 |
|
|
Connecticut
Lemon Law Statutes
Title
42, Chapter 743b
CHAPTER 743b* NEW AUTOMOBILE WARRANTIES
Sec. 42-179. New motor vehicle warranties.
Leased vehicles. Resales. Transfers. Manufacturer buybacks.
- As used in this chapter:
- "Consumer" means
the purchaser, other than for purposes of resale, of a motor
vehicle,
a lessee of a motor vehicle, any person to whom such motor
vehicle is transferred during the duration of an express warranty
applicable to such motor vehicle, and any person entitled by
the terms of such warranty to enforce the obligations of the
warranty; and
- "motor vehicle" means a passenger
motor vehicle or a passenger and commercial motor vehicle,
as defined in section 14-1, which is sold or leased in this
state.
- If a new motor vehicle does not conform to all applicable
express warranties, and the consumer reports the nonconformity
to the manufacturer, its agent or its authorized dealer during
the period of two years following the date of original delivery
of the motor vehicle to a consumer or during the period of
the first eighteen thousand miles of operation, whichever period
ends first, the manufacturer, its agent or its authorized dealer
shall make such repairs as are necessary to conform the vehicle
to such express warranties, notwithstanding the fact that such
repairs are made after the expiration of the applicable period.
- No consumer shall be required to notify the manufacturer
of a claim under this section and sections 42-181 to 42-184,
inclusive, unless the manufacturer has clearly and conspicuously
disclosed to the consumer, in the warranty or owner's manual,
that written notification of the nonconformity is required
before the consumer may be eligible for a refund or replacement
of the vehicle. The manufacturer shall include with the warranty
or owner's manual the name and address to which the consumer
shall send such written notification.
- If the manufacturer, or its agents or authorized dealers
are unable to conform the motor vehicle to any applicable express
warranty by repairing or correcting any defect or condition
which substantially impairs the use, safety or value of the
motor vehicle to the consumer after a reasonable number of
attempts, the manufacturer shall replace the motor vehicle
with a new motor vehicle acceptable to the consumer, or accept
return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund to the consumer,
lessor and lienholder, if any, as their interests may appear,
the following:
- The full contract price, including but
not limited to, charges for undercoating, dealer preparation
and
transportation and installed options,
- all collateral
charges, including but not limited to, sales tax, license
and registration
fees, and similar government charges,
- all finance charges
incurred by the consumer after he first reports the nonconformity
to the manufacturer, agent or dealer and during any subsequent
period when the vehicle is out of service by reason of repair,
and
- all incidental damages as defined in section 42a-2-715,
less a reasonable allowance for the consumer's use of the vehicle.
No authorized dealer shall be held liable by the manufacturer
for any refunds or vehicle replacements in the absence of evidence
indicating that dealership repairs have been carried out in
a manner inconsistent with the manufacturers' instructions.
Refunds or replacements shall be made to the consumer, lessor
and lienholder if any, as their interests may appear. A reasonable
allowance for use shall be that amount obtained by multiplying
the total contract price of the vehicle by a fraction having
as its denominator one hundred thousand and having as its numerator
the number of miles that the vehicle traveled prior to the
manufacturer's acceptance of its return. It shall be an affirmative
defense to any claim under this section
- that an alleged
nonconformity does not substantially impair such use, safety
or value or
- that a nonconformity is the result of abuse,
neglect or unauthorized modifications or alterations of a motor
vehicle by a consumer.
- It shall be presumed that a reasonable number of attempts
have been undertaken to conform a motor vehicle to the applicable
express warranties, if
- the same nonconformity has been
subject to repair four or more times by the manufacturer or
its agents or authorized dealers during the period of two years
following the date of original delivery of the motor vehicle
to a consumer or during the period of the first eighteen thousand
miles of operation, whichever period ends first, but such nonconformity
continues to exist or
- the vehicle is out of service by
reason of repair for a cumulative total of thirty or more calendar
days during the applicable period, determined pursuant to subdivision
(1) of this subsection. Such two-year period and such thirty-day
period shall be extended by any period of time during which
repair services are not available to the consumer because of
a war, invasion, strike or fire, flood or other natural disaster.
No claim shall be made under this section unless at least one
attempt to repair a nonconformity has been made by the manufacturer
or its agent or an authorized dealer or unless such manufacturer,
its agent or an authorized dealer has refused to attempt to
repair such nonconformity.
- If a motor vehicle has a nonconformity which results
in a condition which is likely to cause death or serious bodily
injury if the vehicle is driven, it shall be presumed that
a reasonable number of attempts have been undertaken to conform
such vehicle to the applicable express warranties if the nonconformity
has been subject to repair at least twice by the manufacturer
or its agents or authorized dealers within the express warranty
term or during the period of one year following the date of
the original delivery of the motor vehicle to a consumer, whichever
period ends first, but such nonconformity continues to exist.
The term of an express warranty and such one-year period shall
be extended by any period of time during which repair services
are not available to the consumer because of war, invasion,
strike or fire, flood or other natural disaster.
-
- No motor vehicle which is returned to any person
pursuant to any provision of this chapter or in settlement
of any dispute
related to any complaint made under the provisions of this
chapter and which requires replacement or refund shall be resold,
transferred or leased in the state without clear and conspicuous
written disclosure of the fact that such motor vehicle was
so returned prior to resale or lease. Such disclosure shall
be affixed to the motor vehicle and shall be included in any
contract for sale or lease. The Commissioner of Motor Vehicles
shall, by regulations adopted in accordance with the provisions
of chapter 54, prescribe the form and content of any such disclosure
statement and establish provisions by which the commissioner
may remove such written disclosure after such time as the commissioner
may determine that such motor vehicle is no longer defective.
