I have a GMC Duramax 2005 and from the beginning I've had a problem with the transmision. They put in a new transmission which solved some issues but I'm still having some problems. I am trying to decided whether to grin and bear it or try to use the California lemon law to get satisfaction. It isn't a big problem and it's only obvious at low speeds. At speeds around 5 mph or less the transmission wants to jerk. If I take my foot of the gas it slows down with a jerk and when I increase the gas pedal pressure it jerks forward again. If I am pulling my 5th wheel when this happens then the jerking is worse. It does the same thing when I am backing up into my driveway with my 5th wheel which is not very steep. If I let off on gas the engine acts like it is going to stall and if I try to increase to give it more gas it lunges forward. It's impossible for me to back up slowly and smoothly which can be dangerous as I have limited space to back up into. I've had it back to the dealers many times since I bought it but nothing they do will fix the problem. The last time I took it to the dealer I was told to put it into 4 wheel drive when backing it up. This solved my problem but I don't think I should have to do this with this truck as my trailer is not very big. It should be able to handle the load easily. I had a gas engine Sierra before this and it didn't have any trouble backing this trailer up my driveway. The worst situation is if I am stopped in heavy traffic on the freeway with my 5th wheel and I have to keep on inching forward with the traffic flow. I have to keep on applying pressure to the gas pedal and then taking it off again quickly. Maybe someone else has a similar problem I'd be very interested how they handled it. Thanks for any suggestions or help you can give me.
Hopefully I'm posting this in the right forum (I'm new here), but I need help with my 2005 Volvo S40 that I'm currently leasing (1 year left on the lease). Over the past 3 years, I have had a host of malfunctioning electronics, defective parts, and software malfunctions. To be precise, my car has been brought in for repair at a Volvo dealer for 17 times!!! (yes I'm about to rip all my hair out of my head).
After my audio system could not be repaired at a Volvo dealer 5 times in a row, I hired an attorney in 2006 and received a settlement out of court for $4,500 + $3,000 in attorney fees. The car was never declared a lemon due to the settlement that I received. Unfortunately, after the settlement, my S40 kept accruing more and more malfunctions that now question its safety. I settled out of court because I didn't think I would win a lemon settlement for a malfunctioning audio system that Volvo couldn't repair. However, this was my biggest mistake since my S40 is a really a lemon.
Trying to avoid attorney fees for the 2nd time, I wrote a letter directly to Volvo's Customer Care department about my situation and they couldn't give a rats behind. This was my mistake since I should of wrote the letter to their Legal Department... After about 20 hours and lots of frustrating revisions of letter writing, I have a composed a 2 page letter that I will send to Volvo's Legal Department (hopefully soon). The letter explains my situation and what exactly has went wrong after the settlement in 2006.
Do you guys think I have a case here?
I would love to attach my letter for you guys to review (it's a quick read), but is this a bad idea (legally speaking, don't want anything to go wrong here)? If it's not necessary, I won't post my letter. I could just post a list of malfunctions instead...
Lol yep. There were a few other defects too: my cigarette lighter front and rear kept blowing fuses for no reason, keyless entry failures, approach lights failure, and of course excessive days out of service. Still, if a dealer can't fix a problem within 5 attempts no matter what the defect is, something has to be done with the car.
Any recommendations on what I should do about my current situation?
accruing more and more malfunctions that now question its safety
Since you haven't specified what those malfunctions are I don't think it's possible to judge whether you have a case. Also, I don't think any state would regard a defective audio system to be an actionable condition under its lemon laws.
Here is the list of new malfunctions since the settlement in 2006 for my 2005 Volvo S40:
-Audio system defect: While I was driving, one of my speakers kept malfunctioning and started to howl as loud as a blow-horn. This noise randomly occurred and did not stop even after the power was turned off. This created very dangerous driving conditions especially while driving on the highway.
-Warm air heater malfunction: In the middle of winter, the heater stopped working. A loaner was not available for one week and I had to drive my car with only cold air coming out of the vents in 20 degree weather for one week. A software upgrade was required to fix the problem
-12VDC battery fails twice: I brought in my car after the battery failed on me at the airport. The Volvo dealer said my battery was fine and did not need a replacement. Exactly one week later the battery failed again. Volvo said a software upgrade was required to fix the problem.
