Monday morning on "AirTalk" we detailed the new study linking kids' exposure to organophosphate pesticides with increased diagnoses of ADHD. It reminded me of the California official who wanted to assure the public of the safety of malathion. Malathion is a commonly used organophosphate pesticide today, but was sprayed from helicopters back in 1981 in an effort to eradicate the dreaded Medfly.
Then-governor Jerry Brown's chief of staff, B. T. Collins, wanted to assure the public that malathion was safe, and that the aerial spraying would harm only the Medfly. Collins called a news conference, then chug-a-lugged a beaker of malathion solution. The video of his stunt was played across the country.
Unfortunately, malathion was found to be pretty rough on automotive paint. Southland residents were later told to cover their cars if parked in the open.
Sadly, Collins died of a sudden heart attack just over a decade later, while he was serving in the state legislature. He was only 52.
Source
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Thursday, July 15, 2010
GM Sued Under Lemon Law
While Toyota is definitely taking the brunt of recalls lately, other vehicle manufacturers have troubles of their own: GM is currently being sued over a 2009 Chevrolet. The owner of the Chevrolet claims he experienced repeated problems that caused him to fear for his safety.
This is not the first time GM has been sued for safety issues - in 2009 a wrongful death suit was filed against them for defective seat belts. 2009 also saw a recall of almost 1.5 million mid- and full-size Buick, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile and Pontiac vehicles because of an engine oil leak problem that could pose a fire risk.
This kind of defect in a vehicle is precisely what the lemon law is about. It protects consumers from the harm or loss caused by purchasing a defective vehicle. Who has what rights and what duties in lemon law matters? It seems clear. The consumer has the duty to present the vehicle to the manufacturer or its representative, the dealership, in order that they are able to diagnose the defect and repair it. Along with the duty, the consumer has a right to expect the dealership to repair the vehicle honestly and expeditiously.
What are the rights of the manufacturer? Simply put, they have the right to expect that the consumer will present their defective vehicle at an authorized dealer for repair in a timely manner, and that the consumer properly maintain the vehicle. The manufacturer should have no other expectation. They should not expect a consumer to perfectly describe the defect they are experiencing or any other limiting requirement.
Of the thousands of lemon law clients we have spoken with, it is extremely rare that a manufacturer makes a legitimate offer to buy back or replace a defective vehicle. In each of these cases no hint of awareness of their affirmative duty was present.
Not all manufacturers or dealerships are the same. Some, certainly not enough, really do have the consumer’s best interests at heart.
If however you find yourself with a defective vehicle and a manufacturer who is not ready to step up and replace or refund as they should, find yourself an experienced lemon law attorney. Do your homework. Look at their record. See what others who have used their services have to say.
Be certain they offer you a free case evaluation without delay. Never be afraid to ask hard questions. It’s important and it can determine the outcome of your lemon law case.
Source
This is not the first time GM has been sued for safety issues - in 2009 a wrongful death suit was filed against them for defective seat belts. 2009 also saw a recall of almost 1.5 million mid- and full-size Buick, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile and Pontiac vehicles because of an engine oil leak problem that could pose a fire risk.
This kind of defect in a vehicle is precisely what the lemon law is about. It protects consumers from the harm or loss caused by purchasing a defective vehicle. Who has what rights and what duties in lemon law matters? It seems clear. The consumer has the duty to present the vehicle to the manufacturer or its representative, the dealership, in order that they are able to diagnose the defect and repair it. Along with the duty, the consumer has a right to expect the dealership to repair the vehicle honestly and expeditiously.
What are the rights of the manufacturer? Simply put, they have the right to expect that the consumer will present their defective vehicle at an authorized dealer for repair in a timely manner, and that the consumer properly maintain the vehicle. The manufacturer should have no other expectation. They should not expect a consumer to perfectly describe the defect they are experiencing or any other limiting requirement.
Of the thousands of lemon law clients we have spoken with, it is extremely rare that a manufacturer makes a legitimate offer to buy back or replace a defective vehicle. In each of these cases no hint of awareness of their affirmative duty was present.
Not all manufacturers or dealerships are the same. Some, certainly not enough, really do have the consumer’s best interests at heart.
