California Woman Wins Small-Claims Court Decision over Hybrid Honda Mileage

"Honda was aware...by the time Peters bought her car there were problems with its living up to its advertised mileage,"

What the heck does that mean? The EPA estimate is what Honda used, is the judge saying Honda should have not used the EPA number?

Expect more lawsuits . . . LOTS more lawsuits.

If anyone who posts here has any legal knowledge I would love to know just how far this could go.

I expect Honda will appeal and drag this out until the end of time. It is too powerful a precedent against them.

And yeah, why is the EPA not getting the brunt of this? The manufacturer has to advertise their mileage findings.

It is my understanding that when the Civic Hybrid was first released that yes, it was actually getting that mileage. However, Honda found a problem that was severely shortening the life of the battery pack and so they "fixed" it with a software update. The software update also took a big bite out of the mileage that drivers were seeing to help prolong the battery's life. Honda didn't want all these batteries going out under warranty and then having to pay out on replacing them. So even though the update cut the mileage down, they were still using the EPA ratings from when the car was first released, before the software update. Shame shame shame...

Still, she was exceeding the mileage estimate using the now current epa test cycle and not the old one that was quite antiquated. honda should only be held liable for the money if they, by law, had to recertify the vehicle with the EPA after the software update and still used a false number. however, if the EPA requires the manufacturer to post the numbers but not to recertify after any changes or updates (hardware or software) to the powertrain, then the government should be paying her, not honda. there's always an asterisk next to the mpg ratings that points to small print in every ad blaming the epa estimate.

@robert4380 and creeper

Thanks to both of you for the info. If you are both correct then it seems to me that the next logical step would be for Honda to sue the EPA/government to recoup their costs. This could get interesting . . .

No, the next logical step is for Honda to appeal.

This lawsuit epitomizes what is wrong with our legal system. Whether you blame Honda or the EPA the fact is that the mileage estimate is exactly that... AN ESTIMATE. The same driver on the same day in the same car can get drastically different gas mileage driving over the same route depending on how he/she drives. I don't know anyone who can our would dispute that.

The next thing this ambulance chasing idiot will do is organize a website to gather lawsuits against Carl's Jr. because the wester bacon cheeseburger you actually buy at the window looks nothing like the one advertised on TV.

I'll be honest... this lawsuit (and the response of much of the population (not here on this forum... yet)) makes me sick. People are cheering this woman as if she's taking on big bad corporate American (or Japan). This isn't David vs. Goliath. It's further deterioration of common sense. You think the EPA estimated mileage verbiage on window stickers and car advert's is bad now? Wait for it if this actually stands.

@cjasis: I agree with you entirely.

"Los Angeles Superior Court Commissioner Douglas Carnham agreed with Peteres[....]and awarded her $9,867"

This is the reason that we have such a large number of lawsuits in the US. People don't sue to become whole, they sue to make money. She was awarded nearly $10,000? How on earth did they come up with this amount? How is it possible that not hitting the EPA fuel economy rating could result in $10,000 worth of damage to her?

I'll bet that the difference between her observed fuel economy and the rated average has probably cost no more than $1,000 worth of additional fuel over the years and that’s if she has kept this as her primary car all this time. Of course if that were the case, I would have a very hard time ordering an automaker to pay damages when the "damaged" customer continues to voluntarily own and drive the car for over 6 years…

@cjasis: Normally I would tend to agree that the legal system gets abused to no end and that there are plenty of frivolous cases being brought all the time. In this particular instance though I think the plaintiff's case does have merit. First of all, going from nearly 50 mpg down to 30 mpg falls well outside of what could be considered the EPA's "estimate." An estimate is more like "ok, some of you will get 55, some maybe will see 45, but on average you should be around 50." What would you consider an acceptable margin of error in an EPA estimate? 5 percent? 10 percent? 20 or 30? Secondly, with Honda hybrids in particular there seem to be an abnormally high number of people having the same issue as the lady in this story. Just check all sorts of online forums and you'll find that people, in general, aren't getting near the mileage they should be. I doubt that every single one of them is driving around with a lead foot. In fact, I would tend to go the other way and generalize that hybrid drivers tend to be all the more cautious of how they drive just so they get the pride of knowing they squeezed every last bit of efficiency out of their tank of gas. I'm certainly not an insider and I only know what I've read about this case online, and from what I've heard repeated again and again in Honda web forums from hybrid drivers. Something about this does seem mighty suspicious though, on Honda's part...

LOL. My mother in law lemoned her Civic Hybrid about 4-5 years ago. They gave her all her money back, plus she got to keep the credit on her taxes. End result - she had a free car for a year and made a few k because it couldn't deliver mileage at the level she wanted.

