— Jaguar infotainment problems caused a class action lawsuit that has now been partly dismissed, as Jaguar Land Rover owners continue to claim the infotainment systems are dangerously defective.
The InControl Touch Pro and InControl Touch Pro Duo infotainment systems allow drivers to control the radio, hands-free calling, navigation, backup camera and heating and cooling systems.
The only alleged differences between the InControl Touch Pro and InControl Touch Pro Duo are different screen sizes and different icons and fonts displayed on the screens.
Included in the infotainment class action lawsuit are these Jaguar Land Rover models.
- 2018-2020 Land Rover Range Rover
- 2018-2020 Land Rover Range Rover Sport
- 2018-2020 Land Rover Range Rover Velar
- 2018-2021 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
- 2018-2020 Land Rover Discovery
- 2018-2020 Land Rover Discovery Sport
- 2018-2020 Jaguar E-Pace
- 2018-2020 Jaguar F-Pace
- 2018-2020 Jaguar I-Pace
- 2018-2020 Jaguar F-Type
- 2018-2020 Jaguar XE
- 2018-2020 Jaguar XF
- 2018-2020 Jaguar XJ
The Jaguar Land Rover class action lawsuit alleges the infotainment systems won't respond to user commands, won't start and they have blank display screens.
Alleged audio and video errors cause distracted drivers, and occupant safety is at risk when the backup cameras, heating and cooling systems and hands-free calling systems fail or freeze.
Jaguar Land Rover also allegedly has not found a solution to the problems and either "replaces [the] defective [vehicle] parts with equally defective parts" or advises vehicle owners to wait for forthcoming "software updates" to fix the problems.
Motion to Dismiss Infotainment Class Action Lawsuit
Plaintiffs Blake George, Joyce Ferfecki, Miguel Ortiz, and Stuart Jolly and Laszlo Vas saw multiple claims dismissed in part and granted in part by Judge William J. Martini.
Jaguar argues breach of warranty claims should be dismissed because the alleged turbocharger defect, if it exists, is a "design" defect not covered by warranties.
But Judge Martini ruled the fact the allegations could be construed as design defects is not enough to defeat these claims at the motion to dismiss stage of the case.
Four plaintiffs allege they brought their vehicles to dealerships for service multiple times for InControl infotainment systems problems which nonetheless allegedly continued after repair attempts. According to the judge, express warranty claims can continue for these plaintiffs.
However, the remaining plaintiff doesn't claim he brought his vehicle to a dealer, causing the judge to dismiss his express warranty claim.
Next, the judge ruled Jaguar infotainment problems are an alleged safety risk, which allowed breach of implied warranty of merchantability claims to continue.
Judge Martini did dismiss unjust enrichment claims against Jaguar over the alleged infotainment problems because the plaintiffs didn't purchase their vehicles directly from the automaker.
Jaguar Land Rover Motion to Dismiss: Granted
By the end, the judge granted Jaguar's motion to dismiss these claims:
- Breach of express warranty as to plaintiff George only
- Breach of implied warranty as to plaintiff Vas only
- Unjust enrichment (All plaintiffs)
- Breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (All plaintiffs)
- Violation of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (MCPA)
The above claims are dismissed without prejudice, except for unjust enrichment and violation of the MCPA which are dismissed with prejudice.
Jaguar Land Rover Motion to Dismiss: Denied
However, the judge denied Jaguar's motion to dismiss these claims:
- Breach of express warranty as to plaintiffs Ferfecki, Ortiz, Jolly, and Vas
- Breach of implied warranty of merchantability as to plaintiffs George, Ferfecki, Ortiz, and Jolly
- Violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
- Violations of state consumer protection laws
The Jaguar Land Rover infotainment system lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey: George, et al., v. Jaguar Land Rover North America LLC.
The plaintiff is represented by Bursor & Fisher, P.A., and Barbat Mansour Suciu & Tomina PLLC.