If however you find yourself with a defective vehicle and a manufacturer who is not ready to step up and replace or refund as they should, find yourself an experienced lemon law attorney. Do your homework. Look at their record. See what others who have used their services have to say.
Be certain they offer you a free case evaluation without delay. Never be afraid to ask hard questions. It’s important and it can determine the outcome of your lemon law case.
Source
Monday, June 28, 2010
Chenin blanc from France's Loire Valley
The chenin blanc grape gets a bad rap in California.
Sure, it makes some wonderfully quaffable wines — good examples are the Dry Creek Dry Chenin Blanc and Dancing Coyote Chenin Blanc, both made from grapes grown around Clarksburg — but few would call California chenin blanc world class. Most California chenin is grown in Fresno and Madera counties and ends up in inexpensive jug blends.
It's in the middle section of France's Loire Valley where chenin blanc finds its finest expression in such appellations as Vouvray, Montlouis-sur-Loire, Savennieres and, for dessert wines, Quarts de Chaume and Coteaux du Layon.
The wines, labeled with the name of the appellation rather than the grape variety, can be bone dry, off-dry or very sweet, and many age extremely well. There's even sparkling wine made from chenin blanc. All Loire chenin blancs have a core of racy acidity, wrapped by flavors that range from green apple to white stone fruit to honey and even marzipan.
Vouvray and Montlouis-sur-Loire are near the city of Tours. The appellations are on either side of the Loire River and have similar climates. But the best wines of Vouvray, from south-facing hillsides overlooking the river, have a greater intensity. The most common Vouvray style is off-dry, but there are excellent dry wines and, when weather conditions are right, dessert wines.
Vouvray's benchmark producer is
Advertisement
Domaine Huet L'Echansonne. Founded in 1928 and directed for years by Gaston Huet, the winery was sold in 2003, after Huet's death. Huet's son-in-law, Noel Pinguet, who stayed on as winemaker, was instrumental in the winery's conversion to biodynamic practices in its 88 acres of vineyards. The winery's maze of damp, mold-lined caves snake through the hillside under one of those vineyards.
No matter the sweetness level, the Huet wines can be spectacular. The dry 2007 Vouvray Sec "Le Mont" ($31), for example, is racy and tight, with citrus and mineral flavors, while the sweeter 2008 Vouvray Demi-Sec "Le Haut-Lieu" ($36) is very aromatic, with pear and nectarine flavors and a long finish.
Other good producers in the 5,000-acre appellation include Champalou, Bourillon-Dorleans and Vigneau-Chevreau. At Bourillon-Dorleans — where the caves are sculpted into scenes depicting the history of humanity — there is a lovely 2008 Vouvray Demi-Sec ($21), which is fairly sweet, with pretty apple, pear and white stone fruit flavors.
The smaller (fewer than 1,000 acres) Montlouis-sur-Loire appellation is on the south side of the Loire, facing Vouvray. Sparkling wines account for slightly more than half of the area's production, but there are some very good still wines, too. One vivid wine is the 2007 Domaine Deletang Montlouis Sec "Les Batisses" ($17), which is quite floral and fragrant, with bracing acidity. Domaine La Grange Tiphaine is another good producer to look for.
To the west, near Angers, lie the appellations of Savennieres, Quarts de Chaume and Coteaux du Layon. The chenins of Savennieres, where the vineyards lie in a narrow band on the north bank of the Loire, are usually dry, with a strong mineral component. They're not immediately appealing to everyone — Savennieres is a wine you need to think about — but they age incredibly well.
At Domaine Baumard, for example, I tasted a 1973 Savennieres "Clos du Papillon" that had been open for two days, and it was amazing, with vivid green fig and honey flavors and a very long finish. A more recent vintage, the 2005 ($32), is lean, tight and spicy, with a long finish. It needs more time in the bottle but shows great promise.
Probably the most famous Savennieres producer is biodynamics proponent Nicolas Joly of Coulee de Serrant; Baumard is known not only for Savennieres but also for sweet wines. And they are stunners.
