Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST NEWS: BMW’s replacement fuel injectors caused increased repair costs, suit charges , (Dec 8, 2015)

By Linda O’Brien, J.D., LL.M.

Auto manufacturer BMW has engaged in unfair and monopolistic business practices by reengineering the replacement fuel injectors for BMW vehicles containing N54 engines, so that they were not compatible with the original factory-installed fuel injectors, according to a complaint filed in the federal district court in Newark, New Jersey. The reengineering of replacement fuel injectors allegedly increased the cost of post-warranty repairs of failed fuel injectors (DiMartino v. BMW of North America, LLC, December 4, 2015).

Joseph DiMartino purchased a vehicle manufactured by BMW of North America, containing an N54 engine outfitted with Index 10 fuel injectors.

The complaint states that, for models manufactured from 2007 to 2010, all BMW vehicles containing N54 engines were factory installed with Index 10 fuel injectors. BMW subsequently discovered that the Index 10 injectors were defective and removed those injectors entirely from the market. As a result, BMW dealers and independent service shops were only able to stock the Index 11 fuel injector as the replacement designed by BMW.

BMW reengineered the fuel injectors used in N54 engines so that the replacement Index 11 injectors were not compatible with Index 10 injectors. Thus, when a BMW vehicle with an N54 engine suffered the failure of one or more fuel injectors, the vehicle owner was forced to pay for the replacement of all of the fuel injectors (four, six, or eight depending on the cylinders in the engine) or, at a minimum, the fuel injectors in a bank of injectors, even though the other injectors had not failed. The Index 11 fuel injectors are also not compatible with the onboard computer system that manages the fuel injector system, frequently causing the computer to fail shortly after the replacement injectors are installed, the complaint alleges.

According to the lawsuit, BMW was aware of the incompatibility between the Index 10 and Index 11 fuel injectors after they were manufactured and implemented, as well as the Index 11 fuel injector’s incompatibility with the N54 engine onboard computer system. BMW received notice through numerous complaints about the incompatibility and engine failure issues, but to date has failed to recall the BMW vehicles containing N54 engines to address the Index 11 fuel injector failure defect in any meaningful way.

The vehicle owned by plaintiff Joseph DiMartino had two fuel injectors fail. He was forced to pay to replace all six of his Index 10 injectors in the six cylinder vehicle with Index 11 injectors, even though only two of the six injectors failed. Less than two weeks later, the Index 11 injectors caused stress on the onboard computer and caused it to fail. DiMartino was forced to pay to replace the computer system as well. BMW is being enriched by the post-warranty failure of Index 10 injectors since the company gets to sell and make a profit on the sale of injectors to replace Index 10 injectors that have not failed, the complaint charges.

The plaintiff asserts claims for unjust enrichment and violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act and Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The action seeks declaratory relief; actual, compensatory, and exemplary damages; pre- and post-judgment interest; costs of suit; attorney fees; and any other just and proper relief.

The case is No. 2:15-cv-08447-WJM-MF.

Attorneys: James E. Cecchi (Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, P.C.), Jeffrey A. Leon (Quantum Legal LLC), and Jonathan Shub (Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.) for Joseph DiMartino.

Companies: BMW of North America, LLC

News: Antitrust NewJerseyNews