NJ sues Nissan over stolen headlights
By WAYNE PARRY
Associated Press Writer

March 8, 2004, 12:29 PM EST


NEWARK, N.J. -- New Jersey authorities sued Nissan North America Inc. on Monday, alleging the automaker failed to warn customers that the super-bright headlights on its Maximas were hot targets for thieves.

The suit, filed in Superior Court in Somerset County, also alleges Nissan profited by having customers purchase anti-theft kits that should have been provided for free. The company's dealerships also profited by performing repair work on cars victimized by thieves, state Attorney General Peter Harvey said.

"We allege the company sold cars with these fancy lights, but kept consumers in the dark about how attractive the headlamps were to thieves," said Reni Erdos, director of the state Division of Consumer Affairs, which filed the suit. "Nissan's actions, or lack thereof, rendered consumers vulnerable to the criminals who targeted their vehicles."

Authorities surveyed police departments in 19 New Jersey municipalities over the past two years and documented 756 thefts or attempted thefts of the moon-blue lights from 2002 or 2003 Maximas. Newark led the state with 277, followed by Bloomfield with 135, Jersey City with 108 and Hillside and Butler with 50 each.

"Nissan knew since at least September 2002 that thieves ere targeting the xenon headlamps in Maximas," Harvey said. "However, it wasn't until more than a year later that Nissan finally began notifying 2002 and 2003 Maxima owners of the risk of theft and the availability of anti-theft devices.

"Meanwhile, numerous victims were hit with huge repair bills. We're seeking restitution for those consumers."

The lights cost about $1,800 to replace _ not counting repair costs for other damage done by thieves, which can bring the total to $4,000 or more.

In a statement, Nissan said it does more than any other manufacturer to help reduce xenon headlight theft, which also plagues other vehicle makes and models.

"While nothing can completely eliminate the thefts of parts from vehicles, we believe the proactive steps taken by Nissan will help deter criminals from stealing headlights from our customers' Maximas," the company's statement read.

Nissan said it began an anti-theft initiative last fall, sending letters to consumers informing them they can bring their Maximas to a dealer where a bracket would be installed, free of charge, to make the headlights more difficult to steal.

But the lawsuit alleges that on Sept. 26, 2002, the company issued a bulletin to its service technicians stating that a replacement connector kit was available for the headlights damaged by theft.

Two months later, the complaint alleges, Nissan sent out another bulletin to service reps informing them that a $175 theft deterrent kit was available "if a customer requests" and "for customer pay only."

It was not until November 2003 that Nissan sent letters to consumers offering "securing devices" for the lights. But Harvey said these kits were different from the anti-theft kit.

"The customer would only have found out about the anti-theft kit if he had asked about it, which obviously he couldn't have," Harvey said.

Nissan spokesman John Schilling said he could not comment beyond the prepared statement, which did not address allegations that the company knew about problems with the lights being stolen long before it warned customers and that the free securing kit it offered provided less protection than the anti-theft kit customers had to purchase.

The lawsuit does not name other automakers whose lights are also frequently stolen by thieves, including Acura.

Sandra Feeley of Morris Township witnessed the theft of headlights from her Maxima on a Manhattan street corner last May.

Feeley, who spoke at Monday's news conference, took the vehicle to a dealership to have the lights replaced and $4,000 worth of damage repaired.

"Everyone there said, `Oh, this is an issue here," she said. "I was like, `Why wasn't I told about this?"'

She said she would not have bought a Nissan Maxima had she known its headlights were so popular with thieves.


Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press | Article licensing and reprint options

 

this isnt oly a problem with nissan is it

i know my next door neighbor had her lights stolen

but didnt realize the problem was so rampant

thanks for the post ill tell her tomorrow

 

If they win, it should help NJ insurance rates somewhat.

 

Isn't this one reason for full coverage insurance on new cars? It is crazy to blame the manufacturer. Why not sue the police for not preventing such crimes, or better yet sue the criminals that did it..... oh I guess the cops have to catch them first.

I suppose the "right" thing the stealerships should have done is warn people, but I doubt it would have prevented many people from buying the car. My mom used to have an '89 caddi back in the day with 200 to 300 dollar hub caps. Those hub caps got stolen and were replaced out of pocket more than a few times....we never sued anyone.

 

dunno, to me it's such a retarded law suit. instead of suing nissan, maybe NJ police should first try to catch all those thieves first.... why they never know how to go to the root cause....

for the record, they should sue acura too, the 2nd gen TL headlights are such hot items

 

That's a ridiculous lawsuit. Failure to warn that the lights will be stolen? C'mon, that cause of action will be thrown out of court. So they are arguing that Nissan should warn its owners that people steal the headlights? So if you were to buy expensive rims, should the seller have a duty to warn you that thieves will try to steal them, and if they are stolen should the seller be liable for the loss? This is ridiculous.

They are also alleging the Nissan profited from buyers who purchased anti-theft kits that should have been provided for free? Since when must a manufacturer be obliged to provide a free anti-theft system? It is an extra, like the numerous air-bags offered by manufacturers.

Unless the Nissan HIDs are notoriously easy to steal, which was not alleged, Nissan should not be held liable.

 

I have heard it all. And I agree with Rom...Acura TL lights were also a hot commodity. I guess I should come up with a reason to initiate a lawsuit against one of the car OEMs....they are crazy

 

if i am a car thief maybe i should sue lexus for "making the headlights so hard to steal"? ha!

 

fancy lights? did the lawyer wear a straw hat and answer to bubba?

How about catching thieves instead of wasting tax dollars on sueing an innocent manufacturer? Do i tell every person i build a set of needles for "Hey, These blue needles are rare ,there are only 30 or so sets in the entire world"?? No, i leave it to the owner to have a body bag and a 45 tucked in the trunk.

 

Well, guys, there may just be more to this than what appears on the surface. I agree that this is a frivolous lawsuit, and I don't want to inject too much politics into this, but I'd like to point out that this is exactly the kind of nonsense that President Bush and Congressional Republicans are trying to curb with tort reform.

But this kind of theft may be more than just routine or ordinary car thieves, however. We know for a fact that some unscrupuolus repair shops use stolen airbags and airbag components for accident repair. Why? Simple.....money. Air bags and air bag components are expensive, and one reason is that the sensors are plated with pure gold to ward off corrosion and last for at least 10 years....what Federal law requires. A shop that uses stolen parts can often make much more profit than a shop that orders legit parts from the factory.
So, that brings us back to these expensive Xenon and HID headlights. If a shop is dishonest enough to use stolen airbags, why not also stolen alloy wheels (all steam-cleaned and polished up) or even these $1800 HID lights? Why order them from either the factory or an aftermarket source when you can send a couple of good thieves out to yank a set out of the nearest Maxima (or BMW or Lexus or any other car you can find them) and quietly give these guys a cut of what you'll profit by doing do?

True....most shops are honest and would never consider doing this......but a couple of bad apples can spoil the whole bunch.

 

By the way, 1SICKLEX, just out of curiosity........what does that "Got Moderator" sign above your Wolverine icon mean? Is that something given for a certain number of posts?....I notice you have a huge number of them. Or is it a certain rank you get after so much time and involvement in certain forums?
Just wondering....Thanks.

 

The Miam Herald recently had a very big story regarding Porsche headlights being taken. In fact, the thieves are so good they can use screwdriver to lift out the lights and not damage the rest of the car. One guy had the lights taken 3 times in 4 weeks, then finally sold his Porsche.

They take the bulbs and put them in their customized Civics or Maximas. The police know this but can do nothing to these guys, and claim it is a lousy Porsche design.

You are exactly right about tort reform. People will sue over anything.

 

So now were holding manufacturers responsible for other peoples actions? I can see the arguments on both sides but this is ridiculous.
This goes right along with blaming McDonalds for being overweight!

 

an excess of consumer protection, in a state with a lax police force
lol
glad I live in Texas a place where laws are actually enforced

 

Maybe even a lousy thief has enough of a conscience not to want to mess up the paint job on a $100,000-plus Porsche 911 Turbo.........it's bad enough to mess it up on a $30,000 Maxima.