Blog

GM 6.2 Engine Class Action Lawsuit: Cases, Facts, Options

Posted by Howard Gutman | Jun 14, 2025 | 0 Comments

If you own a Cadillac, Chevrolet, or GMC vehicle with a GM 6.2L V8 L87 engine and have experienced engine failure, you are not alone. Multiple class actions have been filed, each alleging that General Motors knowingly sold vehicles with dangerously defective engines and failed to provide an adequate solution.

Here's what you need to know about the GM lawsuit engine crisis, your rights, and how legal help can make a difference.

Three Major Class Actions: Who's Suing GM and Why?

1. Houchin v. General Motors LLC

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

This GM engine lawsuit represents owners of:

  • 2021–2024 Cadillac Escalade (including ESV),
  • 2019–2024 Chevrolet Silverado 1500,
  • 2021–2024 Chevrolet Tahoe/Suburban,
  • 2019–2024 GMC Sierra 1500, and
  • 2021–2024 GMC Yukon/Yukon XL.

Plaintiffs allege that GM's L87 engines suffer from severe crankshaft and bearing defects, causing excessive friction, heat, and catastrophic engine failure. The GM engine failure lawsuit claims these failures create an “increased risk of collision, injury, or death.”

The suit criticizes GM's recall remedy (thicker oil and a new oil cap) as “egregiously inadequate,” arguing that repairs do not address the true root of the problem and that even replacement engines are equally defective. Plaintiffs say they would not have purchased their vehicles, or would have paid less, had they known of the defects, and that GM failed to offer compensation for loss of value or out-of-pocket expenses.

2. Hernandez v. General Motors LLC

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia

This GM l87 engine lawsuit targets the same family of vehicles and focuses on the L87 engine's design and manufacturing flaws. The complaint details how the crankshaft and connecting rods are prone to premature wear and failure, often resulting in sudden, dangerous breakdowns.

The GM 6.2 engine class action lawsuit highlights that the recall fix (using thicker oil and a new oil cap) does not resolve the underlying problem.

Plaintiffs allege GM has known about these issues for years, yet failed to redesign the engine or provide a permanent solution. The suit seeks compensation for repairs, diminished value, and other damages, and calls for GM to extend warranties and offer proper engine replacements.

3. Powell, II v. General Motors LLC

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed by an Illinois resident whose 2023 GMC Yukon Denali suffered catastrophic engine failure at just 12,000 miles, this GM engine failure lawsuit adds a personal dimension to the crisis. After receiving a replacement engine, the plaintiff experienced the same problems (metal shavings in the oil and engine noise) demonstrating that GM's warranty replacements do not fix the core defect.

The complaint claims GM has been aware of these problems since at least 2021, but has failed to warn customers or provide a meaningful remedy.

Key Facts and Numbers

  • Vehicles Affected: Over 877,000 GM trucks and SUVs with the L87 6.2L V8 engine.
  • Recall Scope: Nearly 600,000 vehicles recalled in the U.S., but the GM 6.2 engine class action lawsuit alleges the recall is inadequate.
  • Common Allegations:
    • Bearing and crankshaft failures can destroy the engine block, leading to sudden loss of power and safety risks;
    • GM's recall fix (thicker oil and new oil cap) does not address the root cause;
    • Replacement engines provided under warranty may have the same defects;
    • Owners not properly compensated for loss of value or out-of-pocket expenses.

Your Legal Options

Owners with substantial and recurring problems may be entitled to a refund or replacement under lemon law. Other owners may have claims for breach of warranty under the Magnuson-Moss Act.

If your GM 6.2L engine has failed or required repeated repairs, call us for a free consultation. We have extensive experience helping New York and New Jersey consumers obtain compensation for defective vehicles. Many of the cases we handle are on a contingency basis, meaning you pay nothing unless we win your case.*


Sources:

You may also like:

 ______________________________

 * No guarantee is made of a particular result. While we handle many claims on a contingency basis, we evaluate each claim individually, and arrangements may vary – these will be set forth in a written agreement. We are happy to discuss our procedures and welcome any questions you may have.

About the Author

Howard Gutman

Howard Gutman has been fighting for consumer rights and representing commercial interests for over 20 years. Нe has a deep knowledge of fraud, consumer, warranty, and lemon law, and will handle your case with honesty and experience.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Law Office of Howard Gutman Is Here for You

At the Law Office of Howard Gutman, we focus on Lemon Law Claims, Consumer Fraud, Do Not Call List, Debt Collection Harassment, and Debt Collection Violations and we are here to listen to you and help you navigate the legal system.

Contact Us Today

The Law Office of Howard Gutman is committed to answering your questions about Lemon Law Claims, Consumer Fraud, Do Not Call List, Debt Collection Harassment, and Debt Collection Violations law issues in New Jersey and New York.

We'll gladly discuss your case with you at your convenience. Contact us today to schedule an appointment.