We recently helped a client in Morro Bay, CA by having the manufacturer repurchase his car. He was driving a 2011 Chevrolet Aveo with about 6,500 miles on it, and was having problems with the air bag light going on. Air bags not working properly are, of course, a safety concern. By the time our client had called us he already had taken the vehicle in three times for repairs. Someone suggested he look into the California lemon law and he then contacted our offices.

Within a few weeks we successfully negotiated with General Motors to have them repurchase his vehicle under the California lemon law statute. The California lemon law protects consumers who have purchased or leased vehicles in California and which show manufacturing defects.

If the vehicle you are driving continues to have problems that started during the manufacturer’s new car warranty, you may be driving a lemon. Please contact the Law Offices of Delsack and Assoc. at 888-Ex-Lemon (888-395-3666) for a free consultation and find out if your vehicle qualifies as a lemon.

A recent survey done by the National Association of Consumer Advocates (NACA) shows that consumer lemon law rights are being stifled as companies try to increase the use of arbitration clauses. Out of 350 consumer attorneys surveyed, 84% said that there is an increase in instances where consumer claims could not be settled or a class action law suits could not be pursued due to an arbitration clause. Approximately 90% of the attorneys surveyed said that they have turned away cases because the underlying contract had an arbitration clause included in it.

Forced arbitration clauses are fast becoming a favorite weapon for businesses as a way of distancing themselves from liability. Clauses are often mislabeled and buried in mountains of paper work, making it easy for the unsuspecting consumer to miss it. Individuals almost always lose to businesses in arbitration. Arbitration is seen as a disadvantage to consumers because:

  1. It creates an uneven playing field in the favor of the automobile manufacturer. A consumer without legal representation will find it difficult to battle an automobile manufacturer that has experience in dealing with lemon law claims.
  2. There is limited recourse for the consumer once a decision is made. The outcome of an arbitration claim can often affect decisions made in future lawsuits.
  3. Businesses are repeated users of an arbitrator, so there is an incentive for an arbitrator to rule in favor of the business if he expects future retentions.
  4. There is a lack of transparency in the proceedings of the arbitration claim.

Consumer Groups Are Fighting Back

  • The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created by Congress in the wake of the Wall Street meltdown, recently announced a public inquiry on forced arbitration.
  • The National Association of Consumer Advocates (NACA) has launched a 50-state public education campaign aimed at teaching consumers about the dangers of forced arbitration.
  • A Public Citizen coalition called Fair Arbitration NOW are petitioning lawmakers to pass an Arbitration Fairness Act.

In the meantime, it is important to recognize that automobile manufacturers will try to force arbitration. You should carefully read any contracts before signing and try to negotiate arbitration clauses out of the contract. If a company tries to force an arbitration clause on you, you may want to take your business elsewhere.

Every automobile manufacturer is subject to repeated problems related to the safety, value, or use of their vehicles, and Chevrolet is no exception. There have been over 16,000 complaints on file for Chevy vehicles, with the Impala, Malibu, Silverado, Trailblazer, Cavalier, Equinox and Cobalt topping the list. Some of these problem are as simple as updates to the owners manual, but many of them can seriously affect the safety of the vehicle, putting the vehicle occupants and others on the road in danger.

In order to protect consumers against defective vehicles, the federal government enacted the Magnusson Moss Act. Every state has their own version of the lemon laws, and California is no exception. California’s Lemon Laws were enacted in 1970 and were founded in the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. The law states that if a manufacturer cannot fix a defective car, truck, boat, RV, motor home, or motorcycle after a reasonable number of repair attempts, the vehicle must be replaced or refunded. Generally, the manufacturer is responsible to re-purchase or replace the defective vehicle.

If you live in California and think that your vehicle could be a lemon, contact the Law Offices of Delsack & Associates at 1.888.395.3666 or go to LemonLawSpecialists.com for a free consultation. You have nothing to loose but your lemon.

Some California lemon law attorneys believe that it is possible to get a privately bought automobile refunded under the California lemon law by getting the seller to “sell” their Lemon Law rights with the sale of the vehicle. The California Lemon Law states that the vehicle must be purchased from someone who is an authorized dealer in order for the laws to apply. Unless there is a legal agreement that states otherwise, a private sale is always “AS IS”.

When buying a vehicle privately, you are hoping that the seller is honest in telling you the condition of the car. Some states may require the seller to fill out an odometer statement and have the vehicle pass emissions testing, but it is beneficial to you to get the vehicle checked out by a mechanic as well. Still, there are no guarantees. This does not mean that every privately sold vehicle is going to be a lemon, because there are good ones out there, but if you do buy a “lemon”, in most cases, it is your loss. Every situation is unique and if you believe that you have a legitimate lemon law case, a consultation with a lemon law lawyer experienced in your state laws can help you decide how to proceed .

