You may think that, because the technicians keep fixing the same thing over and over, the vehicle you’re driving is obviously defective. Unfortunately, the law sees it differently. A “recurring defect” is legally defined as a single problem that substantially impairs the vehicle’s use, value, or safety and that the manufacturer has not successfully repaired after a reasonable number of attempts.
What makes a defect legally “recurring”
The word manufacturers and lawyers often use is nonconformity – a defect that renders the vehicle failing to conform to the express warranty made at the time of sale. Not every aggravating issue applies. The legal yardstick in most states is something called substantial impairment, meaning the defect has to substantially impact the use, value, or safety of the vehicle.
A loud seat is unlikely to rise to that level. Brakes that give out from time to time almost surely will. The difference between the two? One is a legal claim and the other is a warranty repair.
The “reasonable number of attempts” rule
This is the make or break point for most lemon law cases. The law doesn’t demand that a manufacturer build a perfect car – it demands they remedy an issue within a reasonable amount of time. Many jurisdictions consider somewhere around four repair attempts for a specific problem to be a reasonable number before a consumer may seek recourse for a lemon vehicle. Safety issues are often treated as automatic qualification. If the defect is related to something that could cause serious harm – brake failure, steering failure, unintended acceleration – two attempts at repairs are often sufficient to file a claim.
Because the specific number of required attempts varies by jurisdiction, consumers benefit from checking easylemon.com to understand what the threshold is where they live and purchased their vehicle. Here’s the key that manufacturers conveniently leave out: the legislation focuses on the reported symptom, not the part that’s replaced. If you take your vehicle in on four occasions reporting the symptom that your vehicle’s engine seems to shudder while you’re accelerating and on every visit the service department replaces a different part hoping to rectify the problem, you’ve still taken your vehicle in on four different occasions in an attempt to repair the same underlying problem. The legislation is clear that manufacturers cannot stall you out simply by replacing different parts during each visit instead of truly rectifying the problem.
Days out of service – the alternative path
Another set of requirements focuses on the amount of time that a vehicle has been out of service for repairs. If the vehicle is in the shop for repair of one or more substantial defects for a cumulative total of 30 or more calendar days, it is considered a lemon. The 30 days do not have to be consecutive, nor do they have to occur during the first 12 months of ownership or the warranty period. Any days that the vehicle is in the shop, whether or not you are given a replacement vehicle, count toward the 30-day total.
Documentation is not optional
Every time you authorize a repair, a repair order is generated. This document serves as concrete evidence, and the content of the repair order determines whether you have a case or not. If you inform the service advisor that “the car shakes when I brake”, but the repair order states “customer states vehicle vibrates”, you’ve created a grey area that the manufacturer’s legal representatives will definitely capitalize on.
Therefore, when you take your car in for service, describe the issue using simple, clear language, and make sure the exact wording is reflected on the repair order before you leave. If the same issue resurfaces after you get your car back, your next repair order needs to specify the exact same wording. This will constitute proof that the issue has been recurring – the essential legal proof for any lemon law case.
Make sure to stay organized and keep copies of all documents. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, a federal statute that often works in conjunction with various state consumer protection laws, mandates the manufacturer to abide by the provisions of its written warranty. Your paper trail serves as evidence that they did not.
The presumption period and why timing matters
The vast majority of lemon law protections revolve around a presumption period: generally the first 18 months of ownership, or 18,000 miles on the vehicle, whichever comes first. Those are the miles, and that’s the time, when your protection is strongest. Most consumers harbor no doubt that the same problem has been repaired three times without success or the car was out of service for a cumulative total of 30 days. The manufacturer might. The presumption period stacks the deck: if your claim ends up before a judge or arbitrator, he or she will reserve the most skeptical questions for the automaker, not you. The reasoning is simple: the big manufacturers build hundreds of thousands of cars each year. They know there’s bound to be a problem child in the litter. Keep the paperwork up to date, and be prepared to escalate your case if you have a recurring problem.
Getting from frustration to a real claim
If you have had to return to the dealership over and over for the exact same issue, you don’t have to give up and just hope that the next visit will take care of it. The law understands that systems don’t always work ideally and that problems can be challenging to fix. The law protects consumers when they are sold a product that fails to conform to the manufacturer’s warranty. Fixes shouldn’t require more than a few visits to the dealership so if you’ve been stuck in this loop, retaining an attorney to pursue a lemon law claim may be the right move to protect your investment and your family.