- If a manufacturer accepts the return of a motor vehicle
or compensates any person who accepts the return of a motor
vehicle pursuant to subdivision (1) of this subsection such
manufacturer shall stamp the words "MANUFACTURER BUYBACK" clearly
and conspicuously on the face of the original title in letters
at least one-quarter inch high and, within ten days of receipt
of the title, shall submit a copy of the stamped title to the
Department of Motor Vehicles. The Department of Motor Vehicles
shall maintain a listing of such buyback vehicles and in the
case of any request for a title for a buyback vehicle, shall
cause the words "MANUFACTURER BUYBACK" to appear
clearly and conspicuously on the face of the new title in letters
which are at least one-quarter inch high. Any person who applies
for a title shall disclose to the department the fact that
such vehicle was returned as set forth in this subsection.
- If a manufacturer accepts the return of a motor vehicle
from a consumer due to a nonconformity or defect, in exchange
for a refund or a replacement vehicle, whether as a result
of an administrative or judicial determination, an arbitration
proceeding or a voluntary settlement, the manufacturer shall
notify the Department of Motor Vehicles and shall provide the
department with all relevant information, including the year,
make, model, vehicle identification number and prior title
number of the vehicle. The Commissioner of Motor Vehicles shall
adopt regulations in accordance with chapter 54 specifying
the format and time period in which such information shall
be provided and the nature of any additional information which
the commissioner may require.
- The provisions of this subsection
shall apply to motor vehicles originally returned in another
state from a consumer due to a nonconformity or defect in exchange
for a refund or replacement vehicle and which a lessor or transferor
with actual knowledge subsequently sells, transfers or leases
in this state.
- All express and implied warranties arising from the sale
of a new motor vehicle shall be subject to the provisions of
part 3 of article 2 of title 42a.
- Nothing in this section shall in any way limit the rights
or remedies which are otherwise available to a consumer under
any other law.
- If a manufacturer has established an informal dispute
settlement procedure which is certified by the Attorney General
as complying
in all respects with the provisions of Title 16 Code of Federal
Regulations Part 703, as in effect on October 1, 1982, and
with the provisions of subsection (b) of section 42-182, the
provisions of subsection (d) of this section concerning refunds
or replacement shall not apply to any consumer who has not
first resorted to such procedure.
(P.A. 82-287; P.A. 83-351, S. 1; 83-458; P.A. 84-338, S. 3,
8; 84-429, S. 75; P.A. 85-331, S. 1, 6; 85-613, S. 132, 154;
P.A. 87-342, S. 1, 5; 87-522, S. 2, 6; P.A. 89-173, S. 1, 2;
P.A. 92-190; P.A. 93-435, S. 14, 95.)
History: P.A. 83-351 amended Subsec. (a) to provide that the
definitions therein also apply to Sec. 42-180; P.A. 83-458
amended Subsec. (c) by prohibiting manufacturers from holding
dealers liable for refunds or vehicle replacements under certain
circumstances; P.A. 84-338 created a period during which a
consumer may require a manufacturer or dealer to repair a nonconformity
existing in a new motor vehicle sold on or after July 1, 1984,
outlined requirements concerning notifying the manufacturer
of a nonconformity, specified the elements included in a refund
of the contract price, required that a replacement vehicle
be acceptable to the consumer, defined a defect as anything
which impairs the use, safety or value of the vehicle, redefined
the amount deducted for reasonable allowance for use, required
disclosure that any vehicle which requires refund or replacement
and which is being resold has been returned, and established
that a manufacturer's informal dispute resolution procedure
must comply with Title 16, Code of Federal Regulations Part
703 as in effect on October 1, 1982; P.A. 84-429 made technical
changes for statutory consistency; P.A. 85-331 amended Subsec.
(i) by specifying that a manufacturer's informal dispute resolution
procedure must be certified by the attorney general as complying
with Title 16 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 703, as in
effect on October 1, 1982, and with the provisions of Subsec.
(b) of Sec. 42-182, or order to come within the provision of
this section; P.A. 85-613 made technical changes in Subsec.
(e); P.A. 87-342 extended the provisions of the section to
leased vehicles, removed obsolete language and made technical
changes; P.A. 87-522 amended Subsecs. (b) and (e) by removing
archaic language and making other technical changes, inserted
a new Subsec. (f) concerning motor vehicles which have a nonconformity
which results in a condition which is likely to cause death
or serious bodily injury if the vehicle is driven, relettered
the remaining existing Subsecs. and amended the relettered
Subsec. (g) by requiring a manufacturer who accepts the return
of a motor vehicle due to a defect or nonconformity to notify
the department of motor vehicles; P.A. 89-173 amended Subsec.
(e) to require at least one repair attempt prior to making
of a claim and amended Subsec. (g) to require persons other
than manufacturers to make disclosures and to provide for regulations
by the commissioner of motor vehicles concerning the format,
nature and time period of information required; P.A. 92-190
amended Subsec. (g) to make chapter apply to "transferred" vehicles
and to specify that the required written disclosure "shall
be affixed to the motor vehicle and shall be included in any
contract for sale or lease", dividing Subsec. into Subdivs.
and adding provisions designated as Subdiv. (2) which, among
other things, provided for the stamping of the words "manufacturer
buyback" on the original title of any buyback vehicle
and added Subdiv. (4) specifying applicability to vehicles
returned in another state because of nonconformity or defect
and subsequently sold in this state; P.A. 93-435 reinstated
language last printed in the 1991 revision, but dropped in
the 1993 revision due to a clerical error, effective June 28,
1993.
