1793.2. (a) Every manufacturer of consumer goods sold in this state and for which the manufacturer has made an express warranty shall:
(1) (A) Maintain in this state sufficient service and repair facilities reasonably close to all areas where its consumer goods are sold to carry out the terms of those warranties or designate and authorize in this state as service and repair facilities independent repair or service facilities reasonably close to all areas where its consumer goods are sold to carry out the terms of the warranties.
(B) As a means of complying with this paragraph, a manufacturer may enter into warranty service contracts with independent service and repair facilities. The warranty service contracts may provide for a fixed schedule of rates to be charged for warranty service or warranty repair work. However, the rates fixed by those contracts shall be in conformity with the requirements of subdivision (c) of Section 1793.3. The rates established pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 1793.3, between the manufacturer and the independent service and repair facility, shall not preclude a good faith discount which is reasonably related to reduced credit and general overhead cost factors arising from the manufacturer's payment of warranty charges direct to the independent service and repair facility. The warranty service contracts authorized by this paragraph shall not be executed to cover a period of time in excess of one year, and may be renewed only by a separate, new contract or letter of agreement between the manufacturer and the independent service and repair facility.
(2) In the event of a failure to comply with paragraph (1) of this subdivision, be subject to Section 1793.5.
(3) Make available to authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period.
(b) Where those service and repair facilities are maintained in this state and service or repair of the goods is necessary because they do not conform with the applicable express warranties, service and repair shall be commenced within a reasonable time by the manufacturer or its representative in this state. Unless the buyer agrees in writing to the contrary, the goods shall be serviced or repaired so as to conform to the applicable warranties within 30 days. Delay caused by conditions beyond the control of the manufacturer or his representatives shall serve to extend this 30-day requirement. Where delay arises, conforming goods shall be tendered as soon as possible following termination of the condition giving rise to the delay.
(c) The buyer shall deliver nonconforming goods to the manufacturer's service and repair facility within this state, unless, due to reasons of size and weight, or method of attachment, or method of installation, or nature of the nonconformity, delivery cannot reasonably be accomplished. If the buyer cannot return the nonconforming goods for any of these reasons, he or she shall notify the manufacturer or its nearest service and repair facility within the state. Written notice of nonconformity to the manufacturer or its service and repair facility shall constitute return of the goods for purposes of this section. Upon receipt of that notice of nonconformity, the manufacturer shall, at its option, service or repair the goods at the buyer's residence, or pick up the goods for service and repair, or arrange for transporting the goods to its service and repair facility. All reasonable costs of transporting the goods when a buyer cannot return them for any of the above reasons shall be at the manufacturer's expense. The reasonable costs of transporting nonconforming goods after delivery to the service and repair facility until return of the goods to the buyer shall be at the manufacturer's expense.
(d) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), if the manufacturer or its representative in this state does not service or repair the goods to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer shall either replace the goods or reimburse the buyer in an amount equal to the purchase price paid by the buyer, less that amount directly attributable to use by the buyer prior to the discovery of the nonconformity.
(2) If the manufacturer or its representative in this state is unable to service or repair a new motor vehicle, as that term is defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 1793.22, to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer shall either promptly replace the new motor vehicle in accordance with subparagraph (A) or promptly make restitution to the buyer in accordance with subparagraph (B). However, the buyer shall be free to elect restitution in lieu of replacement, and in no event shall the buyer be required by the manufacturer to accept a replacement vehicle.
(A) In the case of replacement, the manufacturer shall replace the buyer's vehicle with a new motor vehicle substantially identical to the vehicle replaced. The replacement vehicle shall be accompanied by all express and implied warranties that normally accompany new motor vehicles of that specific kind. The manufacturer also shall pay for, or to, the buyer the amount of any sales or use tax, license fees, registration fees, and other official fees which the buyer is obligated to pay in connection with the replacement, plus any incidental damages to which the buyer is entitled under Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.
(B) In the case of restitution, the manufacturer shall make restitution in an amount equal to the actual price paid or payable by the buyer, including any charges for transportation and manufacturer-installed options, but excluding nonmanufacturer items installed by a dealer or the buyer, and including any collateral charges such as sales tax, license fees, registration fees, and other official fees, plus any incidental damages to which the buyer is entitled under Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.
