Mercedes-Benz argues the sunroof lawsuit is simply a copycat of prior failed class actions.

Posted in News

Mercedes Sunroof Class Action Is Nonsense, Automaker Says
Mercedes-Benz argues the sunroof lawsuit is simply a copycat of prior failed class actions.

— A Mercedes sunroof class action lawsuit should allegedly be dismissed because it's only a "copycat of three failed class action complaints filed against Mercedes-Benz" over cracked sunroofs.

That view is held by attorneys for Mercedes-Benz who filed a motion to dismiss the class action that alleges the automaker should pay at least $200 million for sunroofs that shatter.

The sunroof class action lawsuit, which includes all Mercedes-Benz vehicles purchased between 2010 to the present, alleges it can cost $2,000 to replace the panoramic sunroof.

However, the customer who sued claims he was told it would cost $9,000 to replace his 2015 Mercedes-Benz ML350 sunroof after it allegedly cracked.

The plaintiff also claims Mercedes offers $250 to $500 as goodwill payments but customers must allegedly agree not to sue the automaker.

In its motion to dismiss the Mercedes sunroof class action lawsuit, the automaker alleges the lawsuit doesn't make much sense and is difficult to understand.

According to Mercedes, the plaintiff makes vague references to cracked sunroof complaints the plaintiff found online, but nothing indicates his sunroof has defects, let alone defects in hundreds of thousands of Mercedes vehicles.

Mercedes argues the plaintiff may say the automaker concealed some kind of undefined sunroof defect, but the class action lawsuit alleges nothing specific about what Mercedes knew, when it knew, who knew and how the automaker learned about the alleged defect.

The plaintiff also allegedly doesn't plead anything about any misrepresentations made to him, and says nothing about the purchase price of the vehicle or even when it was purchased. Mercedes says it doesn't even know if the plaintiff still owns the 2015 Mercedes-Benz ML350.

Attorneys for the automaker also attacked multiple conflicting statements in the sunroof class action, including the incident itself.

"First, he alleges the sunroof in his vehicle cracked on March 3, 2020, 'while Plaintiff [i.e., Bruce Pickens] was driving.' He alleges glass 'spray[ed] throughout the car and onto [him],' but does not allege he was personally injured. He next alleges his sister was driving the vehicle on Interstate 94 in Illinois when the sunroof cracked. He alleges glass fell on his sister, but does not allege she was injured." - Mercedes motion to dismiss

According to Mercedes-Benz, it is "unclear whether plaintiff was even a passenger in the vehicle in this second version of events."

As for vehicle warranties, attorneys for Mercedes-Benz points out the warranty says, “[g]lass breakage or scratches are not covered unless positive physical proof of a manufacturing defect can be established.” According to Mercedes, the lawsuit doesn't adequately allege any defects exist.

The automaker also argues the sunroof class action doesn't identify specific vehicle models or model years affected by the alleged defects and does not limit the vehicles to those equipped with factory-installed sunroofs of any kind, let alone panoramic sunroofs.

The motion to dismiss alleges the plaintiff filed the class action based on nothing more than unspecified "research" and a “cursory internet search.”

And even though the plaintiff allegedly copied previously dismissed class actions against Mercedes regarding the sunroofs, the plaintiff allegedly never mentions those prior actions.

Mercedes also argues the sunroof class action is missing the type of factual allegations required to plausibly plead any of the claims he makes, including the many fraud-based claims.

"The pertinent factual allegations that are pled are wildly inconsistent, as are plaintiff’s descriptions of the putative classes he seeks to represent. And, in many cases, the allegations are so riddled with typographical and grammatical errors that the paragraphs simply make no sense as pled." - Mercedes-Benz

The Mercedes sunroof class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division: Pickens, et al., v. Daimler AG, et al.

The plaintiff is represented by the Washington Law Offices, P.C., of Chicago.


Become a Fan & Spread the Word