- Engine rumbles in idle / running modes: My engine started rumbling when the car was driving or parked. There was an engine module fault and another part needed to be replaced.
-Excessive days out of service My S40 was brought in for service for malfunctions 9 times after the settlement. Who has the time or patience to keep bringing in your vehicle to the dealer for these problems and keep setting up loaner vehicle appointments?
Why are software upgrades required to fix problems with my car? There is definitely something wrong with the electronics on this vehicle.
As Bolivar pointed out, lemon laws vary from state to state. Generally, they specify that in order for a car to "qualify" your troubles have to be "serious" and the defect must "substantially" impair the use, value or safety of the vehicle. Unfortunately, most of them don't define what "serious" and "substantial" mean so it's left up to the judges to decide.
I agree with Mike. I don't think your individual problems amount to "substantial" but many state lemon laws do have terms specifying that if your car is out of service for longer than some number of days then it may qualify as a lemon.
I looked up the N.Y. state lemon law and it says: "It is presumed that there have been a reasonable number of attempts to repair a problem if, during the first 18,000 miles of operation or two years from the original delivery date, whichever comes first, either: (1) the same problem has been subject to repair four or more times and the problem continues to exist; or (2) the car is out of service by reason of repair of one or more problems for a cumulative total of 30 or more calendar days and the problem continues to exist."
My car has been out of service over 30 calendar days, but it is over 18,000 and is over 2 years old. Does this mean, no matter what happens to my car, it can never be declared a lemon?
Sounds like that route is a no-go for your vehicle, yeah. However (assuming you've documented everything well), it might be worth your while to have your lawyer put pressure on Volvo to terminate your lease early, without penalty (I'm assuming, again, that this would be an acceptable outcome).
The only good news is that at least you're in a lease and worst case, you turn this dog back to the leasing company in a year's time. Imagine if you owned/were financing this car and had to trade it in? Ugh.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
when we were having problems with one of the cars we owned we called a lemon law attorney-they told us (we were living in Pa at that time. if the problem started within the first year and continued we could still file under the lemon law. we did not pursue it. sold the car instead after the dealer repaired it, did not trust the car.
when we were having problems with one of the cars we owned we called a lemon law attorney-they told us (we were living in Pa at that time. if the problem started within the first year and continued we could still file under the lemon law. we did not pursue it. sold the car instead after the dealer repaired it, did not trust the car.
Sounds like that route is a no-go for your vehicle, yeah. However (assuming you've documented everything well), it might be worth your while to have your lawyer put pressure on Volvo to terminate your lease early, without penalty (I'm assuming, again, that this would be an acceptable outcome).
The only good news is that at least you're in a lease and worst case, you turn this dog back to the leasing company in a year's time. Imagine if you owned/were financing this car and had to trade it in? Ugh.
Yup seems to be a no go. I would push to get out of the lease early as well.
On the downside, if your car will be out of warranty when you turn in the lease this could lead to more trouble, as you need to return the car in perfect working order after a lease. Whenever I leased I made sure the term coincided with my warranty that way if they balked on the lease return, then I could have them repair anything under warranty.
What's even worse is, this particular model and year has a high resale value. So now since it's a piece of junk, I can't buy it at the end of the lease and sell it to someone else looking to make a profit.. It's no fair, I should be able to sue for this too, since I can't capitalize on its high resale value!
What's even worse is, this particular model and year has a high resale value. So now since it's a piece of junk, I can't buy it at the end of the lease and sell it to someone else looking to make a profit.. It's no fair, I should be able to sue for this too, since I can't capitalize on its high resale value!
Ok let's not get carried away. Sueing is always a last ditch effort in my book.
Do any of you know whether you can even file a lemon law claim on a leased vehicle? Technically, it's not your car so it would seem to me that the actual owner should be filing the claims. Just curious.