(C) When the manufacturer replaces the new motor vehicle pursuant to subparagraph (A), the buyer shall only be liable to pay the manufacturer an amount directly attributable to use by the buyer of the replaced vehicle prior to the time the buyer first delivered the vehicle to the manufacturer or distributor, or its authorized service and repair facility for correction of the problem that gave rise to the nonconformity. When restitution is made pursuant to subparagraph (B), the amount to be paid by the manufacturer to the buyer may be reduced by the manufacturer by that amount directly attributable to use by the buyer prior to the time the buyer first delivered the vehicle to the manufacturer or distributor, or its authorized service and repair facility for correction of the problem that gave rise to the nonconformity. The amount directly attributable to use by the buyer shall be determined by multiplying the actual price of the new motor vehicle paid or payable by the buyer, including any charges for transportation and manufacturer-installed options, by a fraction having as its denominator 120,000 and having as its numerator the number of miles traveled by the new motor vehicle prior to the time the buyer first delivered the vehicle to the manufacturer or distributor, or its authorized service and repair facility for correction of the problem that gave rise to the nonconformity. Nothing in this paragraph shall in any way limit the rights or remedies available to the buyer under any other law.
1793.22
(a)This section shall be known and may be cited as the Tanner Consumer Protection Act.
(b) It shall be presumed that a reasonable number of attempts have been made to conform a new motor vehicle to the applicable express warranties if, within 18 months from delivery to the buyer or 18,000 miles on the odometer of the vehicle, whichever occurs first, one or more of the following occurs:
(1) The same nonconformity results in a condition that is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if the vehicle is driven and the nonconformity has been subject to repair two or more times by the manufacturer or its agents, and the buyer or lessee has at least once directly notified the manufacturer of the need for the repair of the nonconformity.
(2) The same nonconformity has been subject to repair four or more times by the manufacturer or its agents and the buyer has at least once directly notified the manufacturer of the need for the repair of the nonconformity.
(3) The vehicle is out of service by reason of repair of nonconformities by the manufacturer or its agents for a cumulative total of more than 30 calendar days since delivery of the vehicle to the buyer. The 30-day limit shall be extended only if repairs cannot be performed due to conditions beyond the control of the manufacturer or its agents. The buyer shall be required to directly notify the manufacturer pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) only if the manufacturer has clearly and conspicuously disclosed to the buyer, with the warranty or the owner's manual, the provisions of this section and that of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, including the requirement that the buyer must notify the manufacturer directly pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2). The notification, if required, shall be sent to the address, if any, specified clearly and conspicuously by the manufacturer in the warranty or owner's manual. This presumption shall be a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of proof, and it may be asserted by the buyer in any civil action, including an action in small claims court, or other formal or informal proceeding.
(c) If a qualified third-party dispute resolution process exists, and the buyer receives timely notification in writing of the availability of that qualified third-party dispute resolution process with a description of its operation and effect, the presumption in subdivision (b) may not be asserted by the buyer until after the buyer has initially resorted to the qualified third-party dispute resolution process as required in subdivision (d). Notification of the availability of the qualified third-party dispute resolution process is not timely if the buyer suffers any prejudice resulting from any delay in giving the notification. If a qualified third-party dispute resolution process does not exist, or if the buyer is dissatisfied with that third-party decision, or if the manufacturer or its agent neglects to promptly fulfill the terms of the qualified third-party dispute resolution process decision after the decision is accepted by the buyer, the buyer may assert the presumption provided in subdivision (b) in an action to enforce the buyer's rights under subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2. The findings and decision of a qualified third-party dispute resolution process shall be admissible in evidence in the action without further foundation. Any period of limitation of actions under any federal or California laws with respect to any person shall be extended for a period equal to the number of days between the date a complaint is filed with a third-party dispute resolution process and the date of its decision or the date before which the manufacturer or its agent is required by the decision to fulfill its terms if the decision is accepted by the buyer, whichever occurs later.
(d)A qualified third-party dispute resolution process shall be one that does all of the following:
(1) Complies with the minimum requirements of the Federal Trade Commission for informal dispute settlement procedures as set forth in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as those regulations read on January 1, 1987.
(2) Renders decisions which are binding on the manufacturer if the buyer elects to accept the decision.
(3) Prescribes a reasonable time, not to exceed 30 days after the decision is accepted by the buyer, within which the manufacturer or its agent must fulfill the terms of its decisions.
(4) Provides arbitrators who are assigned to decide disputes with copies of, and instruction in, the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission's regulations in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as those regulations read on January 1, 1987, Division 2 (commencing with Section 2101) of the Commercial Code, and this chapter.
(5)Requires the manufacturer, when the process orders, under the terms of this chapter, either that the nonconforming motor vehicle be replaced if the buyer consents to this remedy or that restitution be made to the buyer, to replace the motor vehicle or make restitution in accordance with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2.
(6)Provides, at the request of the arbitrator or a majority of the arbitration panel, for an inspection and written report on the condition of a nonconforming motor vehicle, at no cost to the buyer, by an automobile expert who is independent of the manufacturer.
(7)Takes into account, in rendering decisions, all legal and equitable factors, including, but not limited to, the written warranty, the rights and remedies conferred in regulations of the Federal Trade Commission contained in Part 703 of Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as those regulations read on January 1, 1987, Division 2 (commencing with Section 2101) of the Commercial Code, this chapter, and any other equitable considerations appropriate in the circumstances. Nothing in this chapter requires that, to be certified as a qualified third-party dispute resolution process pursuant to this section, decisions of the process must consider or provide remedies in the form of awards of punitive damages or multiple damages, under subdivision (c) of Section 1794, or of attorneys' fees under subdivision (d) of Section 1794, or of consequential damages other than as provided in subdivisions (a) and(b)of Section 1794, including, but not limited to, reasonable repair, towing, and rental car costs actually incurred by the buyer.
(8)Requires that no arbitrator deciding a dispute may be a party to the dispute and that no other person, including an employee, agent, or dealer for the manufacturer, may be allowed to participate substantively in the merits of any dispute with the arbitrator unless the buyer is allowed toparticipate also. Nothing in this subdivision prohibits any member of anarbitration board from deciding a dispute.
(9)Obtains and maintains certification by the Department of Consumer Affairs pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 472) of Division 1 of the Business and Professions Code.
(e)For the purposes of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 and this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)"Nonconformity" means a nonconformity which substantially impairs the use, value, or safety of the new motor vehicle to the buyer or lessee.
(2)"New motor vehicle" means a new motor vehicle that is bought or used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. "New motor vehicle" also means a new motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight under 10,000 pounds that is bought or used primarily for business purposes by a person, including a partnership, limited liability company, corporation, association, or any other legal entity, to which not more than five motor vehicles are registered in this state. "New motor vehicle" includes the chassis, chassis cab, and that portion of a motor home devoted to its propulsion, but does not include any portion designed, used, or maintained primarily for human habitation, a dealer-owned vehicle and a "demonstrator" or other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer's new car warranty but does not include a motorcycle or a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Vehicle Code because it is to be operated or used exclusively off the highways. A demonstrator is a vehicle assigned by a dealer for the purpose of demonstrating qualities and characteristics common to vehicles of the same or similar model and type.
(3)"Motor home" means a vehicular unit built on, or permanently attached to, a self-propelled motor vehicle chassis, chassis cab, or van, which becomes an integral part of the completed vehicle, designed for human habitation for recreational or emergency occupancy.
(f)
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall sell, either at wholesale or retail, lease, or transfer a motor vehicle transferred by a buyer or lessee to a manufacturer pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 or a similar statute of any other state, unless thenature of the nonconformity experienced by the original buyer or lessee is clearly and conspicuously disclosed to the prospective buyer, lessee, or transferee, the nonconformity is corrected, and the manufacturer warrants to the new buyer, lessee, or transferee in writing for a period of one year that the motor vehicle is free of that nonconformity.
(2) Except for the requirement that the nature of the nonconformity be disclosed to the transferee, paragraph (1) does not apply to the transfer of a motor vehicle to an educational institution if the purpose of the transfer is to make the motor vehicle available for use in automotive repair courses.
[EFFECTIVE 1/1/2001. Amended September 26, 2000 (Bill Number: SB 1718) (Chapter 679).] [Previously Amended September 21, 1999 (Bill Number: AB 1290) (Chapter 448).] [Previously Amended July 12, 1999 (Bill Number: SB 966) (Chapter 83).]
1794.
(a) Any buyer of consumer goods who is damaged by a failure to comply with any obligation under this chapter or under an implied or express warranty or service contract may bring an action for the recovery of damages and other legal and equitable relief.
(b) The measure of the buyer's damages in an action under this section shall include the rights of replacement or reimbursement as set forth in subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, and the following:
(1) Where the buyer has rightfully rejected or justifiably revoked acceptance of the goods or has exercised any right to cancel the sale, Sections 2711, 2712, and 2713 of the Commercial Code shall apply.
(2) Where the buyer has accepted the goods, Sections 2714 and 2715 of the Commercial Code shall apply, and the measure of damages shall include the cost of repairs necessary to make the goods conform.
(c) If the buyer establishes that the failure to comply was willful, the judgment may include, in addition to the amounts recovered under subdivision (a), a civil penalty which shall not exceed two times the amount of actual damages. This subdivision shall not apply in any class action under Section 382 of the Code of Civil Procedure or under Section 1781, or with respect to a claim based solely on a breach of an implied warranty.
(d) If the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney's fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action.
(e) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, if the buyer establishes a violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2, the buyer shall recover damages and reasonable attorney's fees and costs, and may recover a civil penalty of up to two times the amount of damages.
