Legal Victory for Ford: Overturning Allegations of Misleading Fuel Economy Claims for F-150 and Ranger

In a recent appeal, Ford emerged victorious in a case that accused the company of deceiving the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by inflating the fuel economy ratings of its pickup trucks. The court's ruling emphasized the authority of the EPA in determining fuel economy and superseding state law.

Allegations of Deception and MPG Inflation

Ford faced accusations of intentionally deceiving the EPA and inflating the miles per gallon (MPG) ratings of their pickup trucks by up to 15 percent. These allegations raised concerns about the accuracy of fuel economy claims made by the automaker.

Appeal Ruling and EPA's Authority

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled against the plaintiffs, dismissing their claims that Ford had misled the EPA by manipulating factors used in certifying MPG numbers. The court emphasized that federal law grants the EPA significant authority in estimating vehicle fuel economy, surpassing individual states' regulations.

Impact on Consumers and Legal Proceedings

The plaintiffs argued that the inflated MPG ratings led them to overpay for their trucks and incur additional fuel costs. However, the court found that state law claims could disrupt the balance established by federal law, which entrusts the EPA with determining reasonable fuel economy estimates.

Ford's Response

Ford expressed satisfaction with the court's decision, following a previous investigation by the Justice Department into its emissions and fuel economy certification process. The investigation concluded in 2021 without any legal action against the automaker. On the other hand, the plaintiffs and their lawyer expressed disappointment with the outcome, disagreeing with the ruling's interpretation of Supreme Court precedent regarding state regulation of deceptive conduct.

Ford successfully defended itself in the appeal, with the court acknowledging the EPA's authority in estimating fuel economy. The ruling's implications extend beyond this case, highlighting the balance between federal and state regulations in matters of vehicle fuel economy and consumer protection.