If this model has a high resale value, then it should be reflected in your monthly payment. My 2 cents is press Volvo to let you out of your lease without penalty. Life is too short to stress over a car.
??? But you never paid them the first time. Volvo did.
Anyway ... here's the way I see it: You have 1 year left on your lease. They already paid you $4500. Take that money and use it to turn the car back to volvo. In effect, they have already given you the money to terminate early. On a 4-year lease, I can't imagine your remaining payments are much more than that.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
In the State of Alaska there is no lemon law on leased vehicles or used vehicles. I found this out the hard way while dealing with my second 2004 Nissan Titan. That truck had a total of around 45 business days out of service (Alaska goes by business days not total days) with 30 of those being one time, this was in the first year.....really the first 6 months I had the truck. It didn't slow down either, it was always in the shop for something. When I traded it in the rear end was going for the 3rd time and it had just had its 3rd front end put in. Nice truck, but I felt like I lived at the dealer!
Thanks for the info. Now we have one state with lemon laws for leased vehicles and one without. We need a larger sampling. Anyone want to break the tie?
California's lemon law applies to new, leased, and used cars sold with a written warranty. Even lemon law buy backs without proper disclosure are covered. Getting my lemon bought back was very painless once the layers got involved. My service advisor even when to bat for me when asked about my problems by his customer service rep.
WHAT IS A LEMON? - A "Lemon" is a motor vehicle sold or leased after January 1, 1987, that has a defect or condition that substantially impairs the motor vehicle; and the manufacturer, its agent, or authorized dealer cannot repair the vehicle after three attempts or the vehicle is out of service for repairs for a cumulative total of 30 or more days during the term of protection. This Law is only applicable if the vehicle was bought new. Under the statute, the manufacturer must replace the motor vehicle or refund the purchase price (less a reasonable allowance for use).
"Substantially impair" means to render a motor vehicle unreliable or unsafe for normal operation, or to reduce its resale market value below the average resale value for comparable motor vehicles.
The term of protection is defined as one year from the date of original delivery or the term of the warranty, whichever comes first.
The Law is unclear about whether you have to have reported your problem during the "term of protection" in order to have a claim under the "Lemon Law." The Division has adopted the view that the problem essentially has to be reported within the first year or within the term of the warranty, whichever comes first.
Has anyone had any experiences dealing with Mazda (owned by Ford) with lemon law cases? I am in one now and have received one low-ball offer that I have turned down. I'd appreciate any summaries anyone can give about their experiences.
It qualifies as a lemon under my state's laws (in numerous ways), and we have filed suit against the manufacturer, but we have told them we would accept a buy back. We are not looking for a replacement (my state's laws let the consumer decide between replacement or buy back - once the court case is won). From how the state's lemon law reads, I should have an easy court case, and my lawyer feels confident we would win, but Mazda could cause a lengthy delay for the process while trying to negotiate a settlement out of court. Their first offer was incredibly low, and my lawyer said it was just their starting point. I've never been through anything like this before, so I was wondering what other people's experiences are with Mazda and/or their parent company Ford.
Well, my experience was in late 1994 so it's not likely the same now but I won at the first stage (not in court) and Ford promptly reimbursed everything I had paid out on a '94 Club Wagon (some $6000 plus) and took the van back. Now, as I understand it, manufacturers typically only settle on such terms if they can deduct for the miles driven.
Funny thing, when I turned it back in at the selling store the owner pulled me aside and asked if it really had a problem (he had an option to buy it). I said, yes, it did, stay clear of it.
Fast forward - I still have the window sticker for that van and recently ran a Carfax on it. It's had about 8 different owners all over Ohio and is still going as it approaches 200,000 miles!
I don't how it works if you don't want the unit replaced. Everyone I have ever been involved in we were replacing the unit.
You pay for the miles you have driven and that is it if you pick out the same priced unit. If the replacement is more expensive you pay the difference plus the tax on the difference.
Hopefully they will buy back mine before too long. It is odd that the owner would ask you that. I guess you never know how long it will last once they fix everything, but 6 attempts on one item, 3 more on another - neither one is fixed yet - along with 4 attempts on an item they did eventually fix, and numerous one-time fixes has soured me on the model.