Cited. 203 C. 63, 67, 69, 71, 73, 74, 78. Cited. 209 C. 579,
584587. Lemon law I cited. Id. Cited. 212 C. 83, 88. Motorcycles
fall within definition of "motor vehicle". 40 CS
156158. Subsec. (a): Cited. 40 CS 156, 157. Subsec. (d): Cited.
203 C. 63, 78, 79. Cited. 209 C. 579, 587. Cited. 213 C. 136,
140, 142, 143. Subsec. (g): Cited. 209 C. 579, 587. Subsec.
(i): Cited. 209 C. 579, 587. Cited. 212 C. 83, 88, 89, 93.
Sec. 42-179a. Copies of paperwork or invoices.
A dealer or authorized agent of a manufacturer shall, upon
the request of a consumer, provide such consumer with copies
of any paperwork or invoices related to repair work performed
on such consumer's automobile in accordance with the provisions
of subsection (b) of section 42-179. Any person who violates
the provisions of this section shall be guilty of an infraction.
(P.A. 85-331, S. 4, 6.) Cited. 203 C. 63, 73, 74. Cited. 209
C. 579, 585.
Sec. 42-179b. Dealers and lessors to deliver information.
Each motor vehicle dealer, as defined in subsection (11) of
section 14-1, and each person engaged in the business of leasing
new motor vehicles shall, at the time of sale or execution
of the lease of any new motor vehicle, deliver to the consumer,
as defined in subdivision (1) of subsection (a) of section
42-179, of such vehicle written information, in a form approved
by the Commissioner of Consumer Protection, which explains
the new automobile warranty and dispute settlement program
established pursuant to this chapter.
(P.A. 89-173, S. 4.)
Sec. 42-180. Costs and attorney's fees in breach of
warranty actions.
In any action by a consumer against the manufacturer of a motor
vehicle, or the manufacturer's agent or authorized dealer,
based upon the alleged breach of an express or implied warranty
made in connection with the sale or lease of such motor vehicle,
the court, in its discretion, may award to the plaintiff his
costs and reasonable attorney's fees or, if the court determines
that the action was brought without any substantial justification,
may award costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the defendant.
(P.A. 83-351, S. 2; P.A. 87-342, S. 2, 5.) History: P.A. 87-342
extended provisions of section to leased vehicles. Cited. 209
C. 579, 586, 587.
Sec. 42-181. Department arbitration procedure.
Records. Appeals.
- The Department of Consumer Protection, shall provide
an independent arbitration procedure for the settlement of
disputes
between consumers and manufacturers of motor vehicles which
do not conform to all applicable warranties under the terms
of section 42-179. The commissioner shall establish one or
more automobile dispute settlement panels which shall consist
of three members appointed by the Commissioner of Consumer
Protection, only one of whom may be directly involved in the
manufacture, distribution, sale or service of any product.
Members shall be persons interested in consumer disputes and
shall serve without compensation for terms of two years at
the discretion of the commissioner. In lieu of referring an
arbitration dispute to a panel established under the provisions
of this section, the Department of Consumer Protection may
refer an arbitration dispute to the American Arbitration Association
in accordance with regulations adopted in accordance with the
provisions of chapter 54.
- If any motor vehicle purchased at any time on or after
October 1, 1984, or leased at any time on or after June 17,
1987, fails to conform to such applicable warranties as defined
in said section 42-179, a consumer may bring a grievance to
an arbitration panel if the manufacturer of the vehicle has
not established an informal dispute settlement procedure which
the Attorney General has certified as complying in all respects
with the requirements of said section 42-179. The consumer
may initiate a request for arbitration by calling a toll-free
telephone number designated by the commissioner or by requesting
an arbitration hearing in writing. The consumer shall file,
on forms prescribed by the commissioner, any information deemed
relevant to the resolution of the dispute and shall return
the form accompanied by a filing fee of fifty dollars. Such
complaint form shall offer the consumer a choice of presenting
any subsequent testimony orally or in writing. Prior to submitting
the complaint to an arbitration panel, the Department of Consumer
Protection shall conduct an initial review of the complaint.
The department shall determine whether the complaint should
be accepted or rejected for arbitration based on whether it
alleges that the manufacturer has failed to comply with section
42-179. The filing fee shall be refunded if the department
determines that a complaint does not allege a violation of
any applicable warranty under the requirements of said section
42-179. Upon acceptance of the complaint, the commissioner
shall notify the manufacturer of the filing of a request for
arbitration and shall obtain from the manufacturer, in writing
on a form prescribed by the commissioner, any information deemed
relevant to the resolution of the dispute. The manufacturer
shall return the form within fifteen days of receipt, together
with a filing fee of two hundred fifty dollars. A lessee who
brings a grievance to an arbitration panel under this section
shall, upon filing the complaint form provided for in this
section, provide the lessor with notice by registered or certified
mail, return receipt requested, and the lessor may petition
the arbitration panel to be made a party to the arbitration
proceedings. Initial determinations to reject a complaint for
arbitration shall be submitted to an arbitration panel for
a final decision upon receipt of a written request from the
consumer for a review of the initial eligibility determination
and a filing fee of fifty dollars. If a complaint is accepted
for arbitration, an arbitration panel may determine that a
complaint does not allege that the manufacturer has failed
to comply with section 42-179 at any time before such panel
renders its decision on the merits of the dispute. The fee
accompanying the consumer's complaint form shall be refunded
to the consumer and the fee accompanying the form filed by
the manufacturer shall be refunded to the manufacturer if the
arbitration panel determines that a complaint does not allege
a violation of the provisions of section 42-179.