(2) If the manufacturer maintains a qualified third-party dispute resolution process which substantially complies with Section 1793.22, the manufacturer shall not be liable for any civil penalty pursuant to this subdivision.
(3) After the occurrence of the events giving rise to the presumption established in subdivision (b) of Section 1793.22, the buyer may serve upon the manufacturer a written notice requesting that the manufacturer comply with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2. If the buyer fails to serve the notice, the manufacturer shall not be liable for a civil penalty pursuant to this subdivision.
(4) If the buyer serves the notice described in paragraph (3) and the manufacturer complies with paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 1793.2 within 30 days of the service of that notice, the manufacturer shall not be liable for a civil penalty pursuant to this subdivision.
(5) If the buyer recovers a civil penalty under subdivision (c), the buyer may not also recover a civil penalty under this subdivision for the same violation.
California Lemon Law
You think you have a “lemon” – who do you call first?
Many vehicle problems can be identified and repaired by your franchised dealership right from the start, or by the 2nd visit. Sometimes a visit with the Service Manager at the 2nd visit can result in a potential repeated problem being resolved right away. Other times vehicles have a chronic problem (or problems) that despite repeated visits to the dealership (not to mention countless days in the shop) turn out to be “lemons.” This is why each state has a Lemon Law. It’s when despite your best efforts the vehicle just turns out to be chronically defective, and needs to be repurchased or replaced.
Sometimes the old adage “what you do say can hurt you” can be an accurate statement when it comes to Lemon Law claim. Consumers are not generally versed in law, civil litigation, speaking with automobile manufacturers or their “customer assistance centers,” or Lemon Laws. The consumer should consider getting professional advice from an experienced Lemon Law attorney that knows and understands the Lemon Law in your state.
Lemon Law Attorneys
Going up against the “automobile giants” can be a daunting task, often met with intimidation and misinformation being dispensed to the consumer.
Lemon Law attorneys serve a valuable function in the Lemon law and should be consulted early on when the consumer suspects that their vehicle is turning out to be a “lemon.” An experienced Lemon Law attorney can provide valuable information and guidance to the consumer.
If the services of a Lemon Law attorney are indicated, the consumer can “rest easy” knowing that their “lemon law case” is being handled by a professional lawyer experienced in their state’s Lemon Law, and can ensure the consumer no less than their full entitlement under their state’s Lemon Law.
The “lemon lawsuit” – taking it to Court?
All too many consumers are under the impression that in order to have their vehicle repurchased or replaced under their state’s Lemon Law, they must “go to court.” This is far from the fact. “Going to court” is the “last resort” when all other means of “settling” a case have failed.
Consumers also use the term “court” and “win” in the same sentence. While “winning” at court case is the desired outcome, a consumer rarely sees a courtroom in a Lemon Law case.
What consumers often do not realize is that when you hear the words Lemon Law, it is that the word law follows the word lemon. What this means is that a consumer must not only be able to understand the law, but also enforce it. For this reason alone a consumer should consider calling a Lemon Law attorney in their state to find out what their rights are under their state’s Lemon Law. Upon review of the case, if the Lemon Law attorney’s services are required, the consumer knows that they will have a lawyer enforcing the law for them.
How your car dealership can contribute to the problem
One of the key documentation elements to a Lemon Law case is the “repair order” and “invoice.” Most states’ Lemon Laws use the number of times you visited the dealer to get a particular defect corrected in determining whether a vehicle qualifies as a “lemon.”
Dealers can create a problem by what is known as the “open” repair order. An example of this is when a customer has a “repair order” written (and gets a signed copy of it) and the dealer calls and says “we had to order a part, come on by and pick up your car, we are going to hold the repair order ticket open until the part comes in.” This is where you say “no”. If the car is available to drive, but parts are on order, then you need have the dealer close out that repair order and give you an invoice when you pick up the vehicle. You are entitled to a closed repair invoice that accurately reflects what the dealership did to diagnose your written complaint, what parts are on order, the “date in/date out” as well as “miles in/miles out”, giving you a record of that repair visit.
By following the information outlined above, you will avoid having two repair attempts by the dealer turning into one, because they otherwise were going to “hold open” the repair order and only give you one invoice after parts had come in, and repairs were completed.
Turning frustration into “time well spent”
For most Americans, their vehicle is one of their largest monetary investments and reoccurring monthly payments. Protecting equity in that investment is why Lemon Laws were written in the first place.
