A new lawsuit claims that a series of popular hybrid vehicles contain a critical electrical defect that can cause them to stall suddenly, posing safety risks for drivers and passengers. The complaint was filed by James Martin Page on March 31, 2026, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC.
According to the filing, the plaintiff brings the case both individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated who purchased or leased specific models manufactured from 2019 onward. These include Defender (2020–onward), Range Rover (2020–onward), Range Rover Sport (2019–onward), Range Rover Velar (2020–onward), Range Rover Evoque (2019–onward), Discovery (2020–onward), and Discovery Sport (2019–onward). The vehicles are equipped with what is known as Mild Hybrid Electric Vehicle technology—a system designed to improve efficiency through regenerative braking and enhanced performance using a 48V lithium-ion battery, a Belt-integrated Starter Generator, and a DCDC converter.
The core allegation centers on the DCDC converter component. The complaint states: “The DCDC converter…can fail prematurely, which prevents energy stored in the 48V battery from being converted for use by the 12V battery, which leaves essential functionality of the vehicle unable to operate.” This failure can result in charging system malfunctions, excessive battery drain, error messages such as “Stop Safely Electrical Fault Detected,” loss of electrical functions, starting issues, or complete engine stalling—sometimes while driving.
The plaintiff argues that this defect is inherent in each affected vehicle and was present at purchase. He reports experiencing it personally when his own 2023 Land Rover Defender stalled twice—once in his driveway and again while driving—displaying warnings before becoming immobile. After contacting his local dealership for repairs under warranty, he was told multiple other customers were awaiting similar repairs due to backordered parts. According to service records cited in the filing, replacement parts themselves were also found defective or delayed due to high demand.
The complaint highlights numerous consumer complaints made directly to Jaguar Land Rover North America (JLRNA), its authorized dealers, third-party forums such as Reddit and Disco Sport Forums.co.uk, as well as official reports lodged with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Several NHTSA complaints quoted in the document describe incidents where vehicles lost all power without warning while being driven with families onboard or became undriveable due to electrical failures linked to the DCDC converter.
Despite these reports and internal data tracking practices alleged by the plaintiff—including pre-sale testing and monitoring of warranty claims—the suit claims JLRNA failed to disclose or actively concealed knowledge of this defect from consumers. It references technical service bulletins issued by JLRNA acknowledging internal failures within the DCDC converter but notes that recommended repairs only involve replacing faulty converters with identical components prone to repeat failure.
Plaintiff Page contends that had he known about this issue at purchase he would have either paid less or chosen not to buy at all: “Had Plaintiff and Class Members known about this serious Defect at the time of purchase, they either would not have purchased their Class Vehicles or else would have paid substantially less.”
The legal arguments presented include breach of express warranty—since repairs do not permanently fix the problem—and breach of implied warranty of merchantability. The suit also challenges what it describes as unconscionable warranty terms imposed without negotiation after sale completion. Plaintiff asserts that Jaguar Land Rover’s conduct has caused economic harm through overpayment for defective vehicles and out-of-pocket expenses during repair delays.
As remedies, Page seeks certification of nationwide and state classes covering all similarly affected owners; compensatory damages; statutory damages; specific performance; attorney’s fees; costs; equitable relief including an injunction requiring disclosure of defects; reimbursement for related expenses; and any further relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Attorneys representing James Martin Page are referenced throughout but not named explicitly in this portion of the document. No judge names are provided. The case is identified as Case No. 2:26-cv-03438.
Source: 226cv03438_Page_v_Jaguar_Land_Rover_North_America_LLC_Complaint_District_New_Jersey.pdf
