In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation,
No. 12-md-02311

 

If You Are a Truck and/or Equipment Dealership That Purchased Vehicles or Bought Certain Parts for a Vehicle in the U.S. Since 1999, You Could Receive Money from Settlements of Class Actions

You may be part of one or more class action settlements if you are a Truck and/or Equipment dealership that indirectly purchased certain component parts and/or vehicles for resale or lease containing these parts (“Dealer”) in the District of Columbia or one or more of the following states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

For more information concerning the various Settlements, please click on the links below for documents relating to those Settlements:

Separate lawsuits alleging that Defendants in each lawsuit entered into unlawful agreements that allegedly artificially raised the prices of Occupant Safety Systems and/or Vehicle Wire Harness Systems,  have been settled with six defendants and their affiliates totaling $5.1 million.  Generally, you are included if, at any time between January 1, 1999 and August 18, 2016 (the specific dates may depend on the particular settlement agreements) for Vehicle Wire Harness Systems or between January 1, 2003 and August 10, 2016 (the specific dates may depend on the particular settlement agreements) for Occupant Safety Systems, you were a dealer of heavy-duty (Class 8) or medium-duty (Class 4, 5, 6 & 7) trucks, buses, commercial vehicles (excluding automobiles, light trucks, vans, sports utility vehicles, crossovers, pickup trucks, and/or similar motor vehicles sold by automobile dealers), all-terrain vehicles, construction equipment, mining equipment, agricultural equipment, railway vehicles, materials-handling vehicles, and other similar vehicles (“Trucks and/or Equipment”) that: (a) purchased Trucks and/or Equipment containing a Wire Harness or Occupant Safety System; (b) indirectly purchased a replacement Wire Harness System or Occupant Safety System.

A lawsuit alleging that Defendants entered into unlawful agreements that allegedly artificially raised the prices of Bearings, have been settled with six defendants and their affiliates totaling $10.4 million. Generally, you are included if, at any time between January 1, 2000 and May 25, 2017 (the specific dates may depend on the particular settlement agreements) for Bearings, you were a dealer of heavy-duty (Class 8) or medium-duty (Class 4, 5, 6, & 7) trucks, buses, commercial vehicles (excluding automobiles, light trucks, vans, sports utility vehicles, crossovers, pickup trucks, and/or similar motor vehicles sold by automobile dealers), all-terrain vehicles, construction equipment, mining equipment, agricultural equipment, railway vehicles, materials-handling vehicles, and other similar vehicles (“Trucks and/or Equipment”) that:  (a) purchased Trucks and/or Equipment containing Bearings; (b) indirectly purchased a Bearing as a replacement part.  Indirectly means you bought the vehicle replacement part from someone other than the manufacturer of the part.

A lawsuit alleging that the Defendants entered into unlawful agreements that allegedly raised the prices of Starters and Alternators has been settled with a defendant, Mitsubishi Electric (“Settling Defendant”) totaling $1.3 million.

Generally, you are included in the Settlement Class if, at any time between January 1, 2000 and September 12, 2017, you were a dealer of heavy-duty (Class 8) trucks, medium-duty (Class 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7) trucks, buses, commercial vehicles, construction equipment, mining equipment, agricultural equipment (including ATVs designed and/or marketed for agricultural use), railway vehicles, materials handling vehicles, and other similar vehicles (“Trucks and/or Equipment”) that: (a) purchased Trucks and/or Equipment containing a Starter or Alternator which was manufactured or sold by a Defendant or any subsidiary, affiliate, or alleged co-conspirator of a Defendant; and/or (b) indirectly purchased a Starter or Alternator as a replacement part which was manufactured or sold by a Defendant or any subsidiary, affiliate, or alleged co-conspirator of a Defendant.