Source
Sure, it makes some wonderfully quaffable wines — good examples are the Dry Creek Dry Chenin Blanc and Dancing Coyote Chenin Blanc, both made from grapes grown around Clarksburg — but few would call California chenin blanc world class. Most California chenin is grown in Fresno and Madera counties and ends up in inexpensive jug blends.
It's in the middle section of France's Loire Valley where chenin blanc finds its finest expression in such appellations as Vouvray, Montlouis-sur-Loire, Savennieres and, for dessert wines, Quarts de Chaume and Coteaux du Layon.
The wines, labeled with the name of the appellation rather than the grape variety, can be bone dry, off-dry or very sweet, and many age extremely well. There's even sparkling wine made from chenin blanc. All Loire chenin blancs have a core of racy acidity, wrapped by flavors that range from green apple to white stone fruit to honey and even marzipan.
Vouvray and Montlouis-sur-Loire are near the city of Tours. The appellations are on either side of the Loire River and have similar climates. But the best wines of Vouvray, from south-facing hillsides overlooking the river, have a greater intensity. The most common Vouvray style is off-dry, but there are excellent dry wines and, when weather conditions are right, dessert wines.
Vouvray's benchmark producer is
Advertisement
Domaine Huet L'Echansonne. Founded in 1928 and directed for years by Gaston Huet, the winery was sold in 2003, after Huet's death. Huet's son-in-law, Noel Pinguet, who stayed on as winemaker, was instrumental in the winery's conversion to biodynamic practices in its 88 acres of vineyards. The winery's maze of damp, mold-lined caves snake through the hillside under one of those vineyards.
No matter the sweetness level, the Huet wines can be spectacular. The dry 2007 Vouvray Sec "Le Mont" ($31), for example, is racy and tight, with citrus and mineral flavors, while the sweeter 2008 Vouvray Demi-Sec "Le Haut-Lieu" ($36) is very aromatic, with pear and nectarine flavors and a long finish.
Other good producers in the 5,000-acre appellation include Champalou, Bourillon-Dorleans and Vigneau-Chevreau. At Bourillon-Dorleans — where the caves are sculpted into scenes depicting the history of humanity — there is a lovely 2008 Vouvray Demi-Sec ($21), which is fairly sweet, with pretty apple, pear and white stone fruit flavors.
The smaller (fewer than 1,000 acres) Montlouis-sur-Loire appellation is on the south side of the Loire, facing Vouvray. Sparkling wines account for slightly more than half of the area's production, but there are some very good still wines, too. One vivid wine is the 2007 Domaine Deletang Montlouis Sec "Les Batisses" ($17), which is quite floral and fragrant, with bracing acidity. Domaine La Grange Tiphaine is another good producer to look for.
To the west, near Angers, lie the appellations of Savennieres, Quarts de Chaume and Coteaux du Layon. The chenins of Savennieres, where the vineyards lie in a narrow band on the north bank of the Loire, are usually dry, with a strong mineral component. They're not immediately appealing to everyone — Savennieres is a wine you need to think about — but they age incredibly well.
At Domaine Baumard, for example, I tasted a 1973 Savennieres "Clos du Papillon" that had been open for two days, and it was amazing, with vivid green fig and honey flavors and a very long finish. A more recent vintage, the 2005 ($32), is lean, tight and spicy, with a long finish. It needs more time in the bottle but shows great promise.
Probably the most famous Savennieres producer is biodynamics proponent Nicolas Joly of Coulee de Serrant; Baumard is known not only for Savennieres but also for sweet wines. And they are stunners.
Source
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Judge Puts Calif. Toyota Claims on a Single Track
Lawsuits filed in California's state courts against Toyota Motor Corp. over sudden unintended acceleration will be coordinated in a single proceeding, a Los Angeles judge ruled tentatively on Tuesday.
The proceeding was the first to address at least 21 lawsuits filed in California's state courts over a myriad of claims that include economic losses on behalf of consumers, lemon law violations and damages for those who have been injured or died in a Toyota.
"The common thread is unintended acceleration that binds these cases together," Los Angeles County, Calif., Superior Court Judge Carl West told a group of 30 lawyers in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom.
The state court actions are separate from nearly 300 lawsuits pending in multidistrict litigation in federal court in Santa Ana, Calif.
