California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act provides significant protections to consumers in that case–particularly for those who purchase automobiles. One provision gives certain car buyers a “refund-or-replace remedy,” requiring the manufacture to replace a defective car, or provide restitution, after a “reasonable number of attempts” for repair.
Today, the California Supreme Court issued a decision as to which car buyers are entitled to that remedy. The statute applies to “new motor vehicles,” defined as a new vehicle “bought or used primarily for personal” purposes as well as “a dealer-owned vehicle and a ‘demonstrator’ or other motor vehicle sold with a manufacturer’s new car warranty.” In Rodriguez v. FCA, the plaintiffs had bought a two-year-old car from a used car dealer. Though used, the manufacturer’s new car warranty had not yet expired. After numerous attempts to repair the car failed, the plaintiffs invoked the Song-Beverly refund-or-replace remedy, which was denied on the ground that the car was not a “new motor vehicle” under the statute.
In a unanimous opinion, the California Supreme Court agreed with the manufacturers , holding that the statute may only be invoked by new car purchasers, not used car purchasers. Examining the statutory history and language, as well as the Song-Beverly Act’s general distinctions between new and used products, the Court concluded the statute does not cover used cars with an unexpired new car warranty.
