Fee Dispute Hotline
(312) 907-7275

Assisting with High-Stakes Attorney Fee Disputes

The NALFA

News Blog

$1.2M Fee Award Approved in BMW Class Action Settlement

August 25, 2017 | Posted in : Contingency Fees / POF, Fee Award

A recent New Jersey Law Journal story by PJ D’Annunzio, “BMW Class Action Settlement and $1.2M in Attorney Fees Gets Green Light,” reports that a federal judge has approved a settlement agreement that will provide drivers of defective BMW 6-series convertibles with roughly $8.6 million in compensation.  U.S. District Judge William J. Martini of the District of New Jersey also signed off on nearly $1.2 million in attorney fees for lawyers representing the plaintiffs. Those lawyers originally requested up to $1.87 million in fees, which would have been just over 20 percent of the settlement value.

The settlement resolves claims over defective convertible top mechanisms in BMW 6-series cars for the 2004 through 2010 model years.  Owners or entities who leased or owned the qualifying cars will each receive a software upgrade from a BMW garage that addresses the convertible top defect, a one-year unlimited mileage extended warranty, and reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses for up to two previous repair attempts.

"The settlement is reasonable in light of the best possible recovery and the attendant risks of litigation," Martini wrote in his opinion issued Aug. 24.  He added, "Importantly, the settlement does not preclude future claims against BMW for personal injury or subrogation arising from the conduct subject to this litigation."

The settlement, however, was not universally supported and some class members objected.  One family, the Oettings, claimed they lacked faith in BMW's ability to repair their 2005 E64.  They asked to be compensated for the total value of the car over the six years they owned it.

But Martini explained that litigants can't always get everything they want.  "Perhaps an ideal settlement would provide additional monetary compensation and additional relief for the Oettings' frustration, but settlements are by definition the product of compromise, and the possibility 'that a settlement could have been better … does not mean the settlement presented was not fair, reasonable or adequate,'" the judge said.