Diesel Place banner

21 - 39 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,832 Posts
Yhey're not using Bosch at all on the L5P.

L5P uses Denso HPFP and injectors.
It also has a lift pump in the fuel tank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts


I’d like to know how many wrecks have been as result of the fuel pumps grenading? If you were running 70 mph down the interstate towing a 10-14k lb trailer and the engine stopped all of a sudden? No power steering or brakes. It would probably slow down pretty fast, so what if a tractor trailer hit you in the rear?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,957 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,957 Posts
Most of that is an old thread. Has it been going on that long? What is currently being done?
A Google search shows the last news article I can find ws back on Aug 17,2019

Considering this, I would say it's still in "Discovery" mode and will probably be in the courts sometime next year or so depending on how long it takes for "Discovery" between both parties
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,957 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
Has anybody heard anything about GM a lawsuit about our engines not being compatible with US fuel? It's on dieselarmy.com.
Did you see my post in the original 9 page thread on this topic?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
The information in this thread should be moved to the other.

In reading the court doc related to consolidation the claims and change of venue it would appear that there are far too few owners who have joined the action. That alone could kill this thing.

It is pretty simple to become involved. Google CP4 litigation. The firm I contacted in in Texas.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,957 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
686 Posts
CP4 Court Update

Received this a few minutes ago:

Dear Ken,

First and foremost, I hope this email finds you and your family healthy and safe. I wanted to take a moment and update you on our efforts in response to Covid-19 (Coronavirus), as well as the status of the CP4 fuel pump defect class action pending against General Motors LLC (“GM”) in the Eastern District of Michigan.

Despite the halt in business that many are currently facing, I wanted to let you know that our firm is fully operational and not missing a beat. Team HMG, along with co-counsel at Morgan & Morgan and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, will continue to work diligently and fight for you on the CP4 fuel pump defect matter.

Our law firm offices in the Hilliard Building in Corpus Christi were temporarily closed out of an abundance of caution. However, HMG’s technology and established protocols allow our lawyers and staff to work remotely. That means that we are still here to answer any questions you may have on your case through the main phone line, email, text, and even videoconference.

Additionally, you should be aware that many courts are experiencing delays due to Covid-19. Trials have been postponed, hearings have been cancelled, and new rules have been put in place by courts nationwide. This means we must be flexible when it comes to some of the timelines that the courts previously established—as many things have changed as a result of Covid-19. Accordingly, in our CP4-defect-based litigation with GM, GM has requested, and we have agreed to, a temporary stay of the case through May 11, 2020, as GM’s regular business operations have completely ceased and (as you may or may not already be aware) GM is now working on manufacturing mass supplies of medical equipment pursuant to the president’s mandate.

Now for the good news: on Friday, March 27th, Judge Nelva G. Ramos of the Southern District of Texas issued an order rejecting the vast majority of arguments brought by GM in its motion to dismiss the pending CP4 fuel pump class action we have in a “sister” action to the one involving your claims.

GM originally moved to dismiss the Texas motorists’ first amended class action complaint on April 22, 2019, arguing that the auto giant's advertisements touting the CP4-equipped vehicles’ durability and fuel efficiency were “mere puffery” upon which the Texas motorists could not base fraud allegations. In the Court’s ruling, however, Judge Ramos disagreed, explaining that “[n]one of the [Duramax] advertisement materials noted that the vehicles were incompatible with U.S. diesel fuel,” and noting that “[m]isrepresentations are not merely puffery or opinion if they are of a material fact:”

“GM’s statements were not mere sales hype in light of the fact that the CP4 fuel pump was incompatible with U.S. diesel fuel, causing the engine to stall and requiring costly repairs. Because the CP4 pump exerted higher pressure to increase fuel efficiency, it destroyed the fuel injection system and the engine altogether. Plaintiffs allege that GM had superior knowledge that the vehicles were not durable or reliable. This information was not equally available to Plaintiffs."

The Court went on to roundly reject GM’s “suggestion” that the risk of catastrophic CP4 failure did not present an inherent safety risk:

"The worst case scenario of a truck spontaneously stalling at high speeds is not a mere inconvenience. Nor is it a mere inconvenience to spend between $8,000 to $20,000 on repairs to make the trucks fit for their ordinary purpose. The Court rejects GM’s suggestion that the risk of spontaneous engine failure while driving is not, as a matter of law, unreasonably dangerous, depriving the vehicles of fitness for their purpose of transportation.”

We are extremely pleased with this result and are encouraged that a similar ruling could be forthcoming when GM files its motion to dismiss this action in the Eastern District of Michigan.

In closing, let me reiterate that at HMG, we have taken steps to stop the spread of COVID-19, and to protect our co-workers, families, friends, clients, and all other loved ones. We have also planned for unforeseen circumstances and taken steps to insure your case remains the highest of priorities. We are confident that we can all work together to pull through this difficult time. At the end of the day, we remain steadfast in fighting on your behalf.