The Law Offices of Delsack & Associates represents clients to the highest legal standards. With over 24 years of California Lemon Law experience, we have successfully represented thousands of clients throughout the state in all types of lemon law cases. We take pride in the fact that almost 100% of our cases are able to reach satisfactory settlements without litigation, making the process fast and stress free for our clients. Our goal is not to be the “largest” lemon law firm in California, but to continue to be the “BEST”. Below is a list of some of our most recent success stories where we helped consumers get settlements for their lemon vehicles:

  • 1. 2008 Audi RS4: Full buyback – Hesperia, CA – 50,409 miles
  • 2. 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe: Cash & Keep – Clovis, CA – 45,187 miles
  • 3. 2007 Volkswagen Passat: Full buyback – Ramona, CA – 45,481 miles
  • 4. 2011 Hyundai Sonata: Full buyback – Walnut, CA – 5,226 miles
  • 5. 2010 BMW 550IA: Full buyback – Fountain Valley, CA – 27,107 miles
  • 6. 2009 Mercedes Benz GL550: Full buyback – Wilcox, CA – 41,619 miles
  • 7. 2009 Audi A4: Cash and Keep – Sherman Oaks, CA – 32,240 miles
  • 8. 2006 Saab Aero: Full buyback – Sierre Madre, CA – 75,351 miles
  • 9. 2011 Dodge Ram 2500: Full buyback – Arvin, CA – 7,577 miles
  • 10. 2006 Dodge Ram 3500: Full buyback – Cypress, CA – 67,695 miles
  • 11. 2009 Honda Civic LX: Full buyback – Torrance, CA – 13,325 miles
  • 12. 2010 Nissan Murano: Cash & Keep – Yorba Linda, CA – 21,270 miles
  • 13. 2010 Jaguar XF: Full buyback – Chino Hills, CA – 16,058 miles
  • 14. 2008 Smart 2D Passion: Full buyback – Oakland, CA – 39,637 miles
  • 15. 2011 BMW 550i: Full buyback – West Hollywood, CA – 15,206 miles
  • 16. 2010 Chrysler 300: Cash and Keep – Beverly Hills, CA – 24,825 miles

If you live in California and and think your vehicle could be a lemon, contact our Lemon Law Offices, or fill out our Lemon Law Case Review, for a FREE consultation.

Anywhere in California (free call): 1.888.ExLemon (395.3666)

  • California Lemon Law in Los Angeles: 310-475-1700
  • California Lemon Law in San Francisco: 415-285-5366
  • California Lemon Law in San Diego: 619-229-6900
  • California Lemon Law in Orange County: 949-856-4333
  • California Lemon Law in Palm Springs: 760-395-1000
  • California Lemon Law in San Fernando Valley: 818-837-0500

Common California lemon law misconceptions have prevented thousands of lemon owners from trying to get rid of their vehicle and get their money back. The requirements of the lemon laws are technical, differ from state to state, and different manufacturers may interpret their obligations differently. It is important to get an attorney who is experienced in the lemon law of the state you live in. If you live in California and think you have a lemon, contact the lemon law firm of Delsack & Associates at 1-888-395-3666, for a free consultation or go to LemonLawSpecialitsts.com, and GET RID OF YOUR LEMON TODAY!

A California Court of Appeal ruling last September may seem like a small victory for one business owner, but the courts decision is setting a precedence that will affect future decisions across the country when it comes to small business automobiles with a gross vehicle weight (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds.

Daniel Joyce, a licensed contractor from Petaluma first started having problems with his Ford F-250 shortly after purchasing it brand-new in 2006. Joyce decided to sue Ford, but the case was overturned saying that the truck was not covered by the lemon law because the GVWR was 10,000 pounds. After a four year battle, court finally issued a ruling siding with Joyce saying that it is the actual weight of the vehicle that counts. This decision is a victory for the consumer and could help other business owners who may be in a similar situation.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is being accused of trying to keep the Chevrolet Volt battery fire a secret in an attempt to protect the government’s investment in the car company. Members of the House Committee for Government Reform released a report that states that the bailout of GM, creates business and political reasons for the government to sacrifice public safety. They criticize the time it took for the investigation to begin and the conclusion that the vehicle was safe, just two weeks into the investigation.

The NHTSA defends their position on the Chevy Volt investigation, saying that the agency is still developing protocols for dealing with battery powered vehicles. In the case of the Volt, they do not see the fire as a highway hazard because the problem could only be reproduced after impaling the battery with a steel rod. Still, it took at least a week for the fire to start. They added that GM was quick in responding to the problem, and developed protocols to drain the battery after a Volt has been in an accident.