This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
Breach of Warranty
Fraud and Deceit

Brightk Consulting Inc., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, and the general public v. BMW of North America LLC, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

Published: Aug. 25, 2023 | Result Date: Jan. 3, 2023 | Filing Date: Dec. 16, 2021 |

Case number: 8:21-cv-02063-CJC-JDE Settlement –  Reimbursement

Judge

Cormac J. Carney

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Hovanes Margarian
(The Margarian Law Firm)

Armen Margarian
(The Margarian Law Firm)

Shushanik Margarian
(The Margarian Law Firm)


Defendant

Zourik Zarifian
(Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith LLP)

Eric Y. Kizirian
(Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith LLP)


Facts

On December 16, 2021, BrightK Consulting Inc., filed suit on behalf of itself, all others similarly situated, and the general public against BMW of North America, LLC.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: The plaintiff contended that the defendant sold vehicles with defective cupholders, including the 2019-2022 BMW X5, 2020-2022 X6, 2019-2022 X7, 2020-2022 X5M, and 2020-2022 X6M; that the defective cupholders did not actually hold cups filled with liquid, allowing them to spill; that spilled liquids seeped into the airbag control module below the cupholders, getting its wires wet and damages; and that this damage could cause the air bags to inadvertently deploy. The plaintiff further contended this defect exposed consumers to the risk of accident or death; that the defendant knew of the defective design; and that it failed to notify owners and lessees of the defects. Finally, the plaintiff contended that, as a result of the defendant's design and conduct, it was liable for fraud and deceit; had breached express warranties; had breached implied warranties; had violated the Song-Beverly Warranty Act; had violated the Consumer Legal Remedies Act; had violated the Unfair Competition Law; had violated Section 17500 et seq. of the Business and Professions Code; was strictly liable for the defective design; and was negligent.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: The defendant denied any wrongdoing or liability and all the plaintiff's material allegations.

Result

The parties reached an agreement wherein the defendant admitted no wrongdoing or liability but agreed to provide free repairs, reimbursement for out-of-pocket costs, and an extended warranty period to settle class members' claims.


#141323

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390