- The Department of Consumer Protection shall investigate,
gather and organize all information necessary for a fair and
timely decision in each dispute. The commissioner may issue
subpoenas on behalf of any arbitration panel to compel the
attendance of witnesses and the production of documents, papers
and records relevant to the dispute. The department shall forward
a copy of all written testimony, including all documentary
evidence, to an independent technical expert certified by the
National Institute of Automotive Service Excellence or having
a degree or other credentials from a nationally recognized
organization or institution attesting to automotive expertise,
who shall review such material and be available to advise and
consult with the arbitration panel. An expert shall sit as
a nonvoting member of an arbitration panel whenever oral testimony
is presented. Such experts may be recommended by the Commissioner
of Motor Vehicles at the request of the Commissioner of Consumer
Protection. An arbitration panel shall, as expeditiously as
possible, but not later than sixty days after the time the
consumer files the complaint form together with the filing
fee, render a fair decision based on the information gathered
and disclose its findings and the reasons therefor to the parties
involved. The failure of the arbitrators to render a decision
within sixty days shall not void any subsequent decision or
otherwise limit the powers of the arbitrators. The arbitration
panel shall base its determination of liability solely on whether
the manufacturer has failed to comply with section 42-179.
The arbitration decision shall be final and binding as to the
rights of the parties pursuant to section 42-179, subject only
to judicial review as set forth in this subsection. The decision
shall provide appropriate remedies, including, but not limited
to one or more of the following:
- Replacement of the vehicle
with an identical or comparable new vehicle acceptable to the
consumer;
- Refund of the full contract price, plus collateral
charges as specified in subsection (d) of said section 42-179;
- Reimbursement for expenses and compensation for incidental
damages as specified in subsection (d) of said section 42-179;
- Any other remedies available under the applicable warranties,
section 42-179, this section and sections 42-182 to 42-184,
inclusive, or the Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission
Improvement Act, 88 Stat. 2183 (1975), 15 USC 2301 et seq.,
as in effect on October 1, 1982, other than repair of the vehicle.
The decision shall specify a date for performance and completion
of all awarded remedies. Notwithstanding any provision of the
general statutes or any regulation to the contrary, the Department
of Consumer Protection shall not amend, reverse, rescind or
revoke any decision or action of an arbitration panel. The
department shall contact the consumer, within ten working days
after the date for performance, to determine whether performance
has occurred. The manufacturer shall act in good faith in abiding
by any arbitration decision. In addition, either party to the
arbitration may make application to the superior court for
the judicial district in which one of the parties resides or,
when the court is not in session, any judge thereof for an
order confirming, vacating, modifying or correcting any award,
in accordance with the provisions of this section and sections
52-417, 52-418, 52-419 and 52-420. Upon filing such application
the moving party shall mail a copy of the application to the
Attorney General and, upon entry of any judgment or decree,
shall mail a copy of such judgment or decree to the Attorney
General. A review of such application shall be confined to
the record of the proceedings before the arbitration panel.
The court shall conduct a de novo review of the questions of
law raised in the application. In addition to the grounds set
forth in sections 52-418 and 52-419, the court shall consider
questions of fact raised in the application. In reviewing questions
of fact, the court shall uphold the award unless it determines
that the factual findings of the arbitrators are not supported
by substantial evidence in the record and that the substantial
rights of the moving party have been prejudiced. If the arbitrators
fail to state findings or reasons for the award, or the stated
findings or reasons are inadequate, the court shall search
the record to determine whether a basis exists to uphold the
award. If it is determined by the court that the manufacturer
has acted without good cause in bringing an appeal of an award,
the court, in its discretion, may grant to the consumer his
costs and reasonable attorney's fees. If the manufacturer fails
to perform all awarded remedies by the date for performance
specified by the arbitrators, and the enforcement of the award
has not been stayed pursuant to subsection (c) of section 52-420,
then each additional day the manufacturer wilfully fails to
comply shall be deemed a separate violation for purposes of
section 42-184.
- The department shall maintain such records of each dispute
as the commissioner may require, including an index of disputes
by brand name and model. The department shall annually compile
and maintain statistics indicating the record of manufacturer
compliance with arbitration decisions and the number of refunds
or replacements awarded. A copy of the statistical summary
shall be filed with the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles and
shall be considered by him in determining the issuance of any
manufacturer license as required under section 14-67a. The
summary shall be a public record.
- If a manufacturer has not established an informal dispute
settlement procedure certified by the Attorney General as complying
with the requirements of said section 42-179, public notice
of the availability of the department's automobile dispute
settlement procedure shall be prominently posted in the place
of business of each new car dealer licensed by the Department
of Motor Vehicles to engage in the sale of such manufacturer's
new motor vehicles. Display of such public notice shall be
a condition of licensure under sections 14-52 and 14-64. The
Commissioner of Consumer Protection shall determine the size,
type face, form and wording of the sign required by this section,
which shall include the toll-free telephone number and the
address to which requests for the department's arbitration
services may be sent.
- Any consumer injured by the operation of any procedure
which does not conform with procedures established by a manufacturer
pursuant to subsection (b) of section 42-182 and the provisions
of Title 16 Code of Federal Regulations Part 703, as in effect
on October 1, 1982, may appeal any decision rendered as the
result of such a procedure by requesting arbitration de novo
of the dispute by an arbitration panel. Filing procedures and
fees for appeals shall be the same as those required in subsection
(b) of this section. The findings of the manufacturer's informal
dispute settlement procedure may be admissible in evidence
at such arbitration panel hearing and in any civil action subsequently
arising out of any warranty obligation or matter related to
the dispute. Any consumer so injured may, in addition, request
the Attorney General to investigate the manufacturer's procedure
to determine whether its certification shall be suspended or
revoked after proper notice and hearing. The Attorney General
shall establish procedures for processing such consumer complaints
and maintain a record of the disposition of such complaints,
which record shall be included in the annual report prepared
in accordance with the provisions of subsection (a) of section
42-182.
