Owners of 2006–2009 Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles have filed several class actions over the Mopar lifetime warranty, alleging that FCA US LLC (now part of Stellantis) voided their coverage using a five-year inspection requirement buried in the warranty booklet. One case, Hall v. Fiat Chrysler America US LLC, produced a California settlement that refunded half the purchase price of canceled Lifetime Maximum Care service contracts. The larger case over the free lifetime powertrain warranty, Grundy v. FCA US LLC, has moved through the federal court in Michigan without a public resolution, and two earlier suits were dismissed in FCA’s favor.
The Inspection Clause That Triggered the Lawsuits
Starting on or about July 26, 2007, Chrysler included a Lifetime Powertrain Limited Warranty with qualifying new 2006–2009 model-year Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles. It covered the engine, transmission, and drivetrain for the life of the vehicle so long as the original purchaser owned it.
Section 2.4 G of the warranty booklet required the owner to bring the vehicle to an authorized dealer for a free powertrain inspection within 60 days of every five-year anniversary of the in-service date. Miss the window, and coverage was canceled permanently. The booklet stated: “You must have the inspection performed to continue this coverage.”1Chrysler. Lifetime Powertrain Limited Warranty Booklet
Plaintiffs across the lawsuits allege the same core problem: the requirement was absent from promotional materials, hard to find on the company’s website, and not flagged by dealers at the point of sale. Owners typically discovered the cancellation years later, when they brought a vehicle in for a covered repair. The Grundy complaint called the clause a “warranty cancellation ‘poison pill’ to snare unaware consumers,” arguing that the inspection bore no relationship to whether any powertrain component was actually defective.2ClassAction.org. Class Action Says Inspection Clause in FCA Lifetime Warranties Is One-Sided, Unfair
The Hall California Settlement
Hall v. Fiat Chrysler America US LLC (Case No. 8:21-cv-00762), filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, is the one case in this group that produced a payout. It targeted a different product than the other suits: the Lifetime Maximum Care Service Contract, a separately purchased extended warranty sold by Mopar. Plaintiff Donald Hall alleged that FCA canceled these contracts when owners failed the five-year inspection tied to the underlying powertrain warranty.3Hall v. FCA US LLC Settlement. Hall v. Fiat Chrysler America US LLC Settlement Agreement
FCA did not admit liability. Under the settlement, eligible California class members who had purchased a Lifetime Maximum Care Service Contract for a Chrysler, Dodge, or Jeep vehicle and had it terminated for failing the inspection requirement were entitled to a refund of 50 percent of what they paid for the contract.4ClaimDepot. Lifetime Contracts Settlement
The claim submission deadline was March 17, 2025, and the fairness hearing was set for March 21, 2025, in the Central District of California in Riverside. Kroll Settlement Administration LLC processed claims. If the court granted final approval without appeals, checks were to be mailed roughly 45 days after approval and had to be cashed within 90 days.3Hall v. FCA US LLC Settlement. Hall v. Fiat Chrysler America US LLC Settlement Agreement
The claim window has closed. The settlement was limited to California and to purchasers of the paid Maximum Care contract; it did not cover the free lifetime powertrain warranty on its own.
Grundy v. FCA US: The Nationwide Powertrain Case
Paul Grundy, et al. v. FCA US LLC was filed on May 18, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Case No. 2:20-cv-11231). Grundy and at least 27 other owners of 2006–2009 Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles accused FCA of breaching the free lifetime powertrain warranty by canceling coverage over missed five-year inspections.5Top Class Actions. Federal Judge Refuses To Toss Lifetime Warranty Class Action Lawsuit Against Fiat Chrysler
In December 2020, U.S. District Judge Stephen J. Murphy III refused to dismiss most of the case, finding that whether owners had adequate notice of the inspection requirement was a factual question that could not be decided on the pleadings. The court did dismiss claims for injunctive relief.5Top Class Actions. Federal Judge Refuses To Toss Lifetime Warranty Class Action Lawsuit Against Fiat Chrysler A later May 25, 2023 ruling dismissed express warranty claims for several named plaintiffs, including Grundy himself, after their counsel conceded those claims failed under the applicable state laws; claims by the remaining plaintiffs survived.6GovInfo. Grundy v. FCA US LLC, Ruling on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
The status is unclear. The docket was terminated on February 29, 2024,7CourtListener. Grundy v. FCA US LLC Docket but a public tracking page still lists the case as active, and no settlement or final judgment has been publicly reported.2ClassAction.org. Class Action Says Inspection Clause in FCA Lifetime Warranties Is One-Sided, Unfair There is no active claims process tied to Grundy.
