California Lemon Law


Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Dealer’s Warranties- Protect Your Lemon Law Rights

Used car dealers typically sell cars on which the manufacturer’s warranty has expired. Consumers often assume that used cars do not qualify for the California Lemon Law. However, sometimes the dealer will issue a separate “dealer’s warranty” – usually good for 30 days. The short term of the warranty gives you as the buyer a very narrow time frame to do anything about a problem car. However, you still have some rights.

The first and most important rule is know what you’re buying. But let’s say despite all of your diligence, the car starts to sputter when you try to accelerate up to freeways speeds or you discover some other serious defect two days after you buy it. It is very important to present the vehicle for repairs and make a record of it within the 30-day period and if the problem isn’t handled to go back.

Ideally, you’ll present the car, they’ll do the work and give you a repair order documenting when you brought it to them. But what do you do if the dealer says, sorry we’re busy, bring it in next week (after the warranty is up)? Or, they claim it is a normal characteristic of the vehicle and refuse to repair it or give you a document?

It is vital to any case you may want to present to have evidence of presenting it for repair within the warranty period. If polite persistence doesn’t get you a repair order, you can write a letter to the dealer stating the date and time you brought the car in for service, whom you spoke to, the defects with the car that you wanted to fix and the exact response. You can have someone go with you who can provide corroboration that you went there. You should save things such as voice mails and e-mails from the dealership that indicate they knew of the problem within the warranty period.

If you have a used car that can’t be fixed don’t assume you have no rights under the lemon law just because it is used. A qualified lemon law attorney may be able to help you get a refund or replacement. The job is made easier if you’ve got a paper trail.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

What Isn’t the Lemon Law Presumption?

Many people mistakenly believe that in order to qualify for the California lemon law your vehicle must be in the shop a pre-requisite number of times within a certain mileage period. This is simply not so. There is what is a called a “presumption” – e.g. in California if your vehicle has been in the shop 4 or more times within the first 18,000 miles for the same defect, or, 30 days in the shop within 18,000 miles, one is presumed to have a lemon. The advantage gained is a technical one; instead of having the burden to prove your vehicle is a lemon, the burden shifts to the manufacturer to show you don’t. Otherwise the real test is and always has been, whether the manufacturer had a reasonable number of attempts to repair the vehicle, and the defect is substantial. That means e.g. your first problem could start as late as 30,000 miles and so long as you give the manufacturer a reasonable opportunity to repair your defect, you may be entitled to a buyback.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009

How Reliable Is Your Car?

“Reliability” is one of the most important qualities in a car. We depend on them to get us to work, get the kids to their various activities, shopping and many, many other aspects of our daily lives. For most families a car that will be there for you when you need it is a necessity. California lemon law and the lemon laws of other states recognize the importance of the automobile to our daily lives by providing remedies to buyers whose cars are substantially defective.

The highly-respected magazine, Consumer Reports, also takes heed of the importance of reliability by publishing an annual reliability survey based on actual experiences of car owners. Asian cars have for many years dominated the survey and 2009 in which they captured nine of the top ten spots was no exception. Mercury came in tenth. Combined with Ford’s sixteenth-place finish, this made Ford by far the best of the US automakers and also the only one that appears to be gaining on its international competition. Consumer Reports noted that it is the sole US automaker to achieve “world-class reliability.” By contrast, Chrysler’s three brands slipped further in the ratings, though the survey mostly reflects cars that were made before the new ownership team took over.

How well a brand or model did in a survey will not of course tell you whether or not you have a lemon. If your car is not performing, regardless of its reputation, don’t delay getting needed repairs. If it still isn’t fixed a qualified lemon law attorney can help you determine whether or not you have a case.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Friday, October 30th, 2009

California Lemon Law- Does it Require Arbitration?

Some lemon laws may require you to go through an informal arbitration process before you can file a lemon lawsuit. Others may not. In the case where you are not required to do this, it should be known that arbitration is rarely helpful, even if you win. For example, the arbitrator may issue an eloquently worded opinion finding that your defect exists, but that “in all fairness” it looks as if it could be repaired. So, instead of awarding you the refund or replacement that the law requires, you are “awarded” another repair attempt. This isn’t an award at all. It is something you were entitled to under your warranty anyway!

What’s even worse is the “award” of a refund with deductions to your refund that are not permitted by your state law. There is no real oversight committee to see that the law is actually followed.