- The Commissioner of Consumer Protection shall adopt regulations,
in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54, to carry out
the purposes of this section. Written copies of the regulations
and appropriate arbitration hearing procedures shall be provided
to any person upon request.
(P.A. 84-338, S. 1; P.A. 85-331, S. 2, 6; P.A. 87-342, S. 3,
5; 87-522, S. 3, 6; P.A. 89-173, S. 3, 7; P.A. 90-8, S. 1,
2; P.A. 96-259, S. 1.)
History: P.A. 85-331 changed department
panel to arbitration panel, deleted the requirement that a
consumer return the complaint form within five days from Subsec.
(b), sanctioned the use of a technical expert with credentials
from a nationally recognized organization, prohibited the commissioner
from altering the decision of an arbitration panel, and allowed
either party to appeal the decision of an arbitration panel
to superior court in Subsec. (c), and in Subsec. (f) required
the attorney general to establish procedures for processing
consumer complaints and maintaining records; P.A. 87-342 amended
Subsec. (b) by extending the provisions of the section to leased
vehicles; P.A. 87-522 amended Subsec. (b) by providing that
the department of consumer protection shall conduct an initial
review of a complaint, and that such initial review may be
reviewed by an arbitration panel upon written request of a
consumer, provided such panel may determine that the complaint
does not allege a violation of Sec. 42-179 at any time and
amended Subsec. (c) by providing that the failure of the arbitrators
to render a decision within sixty days shall not void any subsequent
decision or otherwise limit the power of the arbitrators, eliminated
the remedy of repair of the vehicle, requiring a party moving
for an order confirming or modifying any award to mail a copy
of the application as subsequent entry of judgment to the attorney
general and provided that each day a manufacturer fails to
perform all awarded remedies shall be deemed a separate violation
for purposes of Sec. 42-184; P.A. 89-173 amended Subdiv. (4)
of Subsec. (c) to exclude repair from the list of remedies;
P.A. 90-8 amended Subsec. (c) to specify that arbitration panel
is to base its determination of liability solely on question
of compliance with Sec. 42-179, to specify that decision is
final and binding subject only to judicial review and to specify
limits of inquiry under judicial review; P.A. 96-259 amended
Subsec. (d) to require the department to compile statistics
annually rather than at intervals of no more than six months.
Cited. 203 C. 63, 65, 66, 70, 7380. Cited. 209 C. 579581, 583,
585, 586, 589, 590, 592594, 596. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Cited.
212 C. 83, 84, 8894, 97. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Cited. 213
C. 136138, 141, 142, 144. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Cited. 218
C. 646, 659, 660. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Subsec. (a): Cited.
212 C. 83, 88. Subsec. (b): Cited. 203 C. 63, 66, 73. Cited.
209 C. 579, 585, 595. Cited. 212 C. 83, 88, 90, 98. Subsec.
(c): Cited. 203 C. 63, 66, 73, 78. Court concluded general
assembly intended to authorize arbitrators to award reasonable
attorneys' fees to consumers who prevail. 209 C. 579, 585,
595. Subdiv. (5) cited. Id., 579, 587, 588, 593. Subdiv. (4)
cited. Id., 579, 589. Judicial review procedures are constitutionally
insufficient. 212 C. 83, 84, 8890, 93, 9597. Subdiv. (2) cited.
213 C. 136, 142. Cited. 226 C. 475, 492. Subsec. (e): Cited.
212 C. 83, 88. Subsec. (g): Cited. 203 C. 63, 66.
Sec. 42-182. Certification of manufacturer's informal
dispute settlement procedures.
- The Attorney General shall prepare an annual report evaluating
the operation of informal dispute settlement procedures established
by manufacturers of new motor vehicles and shall issue a certificate
of approval to those manufacturers whose settlement procedures
comply in all respects with the provisions of Title 16 Code
of Federal Regulations Part 703, as in effect on October 1,
1982, and with the provisions of subsection (b)
of this section. The report and certification shall be
public records. The Attorney General or an agent authorized
by him may conduct any inquiry or investigation in connection
with the certification or evaluation of a manufacturer's informal
dispute settlement procedure and may hold hearings, issue subpoenas
requiring the attendance of witnesses and the production of
records, documents or other evidence in connection therewith,
administer oaths, examine witnesses, receive oral and documentary
evidence and issue written interrogatories prescribing a return
date which would allow a reasonable time to respond, which
responses shall be under oath. Service of subpoenas compelling
testimony or the production of documents and written interrogatories
as provided herein, may be made by
- personal service or
service at the usual place of abode; or
- registered or certified
mail, return receipt requested, a duly executed copy of which
shall be addressed to the person to be served at his principal
place of business in this state, or, if said person has no
principal place of business in this state, to his principal
office or to his residence. In the event that any person shall
fail to comply with a subpoena or with interrogatories issued
pursuant to this section, the Attorney General or an agent
authorized by him may apply to the superior court for the judicial
district of Hartford-New Britain* for compliance, which court
may, upon notice to such person, issue an order requiring such
compliance, which shall be served upon such person. Hearings
under this subsection shall be held in the manner provided
for contested cases under sections 4-176e to 4-181a, inclusive,
except that no informal disposition may be made by stipulation,
agreed settlement, consent order or default, in any proceeding
concerning the certification of an automobile manufacturer's
informal dispute settlement procedure unless such proceeding
is open to the public in accordance with the provisions of
section 1-21. The Attorney General, after notice and hearing,
may suspend or revoke the certification of an automobile manufacturer's
informal dispute settlement procedure which violates the provisions
of subsection (b) of this section or the provisions of Title
16 Code of Federal Regulations Part 703, as in effect on October
1, 1982. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Attorney
General or his authorized agent, may appeal in accordance with
the provisions of sections 4-183 and 4-184. Section 4-184a
shall be applicable to such appeals. Hearings, meetings and
conferences, except telephone conversations, relating to evaluation
and certification shall be open to the public in accordance
with the provisions of section 1-21. If the Attorney General
certifies a manufacturer's informal dispute settlement procedure,
the provisions of subsection (d) of section 42-179 concerning
refunds or replacement shall not apply to any consumer who
has not first resorted to such procedure. A copy of the Attorney
General's report and certification shall be forwarded by the
Attorney General to the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, who
may consider such report and certification in determining the
fitness of an applicant for a manufacturer's license to engage
in business as a manufacturer of motor vehicles for sale in
this state, as provided for in section 14-67a.