To turn frustration into “time well spent,” take the frustration and put it to use. If you think your vehicle is, or may turn out to be a “lemon,” start with the basics: paperwork. Find and organize all of your original sale/lease documents, licensing/registration documents, monthly payment statement(s), and your repair order documents. Take photocopies of originals and set them all in a chronological order from the day you took delivery of your vehicle until now. You will note that warranty repairs at car dealerships are broken down into two documents per visit. First, the “work order” -- this is the document you sign that has your stated complaint. Second, the “invoice” -- this is the document you receive when your vehicle repair is completed and the vehicle is returned to you. The “invoice” has “date in/date out” information as well as “miles in/miles out.” The invoice also notes what the dealer did in an attempt to diagnose and repair your vehicle for each of your complaints.
You may find that you are missing certain invoices, as they may have been lost or the dealer simply didn’t give you one. If this is the case, visit your Service Advisor or Service Manager and request copies. Some dealerships’ computers “purge” repair documents every 30 days. If this is the case, then simply ask your Advisor or Manager to provide you with a “warranty repair history” printout from their dealer-to-manufacturer linked computer. All dealers have this, and the printout will show every warranty claim submitted by any dealer in the United States to the manufacturer of your vehicle. Have your license/registration with you, as they will need verification of ownership before giving out this information.
Visiting the “home” page of this website will give you a listing of the Lemon Law in your state, as well as an experienced Lemon Law attorney serving your state. We suggest you read the Lemon Law statute and call the listed Lemon Law attorney for a consultation. Most cases that meet a basic criteria are given a free case review/evaluation.
Remember, the selling or servicing automobile dealer is not responsible to repurchase or replace your car under your state’s “lemon law,” the manufacturer is. The automobile manufacturers are very experienced in dealing with Lemon Laws and as you can imagine, are not in the business to buy back or replace vehicles every time a customer says “my vehicle is a lemon.” Their responsibility under their limited warranty is simply to correct the warranty non-conformity (defect) so that the vehicle conforms to its warranty’s provisions.
Turning frustration into “time well spent” is funneling the frustration into getting yourself organized, researching your rights, and then taking the appropriate action. It is sometimes a slow process, but be patient, “keep your cool,” and you will have the best chance of coming out a “winner” and getting your vehicle repurchased or replaced.
Automobile Manufacturer’s “solutions", “offers” and “releases”
The consumer will often call the manufacturer’s “customer assistance center” or other facility offered by the manufacturer via an “800” number to “assist” in resolving the customer’s request for help, or a repurchase or replacement vehicle under their state’s Lemon Law.
It is vitally important to know that these “assistance centers” are staffed by people who are typically recording your conversation for “quality control purposes.” The recording can potentially be used against the consumer in a later Arbitration or legal action depending upon the content of the recording – that is – if it benefits the manufacturer’s position. You should consider telling the customer assistance center representative that you intend to record the conversation as well, so both parties have a record of what was said.
In dealing with these “customer assistance centers,” the consumer is often given a “case number”. Do not be misled by the word “case” or “case number”. It is not a legal Lemon Law case, as you might think. It is simply a reference number used to retrieve information on your past call(s) into the “customer assistance center” when calling in again.
Often the agent at the customer assistance center will “offer” a “solution” to the consumer’s request for repurchase or replacement of their defective vehicle by offering a Service Contract, Extended Warranty, the return of a few monthly car payments, or other “resolutions” to the consumer’s request for “lemon law” assistance. These “offers” are often accompanied by a “release” form that forever releases the manufacturer from any legal responsibility to you for current or future problems you may encounter with your vehicle. These "offers" and "resolutions" do not comply with state lemon law requirements in any way or fashion. Car owner beware!
Some customer assistance centers will simply “re-direct” the customer back to their selling dealer to get another repair. Others will “inform” the customer that the customer assistance center will “contact” the repairing dealership. This often simply leads to another repair visit, with no satisfaction to the consumer for their defective vehicle. Some consumers have likened this to the “merry-go-round” syndrome. The consumer does not like the “ride” and “wants to get off”.
Contacting an experienced Lemon Law attorney in your state prior to making contact with a “customer assistance center” can often yield valuable information and insight into your potential Lemon Law case, and ensure that you are protected by your Lemon Law rights.
Arbitration
Arbitration, or “third-party dispute resolution,” is a process that allows the manufacturer’s agent and vehicle owner to “state their case” to an “unbiased” 3rd party, called an “arbitrator,” in an attempt to resolve the consumer’s Lemon Law claim for a repurchase or replacement of the “lemon” vehicle.
First, the requirement for arbitration must be established. Each state has its requirement (or lack thereof) of a consumer’s responsibility to pursue non-binding arbitration. Some states do not require arbitration at all, relieving the consumer of this responsibility.