Lawyers on both sides of the state court cases have attempted to coordinate them into a single proceeding to expedite and streamline the discovery process, particularly as it relates to depositions. Leading that effort has been Mark Robinson, senior partner at Newport Beach, Calif.-based Robinson, Calcagnie & Robinson, who was named co-liaison counsel of the personal injury and wrongful death plaintiffs' steering committee in the federal MDL.
Five plaintiffs lawyers with eight personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits argued against coordinating the cases.
"We'll be slowed down considerably," said Garo Mardirossian, managing partner of Maridrossian & Associates in Los Angeles, who represents the husband of a woman who died on Aug. 28 after her Toyota accelerated to 100 miles per hour, crashing into a median.
Also opposing coordination was John Gomez, of The Gomez Law Firm in San Diego, who represents the relatives of California Highway Patrol Officer Mark Saylor. Saylor was killed, along with his wife, his daughter and his brother-in-law, when his Lexus crashed after suddenly accelerating to 120 miles per hour on a San Diego highway.
The Aug. 28 crash prompted Toyota's first wave of recalls, which now number more than 8 million vehicles worldwide.
Gomez told the judge that in the state court claims against Bridgestone Corp.'s Firestone Tire Co. years ago, not all the individual personal injury cases were coordinated even though there were far more of them than in the Toyota litigation.
The judge did not seem persuaded. "We have five to eight here to begin with. How many more are there?" he said.
Toyota's lawyer, Lisa Gilford, a partner in the Los Angeles office of Alston & Bird, said she preferred to have all the cases in a single proceeding. But she recognized the individual facts inherent in the personal injury and wrongful death cases, which could number as many as 15 in California's state courts.
"We are acknowledging certain types of cases will likely move along different tracks," she said.
In the end, West issued a tentative order coordinating the cases under a state procedure called Judicial Council Coordinated Proceedings, or JCCP.
"I'm sympathetic to the concern you have but also think that there are significant issues to be addressed" in all the cases, West told the lawyers opposing the move. Among those issues are the defects and claims regarding failure to warn and negligence. He offered two options for combining the actions, however. One option would create a second coordinated proceeding before the same judge to address specific issues unique to the personal injury and wrongful death cases. Another option, he said, would allow the cases to move forward in the same proceeding but on a separate track that would be "reflective of their different characteristics."
The judge refused to rule on where the coordinated proceeding should take place. He left that decision to California's chief justice, Ronald George.
Most of the plaintiffs' lawyers argued that the cases should be coordinated in Los Angeles, while Gilford requested Orange County, where the federal MDL is taking place. Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said the Orange County, Calif., Superior Court is "not terribly congested."
"We are certainly able to come to L.A. if that's what is determined, but we think Orange County makes sense," he said.
Source
The proceeding was the first to address at least 21 lawsuits filed in California's state courts over a myriad of claims that include economic losses on behalf of consumers, lemon law violations and damages for those who have been injured or died in a Toyota.
"The common thread is unintended acceleration that binds these cases together," Los Angeles County, Calif., Superior Court Judge Carl West told a group of 30 lawyers in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom.
The state court actions are separate from nearly 300 lawsuits pending in multidistrict litigation in federal court in Santa Ana, Calif.
Lawyers on both sides of the state court cases have attempted to coordinate them into a single proceeding to expedite and streamline the discovery process, particularly as it relates to depositions. Leading that effort has been Mark Robinson, senior partner at Newport Beach, Calif.-based Robinson, Calcagnie & Robinson, who was named co-liaison counsel of the personal injury and wrongful death plaintiffs' steering committee in the federal MDL.
Five plaintiffs lawyers with eight personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits argued against coordinating the cases.
"We'll be slowed down considerably," said Garo Mardirossian, managing partner of Maridrossian & Associates in Los Angeles, who represents the husband of a woman who died on Aug. 28 after her Toyota accelerated to 100 miles per hour, crashing into a median.
Also opposing coordination was John Gomez, of The Gomez Law Firm in San Diego, who represents the relatives of California Highway Patrol Officer Mark Saylor. Saylor was killed, along with his wife, his daughter and his brother-in-law, when his Lexus crashed after suddenly accelerating to 120 miles per hour on a San Diego highway.