Cases Owners Should Know FCA Won
Two earlier cases were decided in FCA’s favor, and they narrow what plaintiffs elsewhere can expect.
Hightman v. Fiat Chrysler US LLC (Case No. 3:18-cv-02205), filed September 24, 2018 in the Southern District of California, made the same core allegation as Grundy: that the inspection clause was hidden and warranties were “routinely voided” over missed inspections. On August 10, 2022, U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice for failing to adequately state a breach-of-warranty claim.8ClassAction.org. Fiat Chrysler Hit With Class Action Over Inspection Provision Hidden in Lifetime Limited Powertrain Warranties
Marksberry v. FCA US was filed in the District of Kansas in November 2019 by an owner of a 2009 Dodge Ram 1500 who was denied coverage for broken exhaust manifold bolts. He said he brought the truck to his Olathe, Kansas dealer every 3,000 miles for service and even received a 23-point inspection during the relevant window, but the dealer never performed the specific five-year powertrain inspection. He paid more than $1,300 out of pocket.9ClassAction.org. Class Action Claims FCA US, Kansas Car Dealer Let Consumer’s Lifetime Warranty Expire On June 9, 2022, a federal judge granted summary judgment to FCA, concluding that Marksberry had not complied with the inspection requirement and that the warranty was not in effect.10USAutoLaw. Dodge Ram Powertrain Warranty Lawsuit Ends
What Owners Have Reported
Court filings and consumer accounts tied to the Grundy litigation describe a recurring pattern of denials:
- A 2008 Dodge Nitro owner completed the first inspection, but the dealer failed to record it. No reminder was sent for the second inspection, and coverage was later denied for a drivetrain failure.
- A 2008 Dodge 1500 owner with 235,000 miles was told at the time of an engine-replacement request that there was no valid lifetime warranty, and reported never having been informed of the inspection requirement.
- A 2007 Dodge Charger Daytona owner was denied coverage for a blown head gasket at 126,000 miles. FCA said the warranty had been canceled after a missed 2012 inspection, which the owner disputed.
- A 2007 Dodge Charger owner was initially told a repair was covered, then told FCA had opted to “buy out” the contract because the vehicle was “too old.”
Another owner reported that a dealer held a vehicle for transmission repair from April 2023 for over a year before refusing to complete the work, with a promised $4,000 buyout check that never arrived.5Top Class Actions. Federal Judge Refuses To Toss Lifetime Warranty Class Action Lawsuit Against Fiat Chrysler
Two Different Products, Two Different Suits
Which lawsuit applies depends on which warranty an owner had.
- The Lifetime Powertrain Limited Warranty came free with qualifying 2006–2009 vehicles and covered the engine, transmission, and drivetrain, subject to the five-year inspection. It is the warranty in Grundy, Hightman, and Marksberry.
- The Lifetime Maximum Care Service Contract was purchased separately from Mopar and covered over 5,000 components, including electrical, suspension, brakes, and air conditioning. First-day rental, towing, and trip-interruption benefits expired at seven years or 100,000 miles. This is the contract in Hall.
Both products were non-transferable. Mopar has since discontinued sales of new Lifetime Maximum Care plans, and says existing contracts continue to be honored for the original purchaser at any authorized dealership, subject to the contract’s termination conditions.11ChryslerFactoryPlans. Lifetime Extended Warranty
Can FCA Force Arbitration?
FCA’s newer vehicle warranties include a binding arbitration provision administered by the American Arbitration Association, with a class action waiver and a 30-day opt-out window after delivery.12Mopar. Chrysler Warranty Guide
Courts have blocked FCA from using dealership arbitration clauses to pull warranty disputes out of court. In Olson v. FCA US, LLC, decided by the Ninth Circuit on April 7, 2026, the panel held that FCA could not enforce an arbitration or delegation clause from a consumer’s lease with an Autonation dealership. It relied in part on the California Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling in Ford Motor Warranty Cases, which held that warranty claims arise from statutes and manufacturer warranties, not from dealership sales contracts, so they are not “intertwined” with those contracts in a way that would let a manufacturer compel arbitration.13U.S. Courts. Olson v. FCA US LLC, Ninth Circuit Opinion
Olson involved defective headrests rather than the lifetime powertrain warranty, but the principle applies more broadly: a consumer’s dealership contract, standing alone, does not give FCA a route to force arbitration of warranty claims against the manufacturer.