Some states, like California, have “voluntary” arbitration that is offered by the automobile manufacturer and which is binding on the manufacturer, but not on the consumer. In California, arbitration is optional for the consumer and is not required. It is only indicated in certain circumstances where the consumer wants to exert the “presumption” rule. Otherwise, the consumer is free to consult and hire a Lemon Law attorney for legal representation, and the attorney fees are paid by the vehicle’s manufacturer in California. (This will vary by state)
As with the example of California, each state has specific requirements under that state’s statute that the consumer must fulfill and adhere to in seeking restitution under their state’s Lemon Law.
It is important to note that automobile manufacturers may attempt to “settle” a consumer’s “case” before or during the Arbitration process. Manufacturers may offer to “resolve” the consumers request for repurchase or replacement by offering an alternative like a Service Contract, an Extended Warranty, the return of few monthly car payments, or other “resolutions.” These “resolutions” or “settlements” may be far short of what the state’s Lemon Law would require of the manufacturer. Be careful.
A consumer should consider consulting with a qualified Lemon Law attorney in his/her state prior to, or after attending an Arbitration hearing to be assured that they will/are receiving their full entitlement under their state’s Lemon Law, and not something far short of it.
The “Trade Assist” and other car dealership practices to “help” customers “get out” of their “lemon” vehicles
Vehicle owners not familiar with the Lemon Law will often seek the help of their selling dealer in resolving their “lemon vehicle” situation, asking the dealer to “take back” their defective purchase. Here the car dealer can take potential advantage of the customer when the customer is most frustrated – and often at their weakest.
The “trade assist” facilitated by the selling dealer is typically nothing more than another vehicle purchase – that is – the consumer is simply trading in their “lemon” vehicle (often losing all earned equity) and is being sold another vehicle! The dealer resells the “lemon” vehicle and ends up selling two cars! The only way the dealer “assisted” the customer was to help him/herself to another sale!
This “assistance” by the dealer often proves financially straining or fatal to the consumer, as the practice of “over allowance” often comes into play. The consumer is “informed” that their vehicle loan is being “paid off” when being traded in, but conveniently the dealer has not mentioned the loss of the down payment, taxes, licensing fees, and monthly payments already made towards the purchase of the car being traded-in in this scenario. This “over allowance” usually shows up in the price of the new vehicle – meaning that the price is inflated, raising the payment on the new car. Remember, the dealer is not the responsible party for your “lemon” vehicle under state Lemon Laws, the automobile’s manufacturer is. There are certain exceptions to the “who is the responsible party,” and a vehicle owner should consult with a qualified Lemon Law attorney to be apprised of his/her potential rights under their state’s Lemon law and other consumer protection laws that may be applicable.
“Warranty Repair History” - What it is, why you need it, and how to get it.
All too often in the excitement of the “new car experience,” consumers do not retain records of their warranty repair visits, only to be frustrated later when their vehicle turns out to potentially be a “lemon”. Sometimes this is as easy as asking your servicing dealer for copies of your warranty repair invoices – or sometimes not.
Today’s automobile manufacturers and their dealerships are linked together by sophisticated computer systems. The purpose is to keep the dealers and the manufacturers “connected” during the period the vehicle is covered by the manufacturers’ new vehicle limited warranty.
By use of this system, your dealer has the ability to print out a “warranty repair history.” This can be in a simple “summary” format, or a fully detailed “complete” history with the details of complaints, testing and repairs. Either of these formats will cover all warranty repairs done to a vehicle by a franchised new car dealership, and these computers are linked to the manufacturer, who maintains the warranty history database.
You should consider asking your dealership Service Advisor or Service Manager for a printout of your vehicle’s warranty repair history. You may be surprised to find out about warranty repairs that you have long forgotten about, but that may be vital to a Lemon Law claim now, or later on.
Multiple repairs during warranty, but now vehicle is now out of warranty –
Many consumers have vehicles that have repeated repairs that take place during the period covered by the manufacturer’s new vehicle limited warranty only to see the same problem re-surface shortly after the warranty has expired. Many states’ Lemon Laws can offer the consumer protection for vehicles that appear repaired but the same problem(s) comes back again. Contacting a qualified Lemon Law attorney in your state can often yield answers to whether your vehicle may qualify for Lemon Law protection and relief.
Complaining to your Dealer – time well spent?
It is very common for a consumer with problem new vehicle to go to their dealer for help, more often than not with the notion “you sold it to me, you fix it” as the basis for the dealer providing a solution to their problem. Consumers will often go to the owner, manager or other “high level” personnel for assistance and answers. It is important to understand that in the case of Lemon Laws, the auto dealer is typically not responsible to buy your new vehicle back or replace it. The dealer did not build or warrant it, hence it is not responsible to repurchase or replace it. When it comes to Lemon Laws, the consumer must turn to the vehicle’s manufacturer.