I knew about the deduction for miles, and I think that is fair. If a replacement is offered, I might see if they will let me change models within their brand.
The milage also stops at I believe the time of the repair that pushed it into the Lemon Law. For example if you have them fix the trans 3x in the first year of ownership, the last fix was at 8,000 miles. You would pay for 8,000 miles of use, even if it takes another 10k miles to get it settled.
Funny thing, when I turned it back in at the selling store the owner pulled me aside and asked if it really had a problem (he had an option to buy it). I said, yes, it did, stay clear of it.
If there is truly something wrong with the unit then it goes back to engineering for them to tear down and see what the problem was.
If it was a ghost problem which half of them are the unit will end up back in the market place some where along the line.
I don't think so. It goes on the mileage on the odometer, if it was that bad you would not be driving it.
That would only be if it were a safety concern. For instance if they can't fix the A/C working you could continue to drive the car until they decide on the Lemon Law. I just remember reading that the odo reading of the first or last "fix" point is where you would pay for the milage if in fact the Lemon Law is invoked.
It may have gone to engineering because it was a long time (according to Cafrax) before the vehicle was again titled.
The van had a bad vibration in it and repeated repair attempts were made to fix it - among other things were new tires, two new driveshafts, and the rear gearset was rebuilt. The likely real problem (a bad alloy wheel) was never addressed by the various servicing dealers for fear that Ford would not reimburse.
I am currently in my first ever buy back with Ford Motor Company.
I had bought a 06 Mustang during the 0 percent offer for 72 months in Sept of 2006, and my only concern on this issue is making sure my finance offer will still be honored after the transfer. No one has been able to confirm this.
To a dealership this is considered as a purchase, when in reality it is more of a switch. You can also not special order a car under the buy back option due to time restraints for round 1, and 2 of the process. You will also not be able to use any special offers, x/z etc plans, or cash backs while picking out your new vehicle. (Which will not matter see below)
Other then that ok here’s my understanding... My Ford car is eligible to be replaced by any Ford, Mercury or Lincoln brand car. Mazda is not an option. So for a Mazda owner I will assume you are stuck to that nameplate. Used mileage is deducted (This is a not a trade in formula) and they go MSRP to MSRP for the difference if any. And tax the difference. So if you bought a car at 19,000 and it had a MSRP price of 22,000. They will base it off 22,000, and not your purchase price.
I did not use a lawyer rather built a strong relationship with my Ford service center, and worked strongly with engineering and my shop for almost a year because really I wanted the car to be fixed and not go into this but after a year I had to make the call. Either way so far Ford has exceeded my expectations “so far” and I only want what is fair without expecting the world, things happen.
I would say anyone who is in a lemon situation needs to work with your dealership, or service center after reading your states lemon laws, and check if your state has any special regulations. (This should be for the state of purchase, as that is where the transaction took place.)
I had bought a 06 Mustang during the 0 percent offer for 72 months in Sept of 2006, and my only concern on this issue is making sure my finance offer will still be honored after the transfer. No one has been able to confirm this.
I doubt it. The only way you could is if Ford credit accepted a substitution of collateral. Sounds to me like Ford is trading you out of the car,in which case, you are starting over with a new loan and new loan terms.
As long as you are going through the selling dealer and they tell them that you are doing a SOC then you will get to keep your rate. You will not be able to add anything to the SOC, meaning if the car you are getting cost $1500 more then the one you purchased originally then you will have to pay the difference out of pocket.
Thanks for sharing your experience and all of the informaion. Did you end up going with another Mustang?
I've already retained a lawyer, so I hope that helps. I only had 1 month left to file a suit in my state, and I couldn't get a resolution by then on my own, so I went that route while it was still an option.
I am stuck with my Volvo S40 lease for another 8 months since I can longer pursue a lemon law (the car is over 2 years old). My warm air heater stopped working again and I brought my car in for service last Thursday. This brings my total warranty service repairs to 18!!! I talked to person in charge of the service department and she spoke with Volvo's shop foreman and said they were bringing in their "A" technician to look at my car.
