Caterpillar Diesel Engine Class Action Settlement
You are a member of this class if you are a person or entity in the United States who are original purchasers or original lessees, subsequent purchasers or subsequent lessees, (including but not limited to those having purchased via a TRAC option or some rights to residual purchase of vehicles at lease end) of a vehicle powered by a Subject Engine.”
Under the terms of the proposed Caterpillar class action settlement, a Subject Engine is defined as all EPA 2007 Compliant Caterpillar On Highway C13 and C15 engines manufactured in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009, including the Caterpillar Regeneration System components of the engine.
Up to $10,000
Caterpillar has agreed to pay $60 million to settle the engine defect class action lawsuit. Class Members who submit valid and timely Claim Forms will be eligible to receive a pro rata share of the settlement fund as follows:
- Class Members who experienced no CRS-related repairs may be eligible to receive a payment of $500 for each Subject Engine.
- Class Members who experienced one to five qualified CRS-related repairs may be eligible to receive a payment of $5,000 per Subject Engine.
- Class Members who experienced six or more qualified CRS-related repairs may be eligible to receive a payment of $10,000 per Subject Engine.
Class Members who experienced at least one CRS-related repair may instead elect to claim losses of up to $15,000. Class Members who select this option must submit proof of payment such as receipts or invoices, and they may seek payment for losses from towing charges, rental charges, hotel charges and other losses incurred as a consequence of qualified CRS-related repairs..
Proof of Purchase
In re: Caterpillar Inc. C13 and C15 Engine Products Liability Litigation,Case No. 1:14-cv-03722-JBS-JSDistrict Court for the District of New Jersey
This settlement is aimed at resolving allegations that some engines failed catastrophically
The plaintiffs claim that the CAT Regeneration System failed to operate even after the equipment was subject to numerous warranty repairs and replacements.
CAT denies all allegations but will settle to avoid further expenses