Some dealers will “assist” the customer who wants “out” of their defective vehicle by contacting the manufacturer’s area representative. Often the results of a visit by the factory representative is simply another opportunity for the automobile manufacturer to attempt a repair to the offending vehicle. If the consumer only seeks to get their vehicle repaired correctly and keep it, this can be an effective way to get assistance. If they want to take advantage of a “lemon law” claim, having the defect repaired again can turn out to diminish or remove a consumers basis to enact a claim under their state’s Lemon Law. Consumers should consider contacting a qualified Lemon Law attorney in their state for legal guidance as to what their rights and potential remedies are in their state for Lemon Law protection.
Manufacturers’ “Certified” and warranted used vehicles
In today’s highly competitive automobile retailing business, manufacturers are boosting the desirability of their used vehicles by offering “Certified Used Vehicles.” These are vehicles that come with a written warranty directly from the vehicle’s manufacturer. These vehicles can qualify for Lemon Law protection just like a vehicle that is purchased or leased “new.” A qualified Lemon Law attorney can assist you in understanding your Lemon Law rights under a manufacturer’s “certified” used vehicle warranty.
Your New Car Warranty and the Lemon Law
Your new car warranty is a written promise by your vehicle’s manufacturer to repair your vehicle without charge to you if found to be defective in materials or workmanship for the covered components/systems during the designated period. Your new car warranty is not a Lemon Law, but rather a promise to repair any component or system that does not conform to the manufacturer’s New Vehicle Limited Warranty. (Warranty provisions and responsibilities vary from state to state).
Your vehicle’s warranty book “instructions” on the Lemon Law
When you purchased or leased your new vehicle, it came with a warranty book or other printed pamphlet on what steps to take in resolving complaints you have with your vehicle. These “steps” are designed to “assist” the customer in resolving their complaints. Consumers should be aware, however, that these “steps” are often what the automobile manufacturer suggests, and not necessarily what your state’s Lemon Law says you must do. Sometimes the “instructions” on “your responsibilities” were printed in these books before potential amendments to your state’s Lemon Law were enacted. Keep in mind that these warranty books are written by the automobile manufacturer to best serve the manufacturer. They are not without important content, but a consumer should get a “balanced” view of their individual procedural requirements from a legal standpoint from a Lemon Law attorney. Contacting a qualified Lemon Law attorney in your state can be of great assistance in understanding what your responsibilities are as a consumer, and what your rights are under your state’s Lemon Law.
Is my vehicle a Lemon?
Finding out if your vehicle is a “lemon” is full of potential traps. Automobile dealerships and their personnel can’t tell you if your vehicle is a “lemon”, as they are not attorneys and don’t know the law. The auto manufacturer isn’t going to tell you if your vehicle qualifies under your state’s Lemon Law, as the phone representatives within their “customer assistance centers” are not attorneys. To find out if your vehicle qualifies under your state’s Lemon Law, you can call a Lemon Law attorney, who is well versed in your state’s Lemon Law. Most attorneys specializing in the Lemon Law will offer a free consultation and evaluation of your situation, and can advise a course of action to both serve you best and preserve your rights under your state’s Lemon Law.
What defines a vehicle as a “Lemon”?
The consumer’s definition of a “lemon” may be a vehicle that just spends too many days in the dealership’s shop, or the same problem happening over and over again, or just a lot of different problems, spoiling the “new car experience.” Under Lemon Laws, vehicles must meet specific criteria, which varies from each state. It’s typically triggered by a specific number of repair attempts, a specific number of days in the shop, a specific safety defect, or other requirements.
Why Lemon Laws were Enacted
Until the passage of Lemon Laws in the United States, it was nearly impossible for a consumer to force an automobile manufacturer to replace a defective or unsafe vehicle. Auto manufacturers would just have their dealers repair the offending vehicle again and again, or worse yet, just tell the customer “they are all like that” or that the problem “could not be duplicated.” The enactment of Lemon Laws forced the manufacturers to take responsibility for their vehicles that turned out to be “lemons”.
Automobile lemon law
State lemon laws offer protection for buyers of new cars, trucks, motorhomes, and motorcycles. State lemon laws provides different options to the consumer and manufacturer.
For cars and trucks that qualify under a states lemon law, the manufacturer must offer to replace or repurchase the offending “lemon” vehicle. The qualifications and restrictions regarding "replacement" vehicles will vary by state.