The Aug. 28 crash prompted Toyota's first wave of recalls, which now number more than 8 million vehicles worldwide.
Gomez told the judge that in the state court claims against Bridgestone Corp.'s Firestone Tire Co. years ago, not all the individual personal injury cases were coordinated even though there were far more of them than in the Toyota litigation.
The judge did not seem persuaded. "We have five to eight here to begin with. How many more are there?" he said.
Toyota's lawyer, Lisa Gilford, a partner in the Los Angeles office of Alston & Bird, said she preferred to have all the cases in a single proceeding. But she recognized the individual facts inherent in the personal injury and wrongful death cases, which could number as many as 15 in California's state courts.
"We are acknowledging certain types of cases will likely move along different tracks," she said.
In the end, West issued a tentative order coordinating the cases under a state procedure called Judicial Council Coordinated Proceedings, or JCCP.
"I'm sympathetic to the concern you have but also think that there are significant issues to be addressed" in all the cases, West told the lawyers opposing the move. Among those issues are the defects and claims regarding failure to warn and negligence. He offered two options for combining the actions, however. One option would create a second coordinated proceeding before the same judge to address specific issues unique to the personal injury and wrongful death cases. Another option, he said, would allow the cases to move forward in the same proceeding but on a separate track that would be "reflective of their different characteristics."
The judge refused to rule on where the coordinated proceeding should take place. He left that decision to California's chief justice, Ronald George.
Most of the plaintiffs' lawyers argued that the cases should be coordinated in Los Angeles, while Gilford requested Orange County, where the federal MDL is taking place. Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said the Orange County, Calif., Superior Court is "not terribly congested."
"We are certainly able to come to L.A. if that's what is determined, but we think Orange County makes sense," he said.
Source
Sunday, March 28, 2010
California Lemon Law: Don’t Back Off if You’re Driving a Lemon
A recent story in the Los Angeles Times Business Section reports that Toyota Motor Corporation—who recently issued the biggest vehicle recall in history—has now disclosed a number of dealings with safety issues that show efforts to keep such issues from consumers at large. For example, the company discovered during a routine test on its Sienna minivan in April 2003 that a plastic panel could come loose and cause the gas pedal to stick, potentially making the vehicle accelerate out of control. They quietly redesigned the part and by that June every 2004 model year Sienna off the assembly line came with the new panel. The company did not notify tens of thousands of people who had already bought vans with the old panel, however.
Toyota also revealed a number of settlements with drivers complaining of unexpected acceleration that, while the individual cases were handled with buybacks or other remedies, the public at large was never notified. It was also revealed that in at least one of these cases, the dealer attempted to place the blame on the driver instead of the vehicle.
Such tactics—while never expected from a company like Toyota with their reputation for quality—are not new at all.
“Manufacturers and dealers put many consumers through what I refer to as ‘the gauntlet,’” said leading California lemon law attorney Norman Taylor. “In dealing with a defective vehicle and what could potentially be a recall, they use deception, delay and occasionally fraud.”
Taylor understands such tactics extremely well. He has been a California lemon law specialist since 1987, and he and his firm, Norman Taylor and Associates, have handled over 8,000 cases for consumers with a 98 percent success rate.
“This gauntlet typically begins when a vehicle owner arrives the second time for a repair of the same defect,” Taylor explained. “The threat of it being a potential lemon sets off alarms at the dealership.”
A number of deceptive tricks can then ensue, including trying to convince the driver it’s their fault, altering the repair order to show something different than the actual problem, explaining to the owner that the vehicle was designed to operate that way, and many more.
It is quite likely that Toyota was following the path that many manufacturers take in avoiding a vehicle recall.
“Manufacturers will do almost anything to avoid a recall,” said Taylor. “A recall will affect hundreds of thousands or even millions of vehicles and cost the manufacturer dearly. The cost is also to the manufacturer’s reputation.”
The consumer suspecting he or she is driving a lemon can avoid “the gauntlet” and many of these problems by contacting a qualified lemon law attorney right away.
Source
Toyota also revealed a number of settlements with drivers complaining of unexpected acceleration that, while the individual cases were handled with buybacks or other remedies, the public at large was never notified. It was also revealed that in at least one of these cases, the dealer attempted to place the blame on the driver instead of the vehicle.