I want to get out of my lease early except there is $3000 worth of payments left. Volvo isn't willing to pay this amount even though my entire lease was with a malfunctioning car. I think the only way I can get out of my lease early is to use a website like LeaseTrader.com and sell the car to someone else. My question is since there are so many problems with my car, am I really allowed to sell my car to someone else? Volvo is brining in their best technician to look at my car, can I ask Volvo to sign a piece of paper that states they looked over the car if it appears to be in perfect working condition?
Since the Lemon Law is off the table, the only option you have is to bug Volvo enough that they release you from your lease. The saving grace is the car is still under warranty. Plus would you feel right passing on your problems to someone else????
I know I wouldn't feel right at all. But Volvo is supposedly bringing in their best of their best to inspect my car for a week. Is there anyway I can get Volvo to guarantee my car is proper working condition before they give it back to me? If they can't guarantee this, can I demand that I want my lease terminated?
Comments
I am trying to decided whether to grin and bear it or try to use the California lemon law to get satisfaction.
It isn't a big problem and it's only obvious at low speeds.
At speeds around 5 mph or less the transmission wants to jerk. If I take my foot of the gas it slows down with a jerk and when I increase the gas pedal pressure it jerks forward again.
If I am pulling my 5th wheel when this happens then the jerking is worse.
It does the same thing when I am backing up into my driveway with my 5th wheel which is not very steep. If I let off on gas the engine acts like it is going to stall and if I try to increase to give it more gas it lunges forward. It's impossible for me to back up slowly and smoothly which can be dangerous as I have limited space to back up into.
I've had it back to the dealers many times since I bought it but nothing they do will fix the problem.
The last time I took it to the dealer I was told to put it into 4 wheel drive when backing it up. This solved my problem but I don't think I should have to do this with this truck as my trailer is not very big. It should be able to handle the load easily.
I had a gas engine Sierra before this and it didn't have any trouble backing this trailer up my driveway.
The worst situation is if I am stopped in heavy traffic on the freeway with my 5th wheel and I have to keep on inching forward with the traffic flow. I have to keep on applying pressure to the gas pedal and then taking it off again quickly.
Maybe someone else has a similar problem I'd be very interested how they handled it.
Thanks for any suggestions or help you can give me.
Have you gone to a second dealer yet to get a second opinion?
After my audio system could not be repaired at a Volvo dealer 5 times in a row, I hired an attorney in 2006 and received a settlement out of court for $4,500 + $3,000 in attorney fees. The car was never declared a lemon due to the settlement that I received. Unfortunately, after the settlement, my S40 kept accruing more and more malfunctions that now question its safety. I settled out of court because I didn't think I would win a lemon settlement for a malfunctioning audio system that Volvo couldn't repair. However, this was my biggest mistake since my S40 is a really a lemon.
Trying to avoid attorney fees for the 2nd time, I wrote a letter directly to Volvo's Customer Care department about my situation and they couldn't give a rats behind. This was my mistake since I should of wrote the letter to their Legal Department... After about 20 hours and lots of frustrating revisions of letter writing, I have a composed a 2 page letter that I will send to Volvo's Legal Department (hopefully soon). The letter explains my situation and what exactly has went wrong after the settlement in 2006.
Do you guys think I have a case here?
I would love to attach my letter for you guys to review (it's a quick read), but is this a bad idea (legally speaking, don't want anything to go wrong here)? If it's not necessary, I won't post my letter. I could just post a list of malfunctions instead...
Thanks a lot guys
It sounds as though you should be going back to that lawyer now (and for the rest of your life).
Any recommendations on what I should do about my current situation?
Since you haven't specified what those malfunctions are I don't think it's possible to judge whether you have a case. Also, I don't think any state would regard a defective audio system to be an actionable condition under its lemon laws.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
-Audio system defect:
While I was driving, one of my speakers kept malfunctioning and started to howl as loud as a blow-horn. This noise randomly occurred and did not stop even after the power was turned off. This created very dangerous driving conditions especially while driving on the highway.