More often than not the arbitration process turns out to be yet another obstacle placed in between the consumer and his goal, to get their money back for a bad vehicle. In all my years I have observed that it is indeed a rare occurrence for a consumer to receive the relief they are actually entitled to under the law. One is better off seeking the assistance of a competent lemon law attorney.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

Thursday, October 22nd, 2009

California Lemon Law Co-Author Dies

We would like to take a moment to express our appreciation for the life and work of former California assemblyman and state senator Robert G. Beverly who recently died at the age of 84. Mr. Beverly is best-known as the co-author of California’s famous Song-Beverly Act, which since its passage in 1970 has formed the basis for California’s lemon law, considered by many to offer the strongest protection to automobile consumers in the nation as well as to buyers of many other products.

Beverly was a Republican who collaborated with Democrat Alfred Song to produce the bipartisan law. According to those who knew Beverly, working well with people of either party was one of his strengths.

Californians should be grateful for Robert Beverly’s efforts to create a level playing field in the marketplace and his legacy in the form of the bill that bears his name.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments

Friday, September 25th, 2009

The Disincentive In Repairing Defects

You’re in the showroom and, despite the recession, you’ve got the financial resources for the high-end luxury car you’ve always wanted. In addition to showing you all of the bells and whistles that will enhance your driving experience, the sales person is assuring you that all of the cash you’re about to shell out will guarantee a very safe and reliable car. There is no chance that a car of this caliber could be a lemon car. Certainly the dealership will have every incentive to make very sure that the car you drive off their lot will give you plenty of trouble-free, high performance driving, right?

Not necessarily. A recent study of Mercedes dealers indicated that their profitability depends on service more than sales. When dealers perform work on your car under warranty they send the bill to the manufacturer for reimbursement. In cases where the repair is not covered under warranty or the warranty has expired the consumer is responsible for repair costs. When there is a question of whether or not the defect is covered under warranty, the dealer asks for approval for a tear down to inspect the defect and submits the claim for warranty approval with the caveat that the consumer may be responsible for the costs of a tear down and repairs if it is decided that the warranty does not cover the defect. When Mercedes put out cars that broke down every few thousand miles, the dealers were raking in the dough. Oddly enough, as Mercedes has tried to improve their product quality, some dealerships have felt a financial pinch.

It’s tough to trust a system where the business that sells you the car has a disincentive to make sure it’s going to be free from defects. This is just another reason why consumers need to know their rights under California lemon law or the state in which they live.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , ,
Posted in California Lemon Law, Warranties, lemon law | No Comments

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

California Lemon Law: Repair Order Alteration Dealer Trick #2

One of the tests for determining whether a vehicle is a lemon is whether there have been repeated repairs for the same problem. To avoid this, the dealership will often write up the same problem in different ways to make it look like different problems. This is subtle, and you might not even notice it, so pay attention when the service writer at the dealership fills in your repair order.

For example, you describe the problem as “check engine light comes on, car stalls.” The service writer suggests it might be something wrong with the Emission Control System, so he writes down “ECS problem” This is not what you said. Be absolutely sure the service write puts down exactly what you tell him to write down. It matters!

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in California Lemon Law, Engine Problems, Warranties, lemon law | 2 Comments

Monday, September 21st, 2009

California’s Branded Lemons

For those with a conscious, not wanting to pass on the problems they have had with their lemon vehicle, there is good news.

The California legislature has provisions in the California Lemon Law that are imposed on any manufacturer who buys a vehicle from a consumer who has made a request that the vehicle be bought back after multiple warranty repair visits.

First and foremost is the requirement that the manufacturer list all the warranty based complaints made by the prior owner, and what was done to remedy the problems for the any subsequent purchaser. This puts the subsequent purchaser on notice that there was something wrong with the vehicle, at least at some point in time. It also gives the subsequent buyer the chance to have the vehicle inspected for himself to see, if their estimation the defect was actually remedied.

If the manufacturer reacquires a vehicle or assists a dealer in reacquiring a vehicle pursuant to the lemon law, the DMV registration must be branded “Lemon Law Buyback”. Further, the manufacturer must have a disclosure notice form for the subsequent purchaser to read and sign, which sets forth the problems experienced by the prior owner and detailing what was done to handle it.

So, not to worry. The legislature was quite concerned about protecting unsuspecting buyers of from used and irreparable motor vehicles that were being sold in the marketplace without proper notification. These notices serve the interests of consumers who have a right to information relevant to their buying decisions.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments

Friday, September 18th, 2009

California Lemon Law Attorneys- Anyone Can Afford One.

