—
A Ford class action lawsuit alleges an EcoBoost engine recall failed to satisfy two vehicle owners who filed the lawsuit for more than $5 million.
But Ford says the class action is bogus because those Ford owners never had any problems with their vehicles or the EcoBoost engines.
These automotive recall lawsuits are popular in the legal world because even if a vehicle owner never had any problems at all, they will still sue for millions because they claim they overpaid for their vehicle. Additionally, an owner will argue their vehicle has lost value simply because it was recalled.
The Ford EcoBoost engine recall and lawsuit revolves around the intake valves which must handle a tremendous amount of heat and pressure. The EcoBoost engine problems occur when an intake valve fractures and damages the engine.
Ford EcoBoost Engine Investigation and Recall
The Ford class action lawsuit wasn’t filed until after the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an EcoBoost investigation and Ford recalled the vehicles.
In March 2022, NHTSA received three virtually identical letters from consumers requesting an official investigation of the intake valves in EcoBoost engines.
This was followed by a July 2022 federal investigation into 2021 Ford Bronco vehicles equipped with 2.7L EcoBoost engines.
That investigation was upgraded and expanded in September 2023 to include 2021–2022 Ford Bronco, Ford Edge, Ford Explorer, Ford F-150, Lincoln Aviator and Lincoln Nautilus vehicles equipped with 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engines.
Ford previously used intake valves made from an alloy referred to as “Silchrome Lite” in its 2.7-liter and 3.0-liter EcoBoost engines.
But there were problems because Silchrome Lite can become “excessively hard and brittle if exposed to over-temperatures during the machining of the component.” Ford stopped using Silchrome Lite for the intake valves in October 2021 and began using intake valves made from a different alloy called “Silchrome 1.”
The automaker determined the EcoBoost intake valves “may have grinding burn and over-specification hardness” and could “crack and break” leading to engine damage.
In August 2024, a Ford EcoBoost engine recall was announced for 2021–2022 Ford Bronco, Edge, Explorer, F-150, and Lincoln Aviator and Nautilus vehicles equipped with 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engines built during a specific period.
Ford estimated 1% of the 90,000 recalled vehicles in the U.S. had defective intake valves. Dealerships were told to inspect each vehicle to determine cumulative EcoBoost engine cycles and to run a service procedure to accumulate high RPM engine cycles for engines that did not meet a certain threshold.
The Ford EcoBoost engine would be replaced if it didn’t pass the inspection. Ford also created a customer satisfaction program (24N12) that provides extended warranty coverage to the vehicles through 10 years or 150,000 miles.
Federal safety investigators had spent two years on the Ford EcoBoost engine investigation and confirmed Ford’s own findings regarding the intake valves. NHTSA confirmed EcoBoost engine “defective intake valves will likely fail at a low time in service and . . . the majority of subject vehicles equipped with defective valves have already experienced a failure.”
The government also determined “the vast majority of failures have occurred before 20,000 miles with over half of all reported failures occurring before 5,000 miles.”
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration closed its EcoBoost engine investigation based on Ford’s recall and customer satisfaction program.
Motion to Dismiss the Ford EcoBoost Engine Recall Lawsuit
The class action lawsuit was filed by Pennsylvania plaintiff Matthew Barkus (2021 Ford F-150) and New York plaintiff Dan Silberman (2021 Ford Bronco) who complain, “Ford has yet to provide an adequate remedy, such as a replacement of their defective valves, or compensate consumers for the amount they overpaid for these defective vehicles.”
And even though trained federal safety regulators call the shots with investigations and recalls, the two vehicle owners complain Ford and NHTSA are wrong about the EcoBoost engines. Barkus and Silberman told the judge Ford only “issued a limited recall” which “only covers a small fraction of the affected vehicles.”
Both plaintiffs also contend the EcoBoost engines expose them and their occupants to a “great risk of bodily harm.”
According to the class action lawsuit, Ford knew the EcoBoost engines and vehicles were defective when they were first built and before the vehicles were first sold. Instead of repairing the problems before selling the vehicles, the lawsuit alleges Ford decided to market and sell the vehicles even though they were allegedly defective and dangerous.
In its motion to dismiss the EcoBoost class action, Ford notes how the two owners filed their lawsuit alleging “great risk of bodily harm” just six weeks after NHTSA closed its 27-month-long investigation.
Ford also told the judge how the plaintiffs do not allege their vehicles had any problems whatsoever and they don’t claim they sought and were denied repairs for the EcoBoost engines or any other problem.
“They do not even allege their own intake valves are actually out of specification and thus have any heightened risk of fracture. Instead, the premise of their case is as follows: Other people with vehicles manufactured during a different time period had a possibility of being manufactured with out-of-spec valves.” — Ford
Ford’s motion to dismiss the EcoBoost lawsuit argues plaintiffs Matthew Barkus and Dan Silberman want the judge to believe Ford and NHTSA are wrong and the plaintiffs are correct. And “on that supposition—plaintiffs claim to have overpaid for their vehicles.”
According to Ford:
“Barkus and Silberman have pled, at most, only a hypothetical future injury. They describe a manufacturing issue that affected other people. In other words, they subjectively fear their vehicles might have a problem but offer no facts to substantiate that concern.”
The plaintiffs allegedly have no facts whatsoever to suggest there is anything wrong with their Ford vehicles, and they allegedly only offer “naked disagreement with the scope of the recall issued by Ford and the investigation conclusions of the federal agency whose special competence is automotive safety.”
Ford argues if the plaintiffs want to prove they overpaid for their vehicles, they must provide factual allegations that support a “reasonable inference” that such an injury occurred, as opposed to a “sheer possibility” or mere conjecture.
Considering this is a nationwide class action lawsuit, Ford says the plaintiffs must show the EcoBoost engine problems are universal, and in this case that won’t work because “99% or more of the recall population is unaffected.”
“This does not amount to adequate pleading of a federal class action. Plaintiffs have alleged an injury-in-imagination, not an injury-in-fact, and this Court should dismiss their claims for lack of standing as well as numerous other deficiencies.” — Ford
The Ford EcoBoost engine class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan: Barkus, et al., v. Ford Motor Company.
The plaintiffs are represented by The Miller Law Firm, P.C., DiCello Levitt LLP, and Smith Krivoshey, PLLC.