Long-running lawsuit over ‘death wobble’ in Ford trucks takes a new turn
A legal case that has been ongoing for nearly seven years over the so-called ‘death wobble’ in Ford Super Duty pickups has taken a new development. A federal appeals court, after years of hearings, arguments, and appeals, has sent key aspects of the case back to a lower court for reconsideration. The dispute centers on certain models of Ford F-250 and F-350 trucks, whose owners claim they can cause severe steering wheel vibration when driving on highways.
The drivers who initiated the lawsuit describe a sudden, severe shaking of the front end of the vehicle after hitting a bump or pothole. According to their claims, the oscillation, or ‘wobble,’ can continue until the truck slows down significantly, creating a tense and potentially dangerous situation. They argue that the issue is not a matter of normal wear and tear but points to a deeper mechanical fault.
Ford’s appeal leads to case review
The case was previously approved to proceed as a class action lawsuit in a number of states. This gave affected owners the opportunity to pursue their claims collectively rather than filing individual lawsuits. Ford resisted, stating that the trucks involved vary by model year, condition, mileage, and service history, making a single class action lawsuit inappropriate.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued its opinion and partially sided with Ford’s position. The judges instructed the lower court to review whether there is sufficient evidence of commonality of the problem among the trucks to continue treating the case as a class action. The legal process continues, but it is now once again under close scrutiny.
A new hurdle for plaintiffs
The lawsuit concerns certain components of the steering and suspension systems, including steering dampers, which are alleged to be prone to failure in some Super Duty models. Thirteen owners involved in the case claim that the wobble is not normal wear and tear but a condition that can arise at any time.
Ford disagrees. According to the company, there is no single defect present in all the trucks and explains it by factors such as mileage, maintenance, modifications, and driving habits.
Due to the wide variety of conditions, Ford believes a universal class action lawsuit is not the right approach.
The question of the company’s knowledge before sale
Another hurdle concerns the plaintiffs’ claims that Ford knew about the problem even before selling the first truck. The “pre-sale knowledge” argument is common and often challenged by automakers. However, in this case, the Ninth Circuit found that the lower court judge should not have allowed general evidence to support this claim.
What happens next
Over time, the scope of the lawsuit has narrowed. Earlier documents mentioned various model years from the mid-2000s to the late 2010s. The current version focuses on specific years and selected states, with some categories of vehicles, including those used for commercial purposes, excluded from the certified classes.
This narrowing reflects the complexity faced by plaintiffs trying to prove a consistent problem affecting thousands of vehicles. The district court must now determine whether the remaining claims have enough in common to be considered together or if the case structure needs to be changed.
This case vividly illustrates the complexity of proving a manufacturing defect in large-scale class action lawsuits against automakers, especially when it involves complex mechanical systems affected by numerous variable factors. The appeals court’s decision underscores the importance of specific evidence and clearly defined commonality among class members. Regardless of the outcome, this process may set an important precedent for how courts handle safety-related claims for vehicles operated under various conditions over many years. For owners, it means continued uncertainty, and for the auto industry, close attention to the results that could influence similar future cases.