Carriers file suit, allege ‘fraud’ over Navistar engines

James Jaillet July 8, 2014

Three trucking companies have filed lawsuits against truck and engine maker Navistar International claiming its 2011 and 2012 MaxxForce engines were defective and didn’t meet federal 2010 emissions standards. The lawsuits further allege Navistar knew its engines were flawed yet concealed that information from truck buyers.

Dallas, Texas-based law firm Miller Weisbrod announced the litigation July 8, saying it is representing the Texas-based Americorp Xpress Carriers, Tennessee-based First Express and Washington-based Floyd Blinksy Trucking.

Navistar spokesperson Elissa Maurer said the company does not comment on pending litigation.

The complaints against Navistar, maker of International trucks, stem from the manufacturer’s reliance on exhaust gas recirculation to try to meet federal emissions standards, according to the suit filed by Americorp.

RELATED: Navistar gets marketshare boost, reports loss 

The EGR systems on Navistar’s proprietary MaxxForce engines reduced engine efficiency, caused them to overheat and produced an excessive amount of soot inside the engines, the lawsuits claim, and the 15 MaxxForce-powered International trucks Americorp bought in 2011 had to be taken to the shop for repairs more than 100 separate times, the carrier says.

The downtime and repair costs run counter to Navistar’s assurance to Americorp that the trucks “were in perfect working order and without defects” at the time of purchase, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit notes Navistar was the only North American engine maker to not use a combination of EGR and selective catalytic reduction to meet 2010 standards, a position Navistar used to market its trucks as having the “lowest cost of ownership,” per the lawsuit.

RELATED: Diagnosis from afar: Navistar hitting its stride through telematics

Americorp and the other carrier say the engines cost them loss of profits; downtime expenses and losses; diminished resale value; out-of-pocket repair expenses; fuel expenses incurred in excess of represented amounts; towing expenses, lodging expenses for drivers; rental car expenses; unreimbursed driver downtime; loss of revenue; and other damages.

The problems experienced with the engines included repeated illumination of the check engine lights, engine derating, EGR system failures, fuel pump failures, a/c blower and compressor failures, clogged hoses and connections and premature wear.

View this article on one page
  • Mark G

    They forgot to include extremely lower resale value than the competitive engines.


Do you actively capture and use customer data?


Volvo truck boss says growth in truck market emerging

Allison unveils integrated stop-start technology for ultra-low carbon powertrain program

Caterpillar engine lawsuits consolidated, new suits continue to be filed


Caterpillar engine lawsuits consolidated, new suits continue to be filed

Successful Dealer Award finalist: Truck Centers, Inc.

River States Truck and Trailer hosts Truck Beauty Contest

Successful Dealer Award

Click here to read about the award and see the nominees for this year's award.