Honestly, I think it was the driver and not the car as she gets like 40 MPGs with a Prius too. Woman is on and off the gas like the pulse of a heartbeat. No idea how to glide.

The problem is that Honda committed fraud by keeping the same EPA figures after reprogramming the battery/computer system.

@robert4380:

First, you need to understand that the person in this lawsuit showed ads from older fuel economy standards, which have since been revised (twice, I believe). Those older standards are even more unrealistic than today's. The NEW combined fuel economy ratings of her generation Civic is 41 mpg according to the EPA.

Second, Honda uses the EPA rating system, just like every other automaker. In fact, this sets a dangerous precedent... there are a lot of lawsuits out there floating around for Prius owners, Elantra owners, and even Cruze owners over fuel economy concerns. If anything, the EPA needs to revise its fuel economy testing guidelines, but that is the standard that all automakers MUST adhere, along with other federalized testing in order to sell cars on the market. That being the case, the responsibility of those numbers should fall to the EPA for their testing regimen, yet Honda is being sued for this. It doesn't make any sense.

@transpower: that's not "fraud", if the car maker makes changes that will affect emissions and fuel economy on vehicles, they are liable to demonstrate this affect has on federalized standards. By your logic, perhaps GM should be sued because they just recently reprogrammed the Volt (which allegedly DOES affect fuel economy).

Just to show you how far this kind of thing can go, should GM also be sued because they reprogrammed the transmission in the Chevy Cruze? The car tried to hit the highest gear possible in order to improve FE, yet the transmission was reprogrammed to lessen this behaviour after consumers complained. I really hope this case gets thrown out

Yes. According to the statements made in the case if the EPA ratings seem too high to be realistic, a manufacturer can advertise a lower number. I don't think this applies to the window sticker, but I'm looking into it.
-mm

@robert4380 - to me, your statements further support my position that the grief, if any, should be directed at the EPA and not Honda. The EPA sets the standards, does the testing, etc. If Honda followed the laws with respect to EPA testing, labeling, etc. (and everything I've read suggests they did) then this case has no merit at all.

@Mike Magrath - I'm curious to learn what you find. I'm also curious to see if the law is double sided and doesn't allow manufacturers to advertise a higher rating when EPA testing seems too low (as many VW TDI supporters and now Fisker seem to be stating is the case).

I don't see why Honda should be able to hide behind the EPA. It is (or should be) the responsibility of the seller to make sure that the product sold can live up to its advertised claims.

if Honda knew that the Civic Hybrid was unlikely to come close to the EPA numbers then they should not have emphasized them in their ads. Passing the numbers along without comment = agreeing with them.

Thanks for the update Mike and PLEASE keep the info comming. Your post lends some credibility to what robert4380 said in his first post.

@bankerdanny: You may have a point about advertising the truth behind the numbers, although for the most part I see ads with giant asterisks next to their rated fuel economy.

But this sort of highlights a big problem with the way things are currently done, doesn't it? How many cars, especially the new "40mpg hwy" cars actually reach their stated fuel economy in real-world conditions? If Honda was sued for this, I think just about every single automaker can be liable for the same “crime” (pretty much the entire IL long term test fleet). And how would you solve this?

Would this mean that the EPA needs to revise their testing methodology?

Would new advertising rules be required for automaker ads?

Would automakers now be required to state more “realistic” fuel economy averages, if they cannot advertise misleading EPA ratings?

If automakers are supposed to use more “realistic” fuel economy figures, how would you define what’s realistic?

The FE testing methodology was originally created in order to provide a basis of comparison between different cars, using the same test. At best, they can only be used as method of comparison between dissimilar cars, and at worst, it’s become an outdated standard that for the most part has very little bearing in the real world. Yet it’s the only real system that automakers currently have to gauge fuel economy. If automakers cannot advertise this number without fear of litigation, then what exactly can they do otherwise? This is something I'm very interested in following as it plays out.

Don't most manufacturers do their own testing for EPA numbers and if the EPA thinks they're too good then they'll personally test the car? I thought that edmunds.com / insideline had an article about that before...

What we also need to remember here is that in 2008 the EPA changed their testing cycle in 2008 to more accurately reflect real-world mileage -- it uses the air conditioning, does acceleration loops and has a top speed of 80. The car in question here is a 2006.
--mm

@Mike Magrath: Right. The newest EPA ratings for the 2006 Civic only list a 42 mpg combined rating for the Civic hybrid. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/22643.shtml.

I think the 30 mpg the person achieved was fairly reasonable (at least looking at some of the leadfoot cars that IL has had). Her particular case rested on the original EPA estimate of 50 mpg. So is Honda really liable for this, or the EPA?