Automobile manufacturers will print warranty books that contain “instructions” for consumers who think they may have a lemon vehicle that qualifies under their states lemon law. Consumers must remember that these lemon law “instructions” or “steps to follow” are what the automobile manufacturer wants you to do, and is NOT necessarily the required steps or procedures for utilizing the lemon law process. For example, many manufacturers warranty books will attempt to direct the consumer to attend an arbitration hearing to "resolve" their lemon law claim. Arbitration and your lemon law rights should be discussed with a lemon law attorney in your state before considering utilizing arbitration services, so you can have a balanced viewpoint. Arbitration is optional in some states. As an example, there is no requirement under the California lemon law to utilize voluntary arbitration.. The consumer in California can, as an example, go directly to a lemon law attorney for representation.
Automobile manufacturers' limited warranty coverage's in all states are the same, though certain states may have specific additional warranty rights afforded to the consumer. Each state has different rules for when a lemon law claim can be filed. You should read the lemon law statute for your state from the links above. If the repeated problem continues to occur after the expiration of the new car warranty in certain states, you may still be entitled to protection under the lemon law. In some states the manufacturer’s “extra power-train warranty coverage” can be utilized as lemon law protection for consumers. These extended “power-train” warranties often provide for coverage as long as 100,000 miles.
Arbitration is a dispute resolution process. The arbitration hearings that the consumer attends are often nothing more than a way for automobile manufacturers to be given “another chance” at fixing the consumers vehicle. One of the potential decisions that can be handed down at, or as a result of an arbitration hearing is “the repair decision.” The automobile manufacturer’s representative argues to the arbitrator that the manufacturer should be "given an additional attempt to repair the vehicle", or argues that they (coincidentally) “now have a fix developed” for the consumer’s repeated defective condition. The consumer often goes into a arbitration hearing expecting a “win” or “lose” decision, but becomes stunned when finding out that the outcome of the arbitration for their lemon law claim is simply to return back to the dealer for another repair attempt! The arbitrators are not lawyers in most states. Participation in an arbitration is NOT required to pursue a legal claim under the lemon law in some states. A consumer should consider getting legal advice from a lemon law attorney in their state before proceeding with the arbitration process.
“Customer Assistance Centers”. Consumers can call the manufacturer’s toll-free “assistance center” (this phone number is usually contained in the manufacture’s warranty booklet) and explain that they feel they have a vehicle that qualifies under their state's lemon law. The manufacturer’s representative will typically assign a “case number” to the consumer’s complaint. Often times the unknowing consumer thinks this “case number” means that something will be done, especially when followed by the potential language of “we are opening a case number for you.” Consumers can be mislead that this is the “opening” or “start” of a legal lemon law case. It is NOT. A “case number” is often nothing more than a reference number to the consumer that allows the automobile manufacturer to establish a numerical file on the consumer which can be used to index any future calls.
“The Dealer Trade Assist”. Consumers need to be VERY aware of this “trick of the automobile trade.” Consumers who have been having repeated problems with their vehicle will often seek lemon law relief by asking their car dealer to “buy back” or replace their vehicle. What the consumer does NOT know is that the dealer does not have the responsibility under state lemon laws to repurchase or replace the offending vehicle. This is where “opportunity knocks” for the car dealer in many instances. The car dealer “responds” to the consumer’s request by “offering” to resolve the consumer’s dreadful car problem by offering “to take them out of their car” or “get you out of this car and into a new one” or similar verbiage. This is NOT the lemon law. This is an example of an opportunistic dealer sales tactic of making the consumer believe that they are getting lemon law relief, but in reality the car dealer is taking the offending vehicle in trade, and simply selling the consumer another vehicle at a handsome profit to the dealer! The dealer often hears consumers say, “You have to get me out of this vehicle.” They are simply taking the customers grief and turning it into profit, while the consumer loses part of or all of their earned equity in their vehicle, often resulting in the loss of thousands of dollars. This “dealer trade assist” can often result in the dealer inflating the price of the “replacement” car and putting the consumer further into debt. Consumers should be very aware that the car dealership is in business to make a profit and to sell cars. The “dealer trade assist” is another example of how a consumer can unknowingly THINK they are getting relief from the lemon law, but are simply being taken advantage of.
What is the consumer to do? Consumers can simplify the entire lemon law process by utilizing the services of a specialized lemon law attorney in their state. A qualified lemon law attorney can offer a wealth of information and insight to the consumer. Many lemon law attorneys even offer a free "consultation" or "case review".
What is a “Lemon Law”?
Each state has it’s own “Lemon Law.” In simple terms, a Lemon Law is a law that requires an automobile manufacturer to repurchase or replace a vehicle that has not been properly repaired within “a reasonable number of repair attempts.” What is “a reasonable number of repair attempts” is typically measured by how many repair attempts there have been for the same problem, or by the total number of days the vehicle has been in the shop and out of the hands of the consumer for any and all problems. The necessary number of repair attempts for the same problem and/or the necessary amount of days in the shop vary from state to state.
