Lemon Law for California

Build Dates : July 01, 2005 - August 31, 2005

NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number : 05V455000

Date Owner’s Notified: 20051014

Date Received by ODI: 20051005

Date Added to Databse: 20051006

Manufacturer’s Involved: GENERAL MOTORS CORP.

Manufacturer’s Responsible for the Recall: GENERAL MOTORS CORP.

Manufacturer Campaign Number: 05086

Component: STEERING:HYDRAULIC POWER ASSIST:HOSE, PIPING, AND CONNECTIONS

Potential Number Of Units Affected : 123592

Summary: 

Certain passenger vehicles may have been built with a power steering hose that is not to specification. Under extreme steering maneuvers, such as turning the steering wheel fully to the left or right while braking, the hose may fracture and leak fluid.

Consequence: 

If this were to occur, power steering assist would be lost and increased steering effort would be required. On vehicles equipped with hydro-boost power brakes, it could also result in loss of power brake assist and increased braking effort would be required. If the power steering fluid spray were to spray onto hot engine parts, an engine compartment fire could occur.

Remedy: 

Dealers will inspect the power steering hose(s) for two suspect date codes and replace them if required. The recall will begin on october 14, 2005.  

You’ve heard the expression, “you can’t have it both ways.” This concept certainly applies in the lemon law. Here’s how. When your car, truck, motor home or boat has repeated defects that the dealership cannot fix, the vehicle may qualify for the lemon law. However, if you cause the defects through misuse or use for which it was not designed, it’s not going to qualify.

If you buy a new BMW ‘seven series’ and take it out to the Mojave Desert for a little off-road fun, and for some unexplained reason (think common sense) the suspension won’t stand up to that neat bit of airborne acrobatics off the brim of a sand dune you tried, you aren’t going to get far accusing BMW of not making a good car.

If the buyer tells the salesperson that he is buying the new Chevy Silverado 2500 with towing kit so that he can tow his bass boat to tournaments, it better be able to tow the bass boat. Having come to an agreement that this is why he is buying the boat, the “Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose” comes into play. This is the “both ways” we’re talking about. A truck ought to haul things, either towed or loaded. If it coughs and dies while towing its rated load, it’s not ‘fit’, and it may qualify as a lemon. If the brakes are so puny the whole vehicle shakes and shivers, and produces that scary burning smell, it’s not ‘fit’ for its intended purpose.

“No, Mr. Smith, I don’t think this is what the manufacturer had in mind for this car.”

As always we want to hear what you think about this part of the law, or for that matter any part of lemon law or auto fraud. It’s what we have been doing for the past 20 plus years. But we haven’t heard it all, or seen it all.

Thanks for visiting. Give us your two or twenty cents. We’d really like to hear what you think.

Lemon Law cases hinge on the defects with a few rare exceptions, in case there is fraud at the outset, 

Ideally you’d wish a long nice  string of the same or similar substantial defects. Substantial would only include vehicles that repeatedly explode spectacularly, while being driven on the freeway and the driver is a sweet little lady of 80 carrying four or five nuns as passengers, if the manufacturers had their way.

It is a fact that many manufacturers will refuse a case where there are four well-documented engine defects and the problem is still present. This could be a well-qualified case for almost any state’s Lemon Law.

For a car owner, it is not unusual to think that the faint squeak in the trunk is akin to a full symphony orchestra playing Bartok fortissimo and why the hell should he have to take it in more than twice before getting rid of his manifestly horrible car.

Somewhere between these two extremes is the area of reality. Common sense must apply.