A vehicle is a “lemon” if the following
criteria are met within 18 months of delivery to the buyer or
lessee or 18,000 miles on the vehicle’s odometer, whichever
comes first:
1 The manufacturer or its agents have made two or more
attempts to repair a warranty problem that results in a
condition that is likely to cause death or serious bodily
injury if the vehicle is driven;
2 The manufacturer or its agents have made four or more
attempts to repair the same warranty problem; or
3 The vehicle has been out of service for more than 30
days (not necessarily all at the same time) while being
repaired for any number of warranty problems; or
4 The problems are covered by the warranty, substantially
reduce the vehicle’s use, value, or safety to the consumer
and are not caused by abuse of the vehicle;
5 If required by the warranty materials or by the owner’s
manual, the consumer has to directly notify the
manufacturer about the problem(s), preferably in writing.
The notice must be sent to the address shown in the
warranty or owner’s manual (for bullets 1 and 2).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGP90
I heard elsewhere that Toyota will only buy your car back if it's fairly new and after 3 separate repair attempts. Not sure about lemon law rules or it's applicability to my situation.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelheart100
It seems like it’s been more than 3 attempts? ...Did Toyota tell you what u heard about the 3 repair attempts and the age of the car. .
|
Not 3, only two is needed if problem could be proven in court to cause great bodily injury or death, if not then 4 or more attempts under warranty within time frame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGP90
.Given that it's a 2013 I'm not sure if Toyota would be willing to buy back/replace. I
|
Did the first attempt occur within 18 months of delivery or 18K miles? If yes, the lemon law time frame and mileage will Toll (Tolling is a legal doctrine that allows for the pausing or delaying of the running of the period of time set forth by a statute of limitations, such that a lawsuit may potentially be filed even after the statute of limitations has run).
Has it been in the shop for more than 30 days total with this problem and can #4 below be proven.
On the downside, be prepared to rebutt Toyota's claim that the vehicle was abused. They tore apart the engine, I'm sure they took pictures of things that might be prima facie evidence of abuse, in their expert opinion. You won't know this (unless they are stupid and tell you) until discovery, and at that point, you have a the right to find a better expert than toyota to rebutt the expert opinion of toyota in court, either by fact, bias, or other means to make the expert look less credible.
Now that everything is going the way of arbitration, their may be more loose or strict discovery rules.
In no way that the statement above encompasses legal advice, opinions, etc. Using the information above at your own risk. Your best bet is to consult an attorney that is an expert on California lemon laws. Be sure you bring everything with you (receipts, notes of conversations, phone calls, etc). Once you talk to your attorney, if he tells you that your case is not good, then try to work with toyota on an amicable solution. You might also look for a federal Lemon law attorney (someone that is allowed to practice in federal court) as the federal lemon laws are more vague. You might also want to chat with your attorney about the nuisance of filing this as a state lemon law or federal lemon law court/arbitration case and the advantages/disadvantages. This would depend of course on the sales contract for the car and what you agreed to as dispute resolution and venue.
Another thought is, you can be extremely nice and explain to them that you love Toyota and that you (and possibly wife/girlfriend/kids) will be loyal Toyota customers for XX years to come and the small amount they will spend on getting your compensated in infinitesimally small compared to the gross amount you (your gf/wife/kids) will spend on purchasing new Toyotas, etc etc etc. I tried this approach with Mitsubishi when something was out of warranty and corporate paid for the work to be done out of warranty.