a lifetime reimbursement program to cover additional fuel costs associated with the rating change — plus a 15 percent premium in acknowledgment of the inconvenience to customers. Owners and drivers leasing vehicles are compensated based on their actual mileage and the fuel costs for the region in which they live; they must go to a dealership to have their odometers read.

The 2012 restatement reduced Hyundai-Kia’s fleetwide average fuel economy from 27 to 26 mpg for the 2012 model year. Individual ratings, depending on the car, will fall from 1 mpg to 6 mpg. Most vehicles saw combined city-highway efficiency drop by 1 mpg.

The global settlement will resolve more than 50 lawsuits filed across the country to address the issue.

The proposed cash amount, which varies by vehicle model and ownership type, will result in an average payment of $353 to Hyundai owners and lessees. For Kia owners, the proposed average cash lump-sum amount will be about $667.

Hyundai and Kia owners can also elect other options such as a dealership credit of 150 percent of the lump sum amount, or a credit of 200 percent of the cash amount toward the purchase of a new Kia or Hyundai.

Additional information about the settlement can be found at or

Hyundai named in class action lawsuit over misrepresenting fuel efficiency of 2011-2013 Elantra vehicles

The lawsuit claims Defendant Hyundai Motor America touted that its Elantra vehicles would get approximately 40 miles to a gallon.  As alleged, in truth the vehicles would only get mileage in the low 30’s which was materially different that what was advertised and promised to consumers.