When I was doing penance by presiding over small claims court(AKA "The Gong Show") that case would have been tossed in less than 60 seconds. The problem is that most judges don't know anything about cars, never mind EPA estimates.

@duck87

While the editors of IL do at times have a lead foot, it is also worth noting that they usually meet or exceed the EPA MPG for the cars in their test fleet. If you have a free moment go back to the articles they posted when they had the GMC Terrain; a vehicle they NEVER hit the EPA milage for.

I would also consider 12 MPG less than advertised to be too big of a difference to only account for the driver.

Ok, does this mean everyone who buys a car can sue the car company because they didnt get the mileage on the sticker? ITS CALLED AN ESTIMATE FOR A REASON. All this woman has done is caused a loophole in the court system now. Now you'll have thousands of people taking car companies to court because god forbid they didnt get the ESTIMATED milelage stated. Dont people have anything better to do?

Wait a minute ... are you saying that "Cars don't get good gas mileage?" So, is it possible that fast food is unhealthy too?

... I digress.

@theinsurgent - more like; "you mean not everythings as advertised"...

I'd also like to know if the court took into acount how this woman drove, or the enviroment she drove in. Whos to say she doesnt drive in the city and sit idle half the time, or she could be a speeder. Theres just too many variables....

Of course Honda could do what they did in the past and make the odometers read more miles than the actual miles traveled. That way they would not be liable for the mileage claims, but then would lose another lawsuit due to inaccurate speedometers. Seems Honda has a history of scams, as the leasees sued and won a class action judgement because their leases were based on mileage and Honda odometers were optimistic by 5%!

This isn't about hybrid cars. It is about ALL cars.

They have opened the floodgates. Technically I could buy a Veyron, floor it everywhere and then sue when it only returned 5 mpg instead of the advertised 10.

This lawsuit is not about the EPA, this is about Honda misleading their customers. Put simply, the batteries that power the Civic are defective - the batteries would have a usable life of under 5 years if Honda had not intervened. Instead of replacing the batteries, as Honda should have, they took the cheap way out and "reprogrammed" the vehicle's computer controls. The software now runs the gasoline engine longer than when the customer first purchased the car. This little upgrade lengthens the life of the batteries, as they are not being used as much, but damages the fuel economy by relying on the gasoline ICE. Honda failed to mention that minor detail to....anyone, until they got caught. Customers are suing because, initially , they had a Civic that achieved 40 + mpgs. After the software change, their fuel economy dropped into the high 20's. This is not about overly litigious Americans, this is about Honda dropping the ball.

Interesting discussion for once, lots of good points raised on both sides. In general, I find the entire legal system just broken here and often repugnant - seems strange to think in history being a lawyer was a very respected profession whereas you almost have to apologize for being one today. That being said, the legal system is there for a reason and I just don't know enough about this case to know if it was a real issue or not. If they published the epa numbers and it didn't live up to them - big deal - as has been pointed out that would be our legal system running amok once again giving this woman almost $10k. If however, Honda knew there was a problem, did the right thing by fixing it yet continued to use old epa numbers to sell vehicles that they knew it couldn't possibly meet after the 'fix' for the battery then that does seem more deceptive. In general, this makes me very uncomfortable but I don't want to say with certainty that this woman is abusing the system without knowing more. Regardless, now that it goes to a real court the chances of Honda paying her are almost zero I would imagine.

I'm surprised that the article and no one posting so far has mentioned this. This case does not establish "precedent" anywhere, because it took place in small claims court in California. This case, and others, were only filed because California raised the small claims monetary award limit to $10,000 starting on January 1 (before it was $7,500 for individuals and $5,000 for businesses).

What's scary for Honda is that in small claims court, they cannot defend themselves with a lawyer. Each side must represent themselves. This is different from a class action suit, where they can hire all the best legal counsel and technical experts for a single case in a single courtroom. The class action settlement was advantageous to them (and the lawyers on both sides) because the monetary damages were contained to less than $200/plaintiff and much of the biggest monetary award ($1,000 credit towards a new car purchase) might end up coming back to them anyway.

Getting sued in small claims courts by thousands of plaintiffs is a far more daunting task for them, because the lawyers have been taken out of the courtroom, and they will have to defend themselves in courthouses all across the country.

But, Honda's actions in this case frankly stink. I know someone who saw his mileage progressively decrease, and the more conspiratorial angle (i.e., Honda purposely reprogramming the control units to extend the battery life just beyond the warranty period) prodded him to trade in his hybrid Honda. At the core, Honda's hybrid design relied on a battery pack setup that was not well suited for the long haul. Either maximize the fuel economy and deal with battery packs that wear down before the warranty period, or reduce the fuel economy and lengthen the battery life.

