Whirlpool Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Defective Fridges

In a legal battle that has caught the attention of consumer advocates nationwide, Michigan resident Clint Daughtrey has taken on the multinational home appliance manufacturer, Whirlpool Corporation, in a class-action lawsuit. The suit alleges that Whirlpool knowingly sold defective SideKicks Refrigerators to unsuspecting consumers.

Daughtrey, representing himself and others who have had similar experiences, claims that the refrigerators contain faulty evaporator coils. These defects, according to the lawsuit, lead to the leakage of refrigerant and the inability of the refrigerators to cool and preserve food. The lawsuit alleges that Whirlpool was aware of these defects but continued to sell the refrigerators without disclosing the issue to consumers.

"All persons and entities who purchased a Whirlpool SideKicks Refrigerator primarily for personal, family, or household purposes in the United States" are included in the class definition. This means that potentially thousands of consumers could be affected by the outcome of this case.

The lawsuit alleges that consumers have suffered financial losses due to spoiled food, the need to purchase replacement refrigerators, and costly repairs or replacements of the defective evaporator coils. The lawsuit states, "Whirlpool was aware of the defect but continued to sell the defective Refrigerators without disclosing the problem or providing any consumer relief."

The case hinges on two main legal theories: breach of implied warranty of merchantability and fraudulent concealment. The implied warranty of merchantability is a fundamental principle of consumer law. It means that when a company sells a product, they are guaranteeing that it is fit for the general purpose for which it was sold. In this case, the plaintiffs allege that Whirlpool breached this warranty by selling refrigerators that were not fit for their general purpose of cooling and preserving food.

Fraudulent concealment, the second legal theory, involves a party intentionally hiding a material fact from another party. The lawsuit alleges that Whirlpool knew about the defect in the evaporator coils but chose not to disclose this information to consumers. If proven, this could be a serious violation of consumer trust and law.

The plaintiffs are seeking money damages and injunctive relief. Injunctive relief, if granted, would require Whirlpool to take specific actions to remedy the situation, such as repairing the defective refrigerators or providing replacements.

This lawsuit serves as a stark reminder of the power dynamics at play in the consumer goods market. It underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in the manufacturing and selling of consumer products. As the case unfolds, it will be interesting to see how the court interprets the laws in question and how it decides to balance the rights of consumers against the interests of a major corporation.