— An Endurance Warranty Services lawsuit has been partly dismissed, including class action claims.
However, the judge gave the plaintiffs leave to modify and refile most of their claims.
The Endurance warranty lawsuit was filed by five customers who claim they paid for "vehicle service contracts" that were worthless.
The class action lawsuit alleges Endurance advertises its warranty means a customer will “never pay for covered car repairs again.”
According to the plaintiffs, they paid thousands of dollars for the vehicle service contracts and when they tried to use the warranty they were denied coverage. Advertising from Endurance purportedly tricked customers into paying for vehicle warranties that didn't pay off.
Typically purchased through its website, EnduranceWarranty.com, the service contracts are advertised as America’s “Best Vehicle Protection Plan Provider,” and promises customers will receive “complete coverage you can count on.”
The lawsuit goes on to contend the warranty plans are advertised as “the most comprehensive auto protection plans in the industry.”
The Endurance warranty lawsuit asserts it takes several weeks or months for the company to decide on claims, only for customers to be told repairs won't be paid for by Endurance. Customers also claim they had to park their vehicles while waiting for claims decisions, then still got stuck paying the bills.
One plaintiff complains she paid about $4,500 for her Endurance warranty service contract which advertised coverage for the transmission in her Ford F-150. She filed a claim for a transmission replacement and Endurance allegedly took a month just to tell her the claim was denied.
She was without use of her truck and by the end, she paid about $8,500 in out-of-pocket expenses to replace the transmission. The other plaintiffs tell similar stories with similar outcomes.
According to the warranty class action:
"Endurance 'employ[s] scare tactics and other unfair and misleading conduct to induce contracts that do not offer the promised coverage.' Endurance 'sales representatives are directed to scare consumers that consumers’ vehicles are prone to suffering from certain failures and that they will be subject to high-cost repair bills,' and to 'omit material information about coverage under the contract.'”
Motion to Dismiss the Endurance Warranty Lawsuit
The company filed a motion to dismiss the class action and also a motion to compel arbitration. According to Endurance, four of five plaintiffs agreed to arbitrate their claims.
In a 43-page opinion, Judge Robert W. Gettleman sent one plaintiff to arbitration and paused his claims for now, but allowed the other plaintiffs' claims to proceed.
As for the motion to dismiss based on a class action waiver, the court denied the motion as to one plaintiff but granted the motion as to the other four plaintiffs.
And importantly, as for the motion to dismiss or strike the class action allegations, the judge granted the motion to strike the class action allegations.
The judge allowed fraud claims to move forward but dismissed unjust enrichment and negligent misrepresentation claims. The judge also allowed various state consumer protection law claims to proceed.
Other than the one plaintiff who had their claims sent to arbitration, the remaining plaintiffs were given leave to file an amended warranty lawsuit by December 23, 2025. Endurance must respond to the modified and refiled lawsuit by January 20, 2026.
The Endurance warranty lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois: Jessica Cooper, et al., v. Endurance Dealer Services, LLC, and Endurance Warranty Services, LLC.
The plaintiffs are represented by Fegan Scott LLC, and Sauder Schelkopf LLC.