If you are a consumer with a lemon vehicle, one of the first questions to ask is “What laws protect me?” Many consumers in California lived out of state previously and may have purchased their vehicle somewhere else. Does California’s Lemon Law protect them? Unless you are active duty military (as explained below), it depends…
Can the car maker force you to sign a “release” and waiver of your non-lemon claims? Can it put a Gag Order on you in the form of Confidentiality or Non-Disparagement Clauses? No, it cannot. In Goglin v. BMW of North America, 4 Cal.App.5th 462, the Court held it was not enough for BMW…
Many times our clients are compelled to continue use of the lemons sold them. Many have no second or alternative transportation, many can’t afford to keep paying for the lemon and buy or rent a replacement. In California, there is no legal requirement that the consumer must discontinue use of the vehicle according to the…
Our lemon law clients, most of whom have suffered mightily at the hands of car makers that can’t fix but won’t buy back their cars, often ask “what about all the hassle of not having my vehicle, what about the stress of repeated life-threatening engine failures”? These are good and fair questions. Unfortunately, the case…
Today starts The Consumer’s Friend Blog’s review of the key cases in California Lemon Law. The first up is Krotin v. Porsche Cars of North America, 38 Cal.App.4th 294 (1995). This is a very important case for consumers. It tells us that the manufacturer (who warranted the vehicle) has an affirmative duty to buyback its…
A new California Assembly bill, AB1690, would add “consumer protection” to existing state law that makes a person’s immigration status “irrelevant to the issue of liability, and in proceedings or discovery” in labor, employment, civil rights and housing cases. A good article in the Daily Journal points out that this is really a clarification of…
Think CarMax sold you a Lemon, or defrauded you in the sale of their “Certified Pre-Owned” cars, vans, or trucks? A devastating ruling against CarMax will help your case. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday overturned a lower court ruling in favor of CarMax Auto Superstores LLC, saying the inspection certificates CarMax provides…
According to an October 2014 lawsuit, a California resident, purchased a new 2007 Triumph Daytona 675 in April 2007 and, seven years later, he was traveling on a highway at roughly 60 miles an hour when the suspension plates on his motorcycle failed and his rear wheel locked up. the motorcycle became “uncontrollable,” and he…
A California federal judge on Monday denied Bebe Stores Inc.’s attempt to escape a proposed class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), saying that the plaintiff didn’t need to have been charged for allegedly unsolicited texts to state a claim. The case is Meyer v. Bebe Stores Inc, case number 14-cv-00267-YGR…
A new California Court decision clarifies that Lessors (Finance Companies the Consumer pays the monthly lease payments to) have to follow the California’s Vehicle Leasing Act, or they will not be able to come after consumers for money after the vehicle is repossessed and sold at auction. The case name is Flannery v. VW Credit,…
