Lemon Law Complaint

CALIFORNIA LEMON LAW COMPLAINT

1. CAPTION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF [COUNTY]

CASE NO. [________________________________]

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF THE SONG-BEVERLY CONSUMER WARRANTY ACT AND BREACH OF WARRANTY; JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff alleges as follows:

2. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF] is a resident of [COUNTY, STATE] and is a buyer or lessee of the Vehicle described below.

2. Defendant [MANUFACTURER / WARRANTOR] manufactured the Vehicle, issued or is obligated under the express warranty attached as Exhibit A, and may be served through [AGENT AND ADDRESS].

3. Optional Defendant [RETAIL SELLER] sold or leased the Vehicle at retail in California and is named only on the specifically pleaded claim supported by its own statutory or warranty obligations.

4. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction because [STATE THE COURT-SPECIFIC BASIS AND AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY].

5. Venue is proper in this County because [STATE FACTS SUPPORTING VENUE].

3. VEHICLE, TRANSACTION, AND WARRANTIES

6. On [DATE], Plaintiff purchased or leased a new [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL], VIN [VIN] (the “Vehicle”), from [SELLER] for primarily personal, family, or household purposes [OR STATE THE QUALIFYING SMALL-BUSINESS FACTS].

7. The transaction documents are attached as Exhibit B. The Vehicle had a manufacturer's express warranty with a term of [TERM / MILEAGE], attached as Exhibit A.

8. The retail sale also carried the implied warranty of merchantability under Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1791.1 and 1792. Its duration was [STATE THE EXPRESS-WARRANTY-BASED PERIOD, NOT LESS THAN 60 DAYS AND NOT MORE THAN ONE YEAR].

4. NONCONFORMITIES AND REPAIR HISTORY

9. During the applicable warranty period, the Vehicle developed the following nonconformity or nonconformities:

[DESCRIBE EACH DEFECT, WHEN IT APPEARED, THE EXPRESS-WARRANTY PROVISION, AND HOW IT IMPAIRED USE, VALUE, OR SAFETY].

10. Plaintiff delivered the Vehicle to the manufacturer, distributor, or an authorized service and repair facility for correction.

11. The repair history is documented by the repair orders attached as Exhibit C:

12. Defendant and its representatives did not conform the Vehicle to the express warranty after a reasonable number of attempts.

13. Select every applicable Tanner Act presumption allegation occurring within the first 18 months or 18,000 miles, whichever occurred first:

• ☐ A nonconformity likely to cause death or serious bodily injury was repaired at least twice, and Plaintiff directly notified the manufacturer at least once as required by Cal. Civ. Code § 1793.22(b)(1).
• ☐ The same nonconformity was repaired at least four times, and Plaintiff directly notified the manufacturer at least once as required by § 1793.22(b)(2).
• ☐ The Vehicle was out of service for repair of nonconformities for a cumulative total of more than 30 calendar days under § 1793.22(b)(3).
• ☐ Plaintiff does not rely solely on the statutory presumption and will prove that Defendant had a reasonable number of repair attempts from the full facