# Canadian Man Wins Legal Battle Against BMW Over i3 Range Claims
## Overview of the Case
In a notable legal dispute that has spanned several years, a Canadian man, Ronen Kleiman, has emerged victorious against BMW regarding misleading claims about the driving range of the i3 electric vehicle. However, this victory comes with a significant financial burden, as Kleiman is required to pay BMW’s legal fees despite being awarded damages.
## Background of the Lawsuit
Kleiman’s legal journey began in 2017 when he filed a lawsuit against BMW, alleging that the marketing for the 2014 i3 overstated its driving range. At the time of his purchase, BMW Canada’s website advertised that the i3 could achieve up to 200 kilometers (124 miles) in Eco Pro and Eco Pro+ driving modes.
However, after only a month of ownership, Kleiman found that his i3 failed to meet these expectations. On a trip of 159 kilometers (99 miles), he managed to drive only 158 kilometers (98 miles) under optimal conditions, which included a sunny 25-degree Celsius day and an empty vehicle.
## Changes in Marketing Claims
An investigation into BMW’s Canadian website revealed that between November 28 and December 10, 2014, the company quietly revised its marketing claims. The updated figures indicated a range of 130 kilometers (81 miles) in Comfort mode, 160 kilometers (99 miles) in Eco Pro, and 156 kilometers (97 miles) in Eco Pro+. Despite presenting archived evidence of these changes in court, BMW maintained that the i3 was never marketed with a 200-kilometer range.
## Court Ruling and Financial Implications
After years of litigation, Deputy Judge James Minns of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled in favor of Kleiman, awarding him $5,000 in damages. However, in a twist of fate, the court also mandated that Kleiman pay BMW $11,140 in legal fees after he rejected a pretrial settlement offer of $10,000.
Kleiman declined the settlement because it included a nondisclosure clause, stating he wanted the public to be aware of the situation. He initially sought $25,000 in damages, which he claimed represented his out-of-pocket expenses.
## BMW’s Defense
In its defense, BMW argued that the range of battery-electric vehicles is influenced by various factors, including driving behavior, environmental conditions, and the use of onboard features. Despite this, Kleiman expressed dissatisfaction with the court’s ruling, feeling that the damages awarded did not adequately hold BMW accountable for its misleading claims.
## Conclusion: A Costly Victory
While Kleiman’s case against BMW highlights the importance of transparency in vehicle marketing, the financial implications of the ruling raise questions about the value of his legal battle. Although he achieved a legal victory, the requirement to pay BMW’s legal fees has left him in a precarious financial position.
As the electric vehicle market continues to grow, this case serves as a reminder for consumers to remain vigilant about the claims made by manufacturers and the potential consequences of pursuing legal action.
### Related Articles
– [BMW Owner Awarded $1.9 Million After Soft-Close Door Snips Thumb](https://www.carscoops.com/2024/07/bmw-driver-awarded-1-9-million-after-soft-close-door-cuts-thumb/)
– [Mustang Owner Sues Ford Over $9,500 EcoBoost Engine Replacement](https://www.carscoops.com/2024/08/class-action-claims-fords-2-3-liter-ecoboost-leaks-coolant-into-the-cylinders/)
This case not only underscores the importance of accurate marketing but also highlights the complexities involved in legal disputes within the automotive industry.