Tuesday, September 27, 2022


Judge chills plaintiffs in Dometic refrigerator suit

By Russ and Tiña De Maris

A federal court judge in Miami, Florida, has favored Dometic in a potential class action lawsuit brought by RVers who say they were sold defective RV refrigerators. Judge Robert Scola of the U.S. District Court ruled that the suit be tossed out.

Catherine Papasan and 17 other individuals brought the class action suit against Dometic Corporation, alleging that Dometic’s refrigerators have a design defect that results in excessive corrosion on the inside of the gas absorption refrigerator’s boiler tubes, and that the corrosion causes the boiler tubes to internally “corrode, crack, and ultimately expel flammable ammonia, hydrogen gas, and carcinogenic sodium chromate at high pressure.” They further alleged that the leaked gas can ignite, but even if it does not ignite, the corrosion eventually ruins the refrigerator’s functionality.

The plaintiffs claim that “because [Dometic] concealed material facts regarding the defect and continuing safety risk to every class member … every class member was induced at the point of sale to purchase their refrigerators at a premium price that they otherwise would not have paid[.]”

While some of the plaintiffs said they’d had no failure of their refrigerators, one of them, Nelson Goehle, of Washington state, claimed that in 2005 he bought a model year 2000 RV with one of Dometic’s RM2652 model refrigerators. Goehle contends that he “used the refrigerator as intended and followed all applicable instructions from Dometic.” But in March 2016, he watched fire blast out of the RV’s refrigerator vent while it was parked outside his home. The RV was totally demolished, and the fire additionally damaged his home. Other plaintiffs in the case also reported refrigerator fires that destroyed their rigs, including Andrew Young of Ohio, and Christopher Johnston of Texas.

In its own filings with the court, defendant Dometic wrote it had set out a recall process in 2006 and 2008 to retrofit some refrigerators for what it termed a “remote risk of fire.” Dometic said it had also put retrofit systems into new models to care for this concern.

Still, the bottom line for these Dometic refrigerator owners wasn’t what they wanted. Judge Scola ruled that because Dometic sells refrigerators not to individual consumers but rather to RV manufacturers, and doesn’t have records of who such end-using customers are, he could not legitimately certify a class-action suit. The plaintiffs had asked for the class-action status, and asked for damages for consumers across the U.S. who owned RVs equipped with the listed Domestic refrigerators. The judge did leave the way open for attorneys to file amendments that might later create a favorable ruling.

Dometic responded to the court’s ruling through its president, Juan Vargues, in a statement issued after the ruling. “I am pleased to see the ruling to dismiss the class action lawsuit. We have all along remained firm in the position that the allegations in the consolidated case were without merit.”

Based on the final ruling of the judge, it isn’t clear that Dometic was vindicated; rather, the judge ruled that the federal court simply did not have the jurisdiction to issue a class-action status in the matter. The ruling was handed down July 24.



Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Billy Bob Thorton
3 years ago

Don’t you just love our legal system. I especially like the comment that the judge left the door open for more legal mumbo jumbo. Sounds like a lot of poppy {bleeped} to me.

3 years ago

Not certifying the “class action” by the judge was really the only option. The “class” would have to be to RV builders, not dealers (they are 3rd party re sellers) or consumers. While Dometic doesn’t have info for retail buyers, it does have info on which builders bought the units and the builder have info for dealers that got the completed units. Dealers had the information for the original purchasers. The court could have reasoned that the recall was in 2006-2008 and that Dometic did try to inform current owners. It is unfortunate that these folks had these problems. I don’t know how Dometic could have developed an better recall campaign considering the time that has lapsed and how many times the product could have changed hands. (Short of roadblocks and mandatory inspections at campgrounds!) (lol) The attorneys will have to find another approach if they ate to be successful.

3 years ago
Reply to  MrDisaster

So, Takata sold airbags to Honda, Honda installed them in automobiles, sold the automobiles to dealers, who sold the cars to consumers. How is it different if it is a refrigerator in an RV?

Billy Bob Thorton
3 years ago
Reply to  Bill

Excellent analysis. Now I will answer your rhetorical question. Because the judge said so. AND, as much as you are correct, the air bag issue was just TOO big a thing to sweep it under the pervebial rug.

RV fridges lighting off and burning the house down, acceptable losses. Plain and simple. A court room is the arena to either win or lose. See Orenthal James verdict. Sometimes right and wrong prevail, but many times the plaintiffs lose, when they were truely in the right.

Kurt Shoemaker Sr
3 years ago

Thanks Chuck for including this article. I was part of this class action and haven’t heard squat from the law firm representing our side of the suit.

Stephen Rushton
3 years ago

It may ne that your state has a “lemon law”(SC does) that you might find standing with….just a thought

Sign up for the RVtravel Newsletter

Your information will *never* be shared or sold to a 3rd party.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Every Saturday and Sunday morning. Serving RVers for more than 20 years.