-Warm air heater malfunction:
In the middle of winter, the heater stopped working. A loaner was not available for one week and I had to drive my car with only cold air coming out of the vents in 20 degree weather for one week. A software upgrade was required to fix the problem
-12VDC battery fails twice:
I brought in my car after the battery failed on me at the airport. The Volvo dealer said my battery was fine and did not need a replacement. Exactly one week later the battery failed again. Volvo said a software upgrade was required to fix the problem.
- Engine rumbles in idle / running modes:
My engine started rumbling when the car was driving or parked. There was an engine module fault and another part needed to be replaced.
-Excessive days out of service
My S40 was brought in for service for malfunctions 9 times after the settlement. Who has the time or patience to keep bringing in your vehicle to the dealer for these problems and keep setting up loaner vehicle appointments?
Why are software upgrades required to fix problems with my car? There is definitely something wrong with the electronics on this vehicle.
What do you think?
-mike
I agree with Mike. I don't think your individual problems amount to "substantial" but many state lemon laws do have terms specifying that if your car is out of service for longer than some number of days then it may qualify as a lemon.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
I looked up the N.Y. state lemon law and it says:
"It is presumed that there have been a reasonable number of attempts to repair a problem if, during the first 18,000 miles of operation or two years from the original delivery date, whichever comes first, either: (1) the same problem has been subject to repair four or more times and the problem continues to exist; or (2) the car is out of service by reason of repair of one or more problems for a cumulative total of 30 or more calendar days and the problem continues to exist."
My car has been out of service over 30 calendar days, but it is over 18,000 and is over 2 years old. Does this mean, no matter what happens to my car, it can never be declared a lemon?
The only good news is that at least you're in a lease and worst case, you turn this dog back to the leasing company in a year's time. Imagine if you owned/were financing this car and had to trade it in? Ugh.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
The only good news is that at least you're in a lease and worst case, you turn this dog back to the leasing company in a year's time. Imagine if you owned/were financing this car and had to trade it in? Ugh.
Yup seems to be a no go. I would push to get out of the lease early as well.
On the downside, if your car will be out of warranty when you turn in the lease this could lead to more trouble, as you need to return the car in perfect working order after a lease. Whenever I leased I made sure the term coincided with my warranty that way if they balked on the lease return, then I could have them repair anything under warranty.
-mike
What's even worse is, this particular model and year has a high resale value. So now since it's a piece of junk, I can't buy it at the end of the lease and sell it to someone else looking to make a profit.. It's no fair, I should be able to sue for this too, since I can't capitalize on its high resale value!
Ok let's not get carried away. Sueing is always a last ditch effort in my book.
-mike
Do any of you know whether you can even file a lemon law claim on a leased vehicle? Technically, it's not your car so it would seem to me that the actual owner should be filing the claims. Just curious.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Presumably other states are the same.
-mike
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
??? But you never paid them the first time. Volvo did.
Anyway ... here's the way I see it: You have 1 year left on your lease. They already paid you $4500. Take that money and use it to turn the car back to volvo. In effect, they have already given you the money to terminate early. On a 4-year lease, I can't imagine your remaining payments are much more than that.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
"Imports are superior"
In the State of Alaska there is no lemon law on leased vehicles or used vehicles. I found this out the hard way while dealing with my second 2004 Nissan Titan. That truck had a total of around 45 business days out of service (Alaska goes by business days not total days) with 30 of those being one time, this was in the first year.....really the first 6 months I had the truck. It didn't slow down either, it was always in the shop for something. When I traded it in the rear end was going for the 3rd time and it had just had its 3rd front end put in. Nice truck, but I felt like I lived at the dealer!
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
WHAT IS A LEMON? - A "Lemon" is a motor vehicle sold or leased after January 1, 1987, that has a defect or condition that substantially impairs the motor vehicle; and the manufacturer, its agent, or authorized dealer cannot repair the vehicle after three attempts or the vehicle is out of service for repairs for a cumulative total of 30 or more days during the term of protection. This Law is only applicable if the vehicle was bought new. Under the statute, the manufacturer must replace the motor vehicle or refund the purchase price (less a reasonable allowance for use).