This is kinda dumb. Hard to tell if the woman drives like grandma or angry commuter. It's a double digit difference eitherway at this point.

@gmt450: What you're just saying has EVERYTHING to do with the EPA. These numbers that Honda threw out about the 50 mpg is not to be taken lightly- they were done to EPA testing standards, and received the EPA "badge of approval". Therefore, no automaker that has done testing to these standards is "wrong" when they advertise these figures. There is no deception- because these are official government figures for the vehicle.

Take this into account as well: The EPA later revised their testing methodology, and all vehicles have since been revised downwards from their original rating. This means everything from trucks to the Prius. The Civic hybrid has also been downgraded, to 42 mpg combined (40 mpg city) from the unrealistic and original 50 mpg. So what about all those vehicles? Can I sue GM because after a tranny update to my Cruze, I didn't get their original EPA estimate?

At best, what Honda could be liable for is not reporting/retesting to EPA standards after their battery update (which brings up another sketchy point, because the Chevy Volt just had an update that also affects fuel economy, so what about that vehicle?), if they were required to do so. If they weren't required, then how are they at fault? Should it not be the EPA, the body that oversees fuel economy standards, be liable for this?

@duck87: You make a very good point, and by the way, thank you for not attacking me - instead you brought up actual facts, like an intelligent person. My problem is Honda needed to change the batteries, but instead choose the software update. Here is my scenario - I hope this makes sense. I do not think that someone should be able to go after an automaker if the EPA rating and the actual, real world fuel economy do not match up - that is unacceptable. We all know that the EPA ratings are overly optimistic. My problem is with owners who purchased a Civic and were averaging, say 42mpg in the real world. Then, after the software upgrade (due to a problem with the batteries, which should be replaced) their fuel economy drops to 27 mpgs. Now, the entire reason for purchasing the Hybrid was fuel economy. Honda consumers paid extra money for the Hybrid version of the Civic, and they had the economy BEFORE the upgrade. After the upgrade, their fuel economy plunges by 10 or 12 mpgs. The fault, at least in my eyes, is with the battery packs. The software patch destroyed the very reason consumers purchased the car in the first place. It will also impact their resale as now consumers might doubt the life of the battery packs. Does this make any sense?! Thanks for the response mate.

Does this mean since I do better on my BMW 328i than the window sticker says BMW can sue me to recoup the cost of what I Have saved? Or can Mobil and Exxon sue BMW because the sticker is wrong and they arent making as much money as they should? When does this crap stop.

@gmt450: The issue with what you're bringing up is the current EPA test regimen. This is very important to consider in the automotive industry, because oftentimes cars are tweaked throughout their generational lifeline with changes that could affect the fuel economy. Under what circumstances should the EPA require that automakers retest vehicles? Consider the following:

-Chevy recently released a software update that, in their own words, improves fuel economy under certain conditions

-Chevy released a transmission update for the Chevy Cruze that fixes consumer complaints of jerkiness. The response of a transmission is critical for overall fuel economy

Should the EPA require either of these vehicle's FE to be re-rated? Would Chevy be "false advertising" if they continued to use the current EPA numbers when it is quite possible that the FE of their vehicles might have changed? Why should the automaker be punished for using numbers that they have obtained using standardized and federalized testing?

@duck - which brings more precedence to my statement, NOT EVERTHINGS AS ADVERTISED PEOPLE! I dont understand how people dont get this already. Just because it says 50 MPGs, doesnt mean it will get it. Or anything else advertised for that matter, just isnt always as good as it sounds. People need to learn to do research.......

It's just under 10K since 10K is max limit for small claim court. They used some fancy damages calculation to get to that # I think...

Reason they are not sueing EPA you see in Honda's statement on the ruling:

"the court stated in error that advertising EPA fuel economy estimates is misleading unless the advertising also explains the effects of stop-and-go driving and the use of air conditioning. In fact, federal law does not permit states or state courts to impose additional requirements of this kind. Thus, a Honda advertisement that accurately referenced EPA mileage estimates, truthfully stated that a driver can get "up to 50 mpg" and carefully noted that mileage will vary is not misleading as a matter of law.
"

But obviously another reason is that suing Honda is much easier than EPA which doesn't have as much to lose.

Why only Honda? It's just the start really. Hyundai already removed their mpg in some of their advertisements. Absolutely ridiculous but that's how the legal system works... (or doesn't). Next thing no one is showing any EPA numbers anymore.

Also we won't see huge number of individual lawsuits since courts won't allow that and will refer to the class action lawsuit instead (which already exists I believe for Honda but will reward smaller compensation).