Such tactics—while never expected from a company like Toyota with their reputation for quality—are not new at all.
“Manufacturers and dealers put many consumers through what I refer to as ‘the gauntlet,’” said leading California lemon law attorney Norman Taylor. “In dealing with a defective vehicle and what could potentially be a recall, they use deception, delay and occasionally fraud.”
Taylor understands such tactics extremely well. He has been a California lemon law specialist since 1987, and he and his firm, Norman Taylor and Associates, have handled over 8,000 cases for consumers with a 98 percent success rate.
“This gauntlet typically begins when a vehicle owner arrives the second time for a repair of the same defect,” Taylor explained. “The threat of it being a potential lemon sets off alarms at the dealership.”
A number of deceptive tricks can then ensue, including trying to convince the driver it’s their fault, altering the repair order to show something different than the actual problem, explaining to the owner that the vehicle was designed to operate that way, and many more.
It is quite likely that Toyota was following the path that many manufacturers take in avoiding a vehicle recall.
“Manufacturers will do almost anything to avoid a recall,” said Taylor. “A recall will affect hundreds of thousands or even millions of vehicles and cost the manufacturer dearly. The cost is also to the manufacturer’s reputation.”
The consumer suspecting he or she is driving a lemon can avoid “the gauntlet” and many of these problems by contacting a qualified lemon law attorney right away.
Source
Monday, March 15, 2010
California Lemon Law: Don’t Wait for the Recall
General Motors has recently issued a recall for Chevrolet Corvettes from the 2005 through 2007 model years, because the roof panel may blow off. The problem stems from a defect with the adhesive bonding and removable roof panel to the frame; if the bond breaks, the roof panel could go flying off while driving. The recall affects 22,100 vehicles.
This problem has apparently been known about for some time—General Motors had previously run a “customer service campaign” for it. But it’s not uncommon for a manufacturer to go as far as possible to avoid a recall, and this particular model of Corvette has obviously been no exception.
“We’ve had several cases with customers who were complaining about the top, “said leading California Lemon Law attorney Norman Taylor. “It’s interesting to see how long it’s taken GM to recall the part.”
Taylor has much experience in such matters. He has been a California lemon law specialist since 1987, and he and his firm, Norman Taylor and Associates, have handled over 8,000 cases for consumers with a 98 percent success rate.
Recalls can affect hundreds of thousands of vehicles and cost a manufacturer tens of millions of dollars. Beyond even those costs is the damage done to the manufacturer’s reputation.
“Needless to say, manufacturers will do almost anything to avoid a recall,” said Taylor.
GM’s “customer service campaign” falls under what Taylor calls a “secret warranty,” just one of several tactics a manufacturer will use to sidestep issuing a recall. Under this strategy, a manufacturer will pay for repair of a particular defect in a particular kind of vehicle, even after the warranty has expired—but only for those customers who are sufficiently aggressive in their complaints.
“Manufacturers issue secret warranties in response to defects that have occurred in a widespread pattern,” Taylor explained. “These defects may have otherwise led to recalls. Manufacturers call them ‘warranty adjustment policies’ or ‘goodwill gestures.’ In the trade, they are called ‘secret warranties’ because they are communicated only to the company’s regional offices and dealers, but never to consumers.”
Source
This problem has apparently been known about for some time—General Motors had previously run a “customer service campaign” for it. But it’s not uncommon for a manufacturer to go as far as possible to avoid a recall, and this particular model of Corvette has obviously been no exception.
“We’ve had several cases with customers who were complaining about the top, “said leading California Lemon Law attorney Norman Taylor. “It’s interesting to see how long it’s taken GM to recall the part.”
Taylor has much experience in such matters. He has been a California lemon law specialist since 1987, and he and his firm, Norman Taylor and Associates, have handled over 8,000 cases for consumers with a 98 percent success rate.
Recalls can affect hundreds of thousands of vehicles and cost a manufacturer tens of millions of dollars. Beyond even those costs is the damage done to the manufacturer’s reputation.
“Needless to say, manufacturers will do almost anything to avoid a recall,” said Taylor.
