Press ESC to close

Honda argues accidental braking lawsuit should be dismissed

The class action lawsuit alleges Honda Insight and Passport vehicles brake suddenly without warning.

— A class action lawsuit over Honda vehicles’ unexpected braking is proceeding through the courts, but Honda argues that the lawsuit doesn’t qualify for another day in any court.

California plaintiff Margaret Amaru and non-California plaintiffs Howard Barkan, James Khargie, Andrea Sivakova and Ricky Urena allege that all 2019-2022 Honda Insight and 2019-2022 Honda Passport vehicles are equipped with unsafe automatic emergency braking systems.

According to the accidental braking lawsuit, the vehicle may suddenly brake despite there being no objects ahead on the road.

The class-action lawsuit comes just weeks after the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration launched an investigation into unintended braking issues in 2019 to 2022 Honda Passport and Insight vehicles.

Honda calls its automatic emergency braking system a “Collision Mitigation Braking System.”

Honda describes the system as follows:

“CMBS™ features a radar transmitter mounted on the front grille fascia that determines the distance and closing speed of obstacles ahead. If the radar and high-resolution camera detect another vehicle or pedestrian in front of the car, it will provide visual and audio warnings. If you don’t react immediately, the system will automatically apply the brakes.”

What was supposed to be a safety feature was accused of being a defective system that could compromise safety.

Honda never warned consumers about the flaws in its automatic emergency braking system, according to the Honda Unintended Braking lawsuit. But Honda said Insight and Passport owner’s manuals clearly warned customers that the braking system wasn’t perfect.

Owners’ manuals for the Insight and Passport warn drivers that the automatic braking system may suddenly activate “when there is no traffic ahead.” While acknowledging these limitations, the owner’s manuals list situations in which unexpected braking may occur.

  • Driving on a curve

  • Driving under a low or narrow bridge

  • Driving over speed bumps, stealing license plates or train tracks

  • Driving over a traffic sign or guardrail

The Honda class action lawsuit claims the braking system used cheap parts and was unable to distinguish between general features of the road and dangerous obstacles.

Motion to dismiss Honda accidental braking lawsuit

Honda argued that the class action lawsuit should be dismissed because the plaintiffs allegedly did not define what the word “sudden” meant, whether to describe duration or braking force or something else. Honda also said it was unclear what the plaintiffs meant by “unintentional.”

If the plaintiffs meant “unintentional,” Honda said it’s unclear how they were sure each braking was unnecessary. After all, automatic emergency braking is meant to help distracted or inattentive drivers.

Honda alleges that the plaintiffs failed to provide the root cause of the alleged “defect” and what caused the sudden and unexpected braking. The class action lawsuit also allegedly fails to explain how often these incidents occur in the real world.

In the motion to dismiss the accidental braking class action lawsuit, the consumer protection claim allegedly failed for “failure to allege the information allegedly omitted and the information that should or could have been disclosed as omitted, and failure to provide a representative sample that allegedly did not include the alleged omitted information.”

It is also alleged that the plaintiffs have not plausibly argued that there is a “real and imminent threat of harm that is not speculative or hypothetical.”

The quick-fix warranty claim also allegedly failed because the plaintiffs argued there was a design defect that was not covered by Honda’s warranty. Honda also argued that none of the plaintiffs claimed they had taken their vehicles to dealers for warranty repairs.

The Honda unintended braking class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California: Andrea Sivakova v. American Honda Motor Co..

The plaintiffs are represented by Smith Krivoshey, PLLC.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Canopy Tents Professional Customization

- Sponsored Ad -
Canopy Tents Professional Customization