|
Lemon Law Wins
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I chose your firm because everyone I spoke to said you are known as the authorities on California Lemon Law. The service you provide reflects this."
|
|
What is a Lemon Car?
Check to see if any of these options apply to your car.
If they do, you may have a case:
- rough idle
- transmission
- rough shifting
- stalling
- check engine light on
- vehicle surges
|
Precedent Setting Lemon Law Wins
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another Important Win for Norman Taylor & Associates
In Hayes v. GMC and Tustin Chevrolet we have a classic Song-Beverly Act case that demonstrates what Mr. Taylor describes in his book on the Lemon Law as the "lemon Gauntlet". The essential facts in that case were:
- The new car was delivered with significant rust to brake lines, rear spindle and lower control arm. An expert stated that the vehicle was exposed to a chemically corrosive material.
- GM denied repair under warranty. They asserted that the rust problem was not covered by the warranty.
- GM attempted one repair, as a "goodwill gesture". The attempted repair did not correct the problem.
- Mr. Hayes undertook arbitration through the Better Business Bureau
(BBB).
- Even though the GM representative said they could not correct the problem, the mediator awarded the manufacturer another repair attempt.
- GM refused to communicate to Mr. Hayes what they intended to do to repair the problem, despite repeated attempts by Mr. Hayes to get this information.
- GM said it was the dealer's problem and they have no control over what the dealer did or did not do.
- Dealer gave the Hayes the runaround (the gauntlet in action).
- Finally the dealer said they would grind away the rust; this was another
improper repair attempt.
- Thereafter Mr. Hayes made several more attempts to get the problem properly corrected.
- The proper solution would have been to replace the rusted components. GM and the dealership never offered to provide this remedy.
- Mr. Hayes files suit.
- On resolution of the case the jury found for the plaintiff and awarded $27,000.00 for replacement cost of the vehicle and 2X this amount, $57,000.00 for civil penalty
|
|