| Home | Contact Us | About Us |

Chapter 1: A New Car Lemon Story Mr. and Mrs. Jones filled out the necessary forms. They imagined that they might get a fair hearing about what was really wrong with their car. Perhaps someone would finally help, someone would really listen! Why would the arbitrator assume that she didn’t know how to put a gas cap on properly? Was it because Mrs. Jones is a woman? After a month-long wait, and another 2,000 miles on the car, the arbitration was held. The arbitrator noted that no problem had been found on two separate occasions, and that at least once it had been determined that Mrs. Jones had failed to replace the gas cap properly. The arbitrator concluded that Mr. and Mrs. Jones had not proven that the manufacturer had not successfully repaired the Check Engine light defect. The arbitrator also found that, even if something were still wrong with the vehicle, the manufacturer did not have a reasonable opportunity to repair it, because the dealerships had performed repairs only three times. Mr. and Mrs. Jones told the arbitrator that the air conditioning had never been repaired during any of the visits to the dealerships. The manufacturer never said anything about this defect because its field technical specialist had not even looked at it. However, the arbitrator found that the defective air conditioning might not be considered to substantially impair the use, value, or safety of the vehicle. Still, the arbitrator ordered the dealership to repair the air conditioning again. It is really quite absurd to tell someone they can have what they are already entitled to. Ordering the manufacturer to fix the air conditioning made it appear as though Mr. and Mrs. Jones won something. They didn’t win anything. The manufacturer’s warranty still covered the defective air conditioner, so the manufacturer was already obligated to attempt to repair it again.

Share |

Home | About | Contact | Feed Back | Site Map © 2009, LemonLawNewyork.info