The California Lemon Law was created to give consumers rights to a replacement or refund once they have given a manufacturer through it’s selling dealers a reasonable opportunity to repair defects that substantially impair the use value or safety of their vehicle.

But what about hiring an attorney to enforce your rights? Isn’t that expensive? An attorney who has experience representing consumers in lemon law knows he will be compensated by his client’s right under the law to recover attorneys fees as part of the recovery from the manufacturer. The law was designed recognizing that consumers have limited funds and sought to encourage consumers to pursue their rights, and to encourage attorneys to represent these consumers, by ensuring full compensation for time expended regardless of the consumer’s monetary recovery.

The California Supreme Court said: “… the primary financial benefit the Song-Beverly Act [lemon law] offers to consumers who sue thereunder to enforce their rights: their ability, if successful, to recover their ‘attorney’s fees based on actual time expended.’ Such fees generally comprise the lion’s share of the litigation costs, and the prospect of having to pay attorney fees even if one wins a lawsuit can serve as a powerful disincentive to the unfortunate purchaser of a malfunctioning automobile. By permitting prevailing buyers to recover their attorney fees in addition to costs and expenses, our Legislature has provided injured consumers strong encouragement to seek legal redress in a situation in which a lawsuit might not otherwise have been economically feasible.”

So don’t let the idea that hiring an attorney to represent your rights in the context of a Lemon Law claim back you down from going forward. This law was made for you if you own a “lemon.” Use it.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in California Lemon Law, Uncategorized, Warranties, lemon law | No Comments

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

Another Lemon Law Defense Trick; Lack of Maintenance

How many of you keep track of the due dates on the maintenance required for your vehicle? I’m good with oil changes, but I don’t really keep good track of the special maintenance service. This could prove to be very costly in ways you might not imagine.

In a period of two weeks I have had two ladies contact me to review their prospective lemon law cases. They both had defects which they had reported with regularity to the servicing dealer. Both presumed that the dealer was performing the required maintenance on their vehicle, which had come as part of the purchase. As it turned out in both instances, the dealer failed to advise the client during their multiple warranty repair visits, that their vehicle was due for some sort of scheduled maintenance service. Later, after the lemon law claim became clear, the manufacturer blamed the client for failing to properly maintain the vehicle, which they maintained was the true source of the defect. There was enough plausibility that I had to decline both cases.

But it was disturbing to me that a client who had paid for maintenance as part of the purchase contract would have the duty to bring the maintenance schedule to the attention of the servicing dealer. Sure enough, in the warranty manual in each case, the duty lies squarely on the shoulders of the buyer. Nonetheless, what type of operation would neglect to point this out to a customer, especially with the idea of creating a repeat customer? I own a vehicle where maintenance came as part of the purchase price. My dealer keeps me informed always when my vehicle is due for maintenance. I don’t instruct them to perform it – although according to the manual it is my duty. My dealer wants my business, so he takes care of me. They bring to my attention anything that is due and it gets done.

In the two instances cited above, neither woman was informed they were due for maintenance, though it came as part of their purchase contract. Both told me they instructed the dealer to do whatever was necessary. Apparently this wasn’t good enough. But for the lack of maintenance, they both had legitimate lemon law claims. Failure to properly maintain a vehicle is a potential defense in a lemon law claim – if it relates to the defect about which the owner complained. Unfortunately for these two ladies, for lack of proper maintenance that related to their defects, I had to turn down their cases. Now they may be stuck with a vehicle that is plagued with a problem that will never get right, or will cost them countless visits until a technician is lucky enough to remedy the defect; probably after the warranty expires and she has to pay for the service.

Did the dealer see a lemon coming down the road? Is this why the dealer chose not to give the client the “heads up” that maintenance was due – because they knew they could blame the customer for lack of maintenance as a defense to the lemon law claim? Having practiced California lemon law for over 22 years, it would come as no surprise if this were true. Just when I think I’ve seen everything…

The moral of the story is, don’t rely on your dealer to keep you informed when maintenance is due on your vehicle – especially if you have already had the vehicle in for warranty repairs repeatedly. Don’t jeopardize your lemon law rights by giving the manufacturer ammunition to use against you by failing to adhere to your maintenance schedule.

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in California Lemon Law, Warranties, lemon law | No Comments

« Older Entries