"Substantially impair" means to render a motor vehicle unreliable or unsafe for normal operation, or to reduce its resale market value below the average resale value for comparable motor vehicles.
The term of protection is defined as one year from the date of original delivery or the term of the warranty, whichever comes first.
The Law is unclear about whether you have to have reported your problem during the "term of protection" in order to have a claim under the "Lemon Law." The Division has adopted the view that the problem essentially has to be reported within the first year or within the term of the warranty, whichever comes first.
"Imports are superior"
Thanks!
Duke
Funny thing, when I turned it back in at the selling store the owner pulled me aside and asked if it really had a problem (he had an option to buy it). I said, yes, it did, stay clear of it.
Fast forward - I still have the window sticker for that van and recently ran a Carfax on it. It's had about 8 different owners all over Ohio and is still going as it approaches 200,000 miles!
You pay for the miles you have driven and that is it if you pick out the same priced unit. If the replacement is more expensive you pay the difference plus the tax on the difference.
-mike
If there is truly something wrong with the unit then it goes back to engineering for them to tear down and see what the problem was.
If it was a ghost problem which half of them are the unit will end up back in the market place some where along the line.
That would only be if it were a safety concern. For instance if they can't fix the A/C working you could continue to drive the car until they decide on the Lemon Law. I just remember reading that the odo reading of the first or last "fix" point is where you would pay for the milage if in fact the Lemon Law is invoked.
-mike
Motorsports and Modifications Host
The van had a bad vibration in it and repeated repair attempts were made to fix it - among other things were new tires, two new driveshafts, and the rear gearset was rebuilt. The likely real problem (a bad alloy wheel) was never addressed by the various servicing dealers for fear that Ford would not reimburse.
I had bought a 06 Mustang during the 0 percent offer for 72 months in Sept of 2006, and my only concern on this issue is making sure my finance offer will still be honored after the transfer. No one has been able to confirm this.
To a dealership this is considered as a purchase, when in reality it is more of a switch. You can also not special order a car under the buy back option due to time restraints for round 1, and 2 of the process. You will also not be able to use any special offers, x/z etc plans, or cash backs while picking out your new vehicle. (Which will not matter see below)
Other then that ok here’s my understanding...
My Ford car is eligible to be replaced by any Ford, Mercury or Lincoln brand car. Mazda is not an option. So for a Mazda owner I will assume you are stuck to that nameplate.
Used mileage is deducted (This is a not a trade in formula) and they go MSRP to MSRP for the difference if any. And tax the difference. So if you bought a car at 19,000 and it had a MSRP price of 22,000. They will base it off 22,000, and not your purchase price.
I did not use a lawyer rather built a strong relationship with my Ford service center, and worked strongly with engineering and my shop for almost a year because really I wanted the car to be fixed and not go into this but after a year I had to make the call. Either way so far Ford has exceeded my expectations “so far” and I only want what is fair without expecting the world, things happen.
I would say anyone who is in a lemon situation needs to work with your dealership, or service center after reading your states lemon laws, and check if your state has any special regulations. (This should be for the state of purchase, as that is where the transaction took place.)
I doubt it.
The only way you could is if Ford credit accepted a substitution of collateral.
Sounds to me like Ford is trading you out of the car,in which case, you are starting over with a new loan and new loan terms.
I've already retained a lawyer, so I hope that helps. I only had 1 month left to file a suit in my state, and I couldn't get a resolution by then on my own, so I went that route while it was still an option.
I want to get out of my lease early except there is $3000 worth of payments left. Volvo isn't willing to pay this amount even though my entire lease was with a malfunctioning car. I think the only way I can get out of my lease early is to use a website like LeaseTrader.com and sell the car to someone else. My question is since there are so many problems with my car, am I really allowed to sell my car to someone else? Volvo is brining in their best technician to look at my car, can I ask Volvo to sign a piece of paper that states they looked over the car if it appears to be in perfect working condition?