A motion GM filed to compel arbitration in an Ohio lawsuit over allegedly excessive oil consumption and defective piston rings in the Generation IV 5.3L Vortec V8 engine has been denied by the judge as the latest event in a protracted legal action now dragging on for almost four years.
The judge in the case, Charles Fleming, denied the motion because GM did not file it until two years after the lawsuit started, CarComplaints reports, noting that because the automaker did so and offered no explanation, “the Court finds that Defendant waived any right it may have had to compel arbitration.”
The lawsuit relates to a 2013 Chevy Silverado pickup purchased new in 2013 by plaintiff Lisa Mae Jennings. Jennings’ class action suit claims multiple repairs had to be made to the vehicle relating to excessive oil consumption and was originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio during December 2020.
The suit is one of a series related to similar or identical problems across a range of General Motors vehicles powered by the Vortec V8. Among the models included are the following:
- 2010-2014 Chevrolet Silverado
- 2010-2014 Chevrolet Suburban
- 2010-2014 Chevrolet Tahoe
- 2010-2014 Chevrolet Avalanche
- 2010-2014 GMC Sierra
- 2010-2014 GMC Yukon
- 2010-2014 GMC Yukon XL
Counter to these claims, GM argues “the truck has not needed any other repairs, and plaintiff has never had an oil consumption test performed on her 2013 Silverado.” The automaker also asserts that “there is no evidence that any of the repairs to her truck had anything to do with excess oil consumption or a piston ring defect,” while pointing out Jennings has driven her truck more than 100,000 miles and allegedly has provided no evidence of excess oil use.
GM called for the case to be dismissed in January of this year, while the motion for arbitration was filed last November. This was based on the written arbitration agreement signed by Jennings at the time of purchase. If successful, the motion would have compelled Jennings to agree to arbitration based on those terms.
This avenue has been denied to GM by the judge’s decision, so the lawsuit will continue toward the start of its fifth year.
Comments
It would be interesting to see the ROs for the alleged issue! Did she dealership do the repairs to address her concerns, as “concerns” which were not proven via an “Oil Consumption Test” performed by the dealer?
An “Oil Consumption Test” is where the dealer notes the start of the test on an RO, so the paper trail starts. After the initial oil change, with the oil at the “FULL” level when the vehicle leaves, the customer returns every week for a dealership employee to check the oil level and note it, for more documentation, until the level reaches “1 Quart Low”. Time and mileage are recorded. If the oil is consumed fast enough, a quart might be added and the test continues until that quart is consumed. Generally, it takes a completed test for ANY related work, even engine replacement under the normal factory warranty, to be approved and happen.
We had a customer with a ’90s DeVille that we had done ALL of the oil changes on since new. The Oil Consumption Test met GM’s “excessive use” criteria, so it got a new crate engine near the end of the factory warranty at 50K miles.
The fact the mentioned litigation has drug on this long sounds like the judge is not interested in hearing the case, to me. On the surface, the fact the customer did not participate in the needed Oil Consumption Test is telling. Knowing “the rest of the story”, from 100K miles of dealership ROs, is necessary, too! We are not hearing the full story, no matter what.
We currently own 2 Chevy’s that supposedly have oil consumption issues. A ’21 TB w/1.3L turbo, and ’24 6.6L HD gasser. The TB is approaching 38k, my HD just turned 8k. Neither have had any issues, and I’ve been checking levels frequently, and especially nearing their current oil life cycle. I paid for lifetime oil changes through our local GM dealer, so the vehicles seldom go much past the recommended change interval. I have a gut feeling that most of these oil consumption issues are due to the lube tech’s not properly filling them full to start with, the owner then checks the oil in a few hundred miles and see that the levels are low so they “assume” that the engine is consuming oil. I believe it mostly comes from not topping the oil off after the new filter fills up, after the initial start-up. I’ve logged close to, or over 500K miles with various GM vehicles & various engines since 1999, and I’ve never had an oil-burner.
Customers for life Mary Barra? lol.
What a shame GM walks away from its customers.
Thankfully there will be no arbitration. Sadly the arbitration from GMs 2019 improperly closed Lordstown complex is still being stalled by GMs lawyers.
Even if customers win, lawyers will get most of the settlement and owners a few hundred dollars voucher off next gm vehicle purchase or something similar.
Don’t buy anything Gm folks.You will win on day one.If you buy Gm I prefer not to hear about it due to the fact Gm customers had issues for a very long time now and the courts are such a slow process.I hope the judge drives Gm products.😁🤣 most vehicles these days are proved to be unreliable and cost more to own than ever before.The car industry wants your cars serviced at Dealerships so they can make even more money.Ev’s are worsts than Gm issues.The trucking industry The bus industry are all failing as well.Look at all the companies going out of business. Many are already gone before your research even begins.The dealers know all the problems and next year will try to sell you another junker.Do your research before you buy.It helps to be able to do your own service also.Good luck to all.