GM’s “customer service campaign” falls under what Taylor calls a “secret warranty,” just one of several tactics a manufacturer will use to sidestep issuing a recall. Under this strategy, a manufacturer will pay for repair of a particular defect in a particular kind of vehicle, even after the warranty has expired—but only for those customers who are sufficiently aggressive in their complaints.
“Manufacturers issue secret warranties in response to defects that have occurred in a widespread pattern,” Taylor explained. “These defects may have otherwise led to recalls. Manufacturers call them ‘warranty adjustment policies’ or ‘goodwill gestures.’ In the trade, they are called ‘secret warranties’ because they are communicated only to the company’s regional offices and dealers, but never to consumers.”
Source
Sunday, February 28, 2010
California Lemon Law: Know Your Emissions Warranties
With new vehicles, it is common to find that an emissions warranty lasts longer than the manufacturer’s basic warranty. Some emissions warranties last as long as 8 years or 80,000 miles, covering parts such as the catalytic converter and the power train control module. It’s important to check a vehicle’s warranty manual, as it will be found that different parts of the vehicle—such as the emission system—have different warranty periods.
As can be seen in the news every day, tougher emissions standards are constantly on the horizon, and with new standards, new equipment will be built into vehicles. If emissions requirements are made more demanding on the manufacturers and dealers in the state of California and even the nation as a whole, then it is possible that we will see longer warranties for emissions-related repairs or warranties that cover more parts. How quickly we may see this change may depend on the stability or volatility of the price per barrel of oil.
“For consumers, tougher standards could mean that if they are having defects related to the emissions system, that they may have longer coverage and hopefully more extensive coverage of certain parts,” said Norman Taylor, leading California lemon law attorney. “If defects were occurring, the California lemon law might treat the emissions warranty much like the manufacturer’s basic warranty, and the consumer may be entitled to a buyback or replacement vehicle.”
Taylor understands the fine points of lemon law well. He has been a California lemon law specialist since 1987, and he and his firm, Norman Taylor and Associates, have handled over 8,000 cases for consumers with a 98 percent success rate.
“The crux of the matter is, is the vehicle a lemon or not?” Taylor continued. “A lemon is understood to mean a vehicle with a defect that the manufacturer has not successfully repaired after a certain number of attempts, or after the vehicle has been out of service for a particular number of days.”
A “defect” is defined as something the vehicle does or does not do that falls below the standard set forth in the warranty. Some states, such as California, use the term “nonconformity” in their lemon laws. A nonconformity is essentially the same as a defect.
The bottom line: it is important to understand your warranties and their limits. In any case, however, if you think you are driving a lemon, contact a qualified lemon law attorney right away.
As can be seen in the news every day, tougher emissions standards are constantly on the horizon, and with new standards, new equipment will be built into vehicles. If emissions requirements are made more demanding on the manufacturers and dealers in the state of California and even the nation as a whole, then it is possible that we will see longer warranties for emissions-related repairs or warranties that cover more parts. How quickly we may see this change may depend on the stability or volatility of the price per barrel of oil.
“For consumers, tougher standards could mean that if they are having defects related to the emissions system, that they may have longer coverage and hopefully more extensive coverage of certain parts,” said Norman Taylor, leading California lemon law attorney. “If defects were occurring, the California lemon law might treat the emissions warranty much like the manufacturer’s basic warranty, and the consumer may be entitled to a buyback or replacement vehicle.”
Taylor understands the fine points of lemon law well. He has been a California lemon law specialist since 1987, and he and his firm, Norman Taylor and Associates, have handled over 8,000 cases for consumers with a 98 percent success rate.
“The crux of the matter is, is the vehicle a lemon or not?” Taylor continued. “A lemon is understood to mean a vehicle with a defect that the manufacturer has not successfully repaired after a certain number of attempts, or after the vehicle has been out of service for a particular number of days.”
A “defect” is defined as something the vehicle does or does not do that falls below the standard set forth in the warranty. Some states, such as California, use the term “nonconformity” in their lemon laws. A nonconformity is essentially the same as a defect.
The bottom line: it is important to understand your warranties and their limits. In any case, however, if you think you are driving a lemon, contact a qualified lemon law attorney right away.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)