Please feel free to visit HMGlawfirm.com for additional firm information and updates, or reach out to our CP4 fuel pump litigation team at [email protected]. Stay safe and stay healthy!

Sincerely,

Robert C. Hilliard
Hilliard Martinez Gonzales LLP
719 S. Shoreline Blvd.
Corpus Christi, Texas 78401
Phone: 361.882.1612
Web: hmglawfirm.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs in the Matter of Chapman, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 2:19-cv-12333 (E.D. Mich.)
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,957 Posts
Received this a few minutes ago:

Dear Ken,

First and foremost, I hope this email finds you and your family healthy and safe. I wanted to take a moment and update you on our efforts in response to Covid-19 (Coronavirus), as well as the status of the CP4 fuel pump defect class action pending against General Motors LLC (“GM”) in the Eastern District of Michigan.

Despite the halt in business that many are currently facing, I wanted to let you know that our firm is fully operational and not missing a beat. Team HMG, along with co-counsel at Morgan & Morgan and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, will continue to work diligently and fight for you on the CP4 fuel pump defect matter.

Our law firm offices in the Hilliard Building in Corpus Christi were temporarily closed out of an abundance of caution. However, HMG’s technology and established protocols allow our lawyers and staff to work remotely. That means that we are still here to answer any questions you may have on your case through the main phone line, email, text, and even videoconference.

Additionally, you should be aware that many courts are experiencing delays due to Covid-19. Trials have been postponed, hearings have been cancelled, and new rules have been put in place by courts nationwide. This means we must be flexible when it comes to some of the timelines that the courts previously established—as many things have changed as a result of Covid-19. Accordingly, in our CP4-defect-based litigation with GM, GM has requested, and we have agreed to, a temporary stay of the case through May 11, 2020, as GM’s regular business operations have completely ceased and (as you may or may not already be aware) GM is now working on manufacturing mass supplies of medical equipment pursuant to the president’s mandate.

Now for the good news: on Friday, March 27th, Judge Nelva G. Ramos of the Southern District of Texas issued an order rejecting the vast majority of arguments brought by GM in its motion to dismiss the pending CP4 fuel pump class action we have in a “sister” action to the one involving your claims.

GM originally moved to dismiss the Texas motorists’ first amended class action complaint on April 22, 2019, arguing that the auto giant's advertisements touting the CP4-equipped vehicles’ durability and fuel efficiency were “mere puffery” upon which the Texas motorists could not base fraud allegations. In the Court’s ruling, however, Judge Ramos disagreed, explaining that “[n]one of the [Duramax] advertisement materials noted that the vehicles were incompatible with U.S. diesel fuel,” and noting that “[m]isrepresentations are not merely puffery or opinion if they are of a material fact:”

“GM’s statements were not mere sales hype in light of the fact that the CP4 fuel pump was incompatible with U.S. diesel fuel, causing the engine to stall and requiring costly repairs. Because the CP4 pump exerted higher pressure to increase fuel efficiency, it destroyed the fuel injection system and the engine altogether. Plaintiffs allege that GM had superior knowledge that the vehicles were not durable or reliable. This information was not equally available to Plaintiffs."

The Court went on to roundly reject GM’s “suggestion” that the risk of catastrophic CP4 failure did not present an inherent safety risk:

"The worst case scenario of a truck spontaneously stalling at high speeds is not a mere inconvenience. Nor is it a mere inconvenience to spend between $8,000 to $20,000 on repairs to make the trucks fit for their ordinary purpose. The Court rejects GM’s suggestion that the risk of spontaneous engine failure while driving is not, as a matter of law, unreasonably dangerous, depriving the vehicles of fitness for their purpose of transportation.”

We are extremely pleased with this result and are encouraged that a similar ruling could be forthcoming when GM files its motion to dismiss this action in the Eastern District of Michigan.

In closing, let me reiterate that at HMG, we have taken steps to stop the spread of COVID-19, and to protect our co-workers, families, friends, clients, and all other loved ones. We have also planned for unforeseen circumstances and taken steps to insure your case remains the highest of priorities. We are confident that we can all work together to pull through this difficult time. At the end of the day, we remain steadfast in fighting on your behalf.

Please feel free to visit HMGlawfirm.com for additional firm information and updates, or reach out to our CP4 fuel pump litigation team at [email protected]. Stay safe and stay healthy!

Sincerely,

Robert C. Hilliard
Hilliard Martinez Gonzales LLP
719 S. Shoreline Blvd.
Corpus Christi, Texas 78401
Phone: 361.882.1612
Web: hmglawfirm.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs in the Matter of Chapman, et al. v. General Motors LLC, No. 2:19-cv-12333 (E.D. Mich.)

Thread merged for updated info ..
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Top