- A manufacturer's
informal dispute procedure shall not include any practices
which:
- Delay a decision in any dispute beyond sixty days
after the date on which the consumer initially resorts to the
informal dispute settlement procedure either by a telephone
call or by written notification that a dispute exists;
-
delay performance of remedies awarded in a settlement beyond
ten days after receipt of notice of the consumer's acceptance
of the decision, except that a manufacturer may have thirty
days following the date of such receipt to deliver a replacement
of a motor vehicle acceptable to the consumer or to refund
the full contract price of the vehicle together with all collateral
charges, and all consequential and incidental damages as defined
in said section 42-179;
- require the consumer to make
the vehicle available more than once for inspection by a manufacturer's
representative, and more than once for repair of the same defect
by a dealer, in which cases, and upon proof of the consumer's
financial responsibility in accordance with the provisions
of section 14-112, the manufacturer of the defective vehicle
shall provide for the loan of a reliable vehicle, not more
than two years old, for use during the periods required for
inspection or repair;
- fail to consider in decisions any
remedies provided by sections 42-179 and 42-181, this section
and sections 42-183 and 42-184, such remedies to include
-
repair, replacement and refund,
- reimbursement for expenses
and collateral charges,
- compensation for consequential
and incidental damages as defined in said section 42-179 and
- any other remedies available under applicable express
or implied warranties;
- require the consumer to take any
action or assume any obligation not specifically authorized
under
the provisions of Title 16 Code of Federal Regulations Part
703, as in effect on October 1, 1982; or
- fail to conform
to all applicable standards and requirements of this chapter
in the processing of consumer complaints.
- Any manufacturer operating or participating in an informal
dispute settlement procedure for resolving disputes with consumers
in this state shall be required to maintain records which indicate
the number of:
- Vehicles sold in this state during the reporting
period;
- telephone and written requests from consumers to
enter the dispute resolution program;
- requests rejected
as ineligible for the program;
- requests accepted for resolution
by the program;
- cases in which a decision was reached and
the manufacturer has complied with the decision within the
time period for compliance established by the decision;
-
cases in which a decision was reached and the manufacturer's
compliance occurred after the expiration of the time period
for compliance established by the decision;
- cases in which
a decision was reached, the time period for compliance has
expired and the manufacturer has not complied with such decision;
- cases in which a decision was reached and the time period
for compliance has not yet expired;
- cases in which a decision
awarded no relief to the consumer;
- cases in which a decision
awarded the consumer further repair or extended warranty;
-
cases in which a decision required the manufacturer to accept
the return of the vehicle and a refund was issued to the consumer;
- cases in which a decision required the manufacturer to
accept the return of the vehicle and a replacement vehicle
was provided to the consumer;
- cases in which a decision
is pending;
- cases in which the consumer accepted the decision;
- cases in which the consumer rejected the decision;
-
cases resolved by predecision settlement.
(P.A. 84-338, S. 2, 8; P.A. 85-331, S. 3, 6; P.A. 87-522, S.
5, 6; P.A. 88-230, S. 1, 12; 88-317, S. 94, 107; P.A. 90-98,
S. 1, 2; P.A. 93-142, S. 4, 7, 8; P.A. 95-220, S. 46.) *Note:
On and after September 1, 1998, the phrase "judicial district
of Hartford" shall be substituted for "judicial district
of Hartford-New Britain".
History: P.A. 85-331 empowered the attorney general to conduct
hearings in connection with the certification or evaluation
of manufacturer's informal dispute settlement procedures, prohibited
informal dispositions, unless such proceeding is open to the
public, provided for the revocation of certification, appeals
from decisions of the attorney general, required meetings relating
to certification or evaluation to be open to the public, deleted
the attorney general's power to adopt regulations, prohibited
manufacturer's settlement procedures from failing to conform
to standards of this chapter in processing consumer complaints;
P.A. 87-522 amended Subsec. (a) by authorizing the attorney
general to issue written interrogatories and prescribing the
manner in which subpoenas may be served, and amended Subsec.
(c) by specifying the type of records which manufacturers operating
or participating in informal dispute settlement procedure are
required to keep; P.A. 88-230 replaced "judicial district
of Hartford-New Britain" with "judicial district
of Hartford", effective September 1, 1991; P.A. 88-317
amended reference to Secs. 4-177 to 4-181 in Subsec. (a) to
include new sections added to Ch. 54, effective July 1, 1989,
and applicable to all agency proceedings commencing on or after
that date; P.A. 90-98 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230
from September 1, 1991, to September 1, 1993; P.A. 93-142 changed
the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1993, to
September 1, 1996, effective June 14, 1993; P.A. 95-220 changed
the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1996, to
September 1, 1998, effective July 1, 1995.
Cited. 203 C. 63, 65, 66, 70, 7380. Cited. 209 C. 579, 585,
586, 589, 590, 592594, 596. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Cited.
212 C. 8385, 8893, 97. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Cited. 213 C.
136, 137, 141, 142, 144. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Cited. 218
C. 646, 659, 660. Lemon Law II cited. Id. Subsec. (b): Cited.
209 C. 579, 587.
Sec. 42-183. Institution of proceedings.
The Commissioner of Consumer Protection may, in consultation
with the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, request institution
of proceedings under section 14-67c against any manufacturer
found to have failed to comply with the provisions of sections
42-179, 42-181 and 42-182, this section and section 42-184.
(P.A. 84-338, S. 4, 8.) Cited. 203 C. 63, 65, 66, 70, 7380.
Cited. 209 C. 579, 585, 586, 589, 590, 592594, 596. Lemon Law
II cited. Id. Cited. 212 C. 83, 84, 8893, 97. Lemon Law II
cited. Id. Cited. 213 C. 136, 137, 141, 142, 144. Lemon Law
II cited. Id. Cited. 218 C. 646, 659, 660. Lemon Law II cited.
Id.
Sec. 42-184. Unfair trade practices.
A violation of any of the provisions of sections 42-179 and
42-181 to 42-183, inclusive, shall be deemed an unfair or deceptive
trade practice under chapter 735a.
(P.A. 84-338, S. 5, 8.) Cited. 203 C. 63, 65, 66, 70, 7380.
Cited. 209 C. 579, 585, 586, 589, 590, 592594, 596. Lemon Law
II cited. Id. Cited. 212 C. 83, 84, 8893, 97. Lemon Law II
cited. Id. Cited. 213 C. 136, 137, 141, 142, 144. Lemon Law
II cited. Id. Cited. 218 C. 646, 659, 660. Lemon Law II cited.
Id.
Sec. 42-185. Waiver of filing fees, statement prohibited.
Notwithstanding the provisions of any general statute, regulation
or grant of authority to the contrary, no filing fee or statement
required under the provisions of this chapter shall be waived,
refunded, reduced or withheld from use, by the state pursuant
to any contract, stipulated settlement, consent order, administrative
directive or by any other means except as provided in this
chapter or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction made
upon proof of economic hardship and a finding that such settlement,
consent order, directive or other action is in the public interest.
(P.A. 85-331, S. 5, 6.) Cited. 203 C. 63, 73. Cited. 209 C.
579, 585. Cited. 212 C. 83, 84, 8893, 97, 99. Lemon Law II
cited. Id. Cited. 218 C. 646, 659, 660. Lemon Law II cited.
Id.
Sec. 42-186. Action brought by lessee against manufacturer.
Lessee to notify lessor. Lessor authorized to petition to be
made a party to proceeding. In any action by a consumer who
is a lessee against the manufacturer of a motor vehicle, or
the manufacturer's agent or authorized dealer, based upon the
alleged breach of an express or implied warranty made in connection
with the lease of such motor vehicle pursuant to section 42-179,
the lessee shall, at the time of the service of process upon
such manufacturer, manufacturer's agent or authorized dealer,
notify the lessor of such motor vehicle of such action by registered
or certified mail, return receipt requested, and such lessor
may petition the court to be made a party to the proceedings.
(P.A. 87-342, S. 4, 5.)
Secs. 42-187 to 42-199. Reserved for future use. |
|
The
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is a Federal Law that protects the buyer of any product which costs more than $25 and comes with an express written warranty.
This law applies to any product that you buy that does not perform as it should.
Your car is a major investment, rationalized by the peace of mind that flows from its expected dependability and safety. Accordingly, you are entitled
to expect an automobile properly constructed and regulated to provide reasonably safe, trouble-free, and dependable transportation – regardless
of the exact make and model you bought. Unfortunately, sometimes these principles do not hold true and defects arise in automobiles. Although one defect
is not actionable, repeated defects are as there exists a generally accepted rule that unsuccessful repair efforts render the warrantor liable. Simply
put, there comes a time when “enough is enough” – when after having to take your car into the shop for repairs an inordinate number
of times and experiencing all of the attendant inconvenience, you are entitled to say, ‘That’s all,’ and revoke, notwithstanding the
seller’s repeated good faith efforts to fix the car. The rationale behind these basic principles is clear: once your faith in the vehicle is shaken,
the vehicle loses its real value to you and becomes an instrument whose integrity is impaired and whose operation is fraught with apprehension. The question
thus becomes when is “enough”?
As you know, enough is never enough from your warrantor’s point of view and you should simply continue to have your defective vehicle repaired – time
and time again. However, you are not required to allow a warrantor to tinker with your vehicle indefinitely in the hope that it may eventually be fixed.
Rather, you are entitled to expect your vehicle to be repaired within a reasonable opportunity. To this end, both the federal Moss Warranty Act, and
the various state “lemon laws,” require repairs to your vehicle be performed within a reasonable opportunity.
Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty
Act, a warrantor should perform adequate repairs in at least two, and possibly three, attempts to correct a particular defect. Further, the Magnuson-Moss
Warranty Act’s reasonableness requirement applies to your vehicle as a whole rather than to each individual defect
that arises. Although most of the Lemon Laws vary from state to state, each individual law usually require a warrantor to cure a specific defect within
four to five attempts or the automobile as a whole within thirty days. If the warrantor fails to meet this obligation, most of the lemon laws provide
for a full refund or new replacement vehicle. Further, this reasonable number of attempts/reasonable opportunity standard, whether it be that of the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act or that of the Lemon Laws, is akin to strict liability – once this threshold has been met, the continued existence of
a defect is irrelevant and you are still entitled to relief.
One of the most important parts of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is its fee shifting
provision. This provision provides that you may recover the attorney fees incurred in the prosecution of your case if you are successful – independent
of how much you actually win. That rational behind this fee shifting provision is to twofold: (1) to ensure you will be able to vindicate your rights
without having to expend large sums on attorney's fees and (2) because automobile manufacturers are able to write off all expenses of defense as a
legitimate business expense, whereas you, the average consumer, obviously does not have that kind of economic staying power. Most of the Lemon Laws contain
similar fee shifting provisions.
You may also derive additional warranty rights from the Uniform Commercial Code; however, the Code does not allow you
in most states to recover your attorney fees and is also not as consumer friendly as the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act or the various state lemon laws.
The narrative information on Magnuson-Moss, UCC and lemon laws on these pages is provided by Marshall Meyers, attorney.
|
|
Uniform
Commercial Code Summary
The Uniform Commercial Code or UCC has been enacted in all 50 states and some of the territories of the United States. It is the primary source of law
in all contracts dealing with the sale of products. The TARR refers to Tender, Acceptance, Rejection, Revocation and applies to different aspects of
the consumer's "relationship" with the purchased goods.
TENDER -
The tender provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code contained in Section2-601 provide that the buyer is entitled to reject any goods that fail in
any respect to conform to the contract. Unfortunately, new cars are often technically complex and their innermost workings are beyond the understanding
of the average new car buyer. The buyer, therefore, does not know whether the goods are then conforming.
ACCEPTANCE -
The new car buyer accepts the goods believing and expecting that the manufacturer will repair any problem he has with the goods under the warranty.
REJECTION
-
The new car buyer may discover a problem with the vehicle within the first few miles of his purchase. This would allow the new car buyer to reject
the goods. If the new car buyer discovers a defect in the car within a reasonable time to inspect the vehicle, he may reject the vehicle. This period
is not defined. On the one hand, the buyer must be given a reasonable time to inspect and that reasonable time to inspect will be held as an acceptance
of the vehicle. The Courts will decide this reasonable time to inspect based on the knowledge and experience of the buyer, the difficulty in discovering
the defect, and the opportunity to discover the defect.
The following is an example of a case of rejection: Mr. Zabriskie purchase a new 1966 Chevrolet Biscayne. After picking up the car on Friday evening,
while en route to his home 2.5 miles away, and within 7/10ths of a mile from the dealership, the car stalled and stalled again within 15 feet. Thereafter,
the car would only drive in low gear. The buyer rejected the vehicle and stopped payment on his check. The dealer contended that the buyer could not
reject the car because he had driven it around the block and that was his reasonable opportunity to inspect. The New Jersey Court said;
To the layman,
the complicated mechanisms of today's automobile are a complete mystery. To have the automobile inspected by someone with sufficient expertise to disassemble
the vehicle in order the discover latent defects before the contract is signed, is assuredly impossible and highly impractical. Consequently, the first
few miles of driving become even more significant to the excited new car buyer. This is the buyer's first reasonable opportunity to enjoy his new vehicle
to see if it conforms to what it was represented to be and whether he is getting what he bargained for. How long the buyer may drive the new car under
the guise of inspection of new goods is not an issue in the present case because 7/10th of a mile is clearly within the ambit of a reasonable opportunity
to inspect. Zabriskie Chevrolet, Inc. v. Smith, 240 A. 2d 195(1968)
It is suggested that Courts will tend to excuse use by consumers if possible.
REVOCATION -
What happens when the consumer has used the new car for a lengthy period of time? This is the typical lemon car case. The UCC provides that a buyer
may revoke his acceptance of goods whose non-conformity substantially impairs the value of the goods to him when he has accepted the goods without
discovery of a non-conformity because it was difficult to discover or if he was assured that non-conformities would be repaired. Of course, the average
new car buyer does not learn of the nonconformity until hundreds of thousands of miles later. And because quality is job one, and manufacturers are
competing on the basis of their warranties, the consumer always is assured that any noncomformities he does discover will be remedied.
What is a noncomformity substantially impairing the value of the vehicle?
- A noncomformity may include a number of relatively minor defects whose cumulative total adds up to a substantial impairment. This is the "Shake
Faith" Doctrine first stated in the Zabrisikie case. "For a majority of people the purchase of a new car is a major investment, rationalized
by the peace of mind that flows from its dependability and safety. Once their faith is shaken, the vehicle loses not only its real value in their eyes,
but becomes an instrument whose integrity is substantially impaired and whose operation is fraught with apprehension".
- A substantial noncomformity may include a failure or refusal to repair the goods under the warranty. In Durfee V. Rod Baxter Imports, the Minnesota
Court held that the Saab owner that was plagued by a series of of annoying minor defects and stalling, which were never repaired after a number of attempts,
could revoke, "if repairs are not successfully undertaken within a reasonable time", the consumer may elect to revoke.
- Substantial Non Conformity and Lemon Laws often define what may be considered a substantial impairment. These definitions have been successfully used
to flesh out the substantial impairment in the UCC.
Additional narrative information on Magnusson-Moss, UCC and lemon laws on these pages is provided by T. Michael Flinn, attorney.
|
|
|
|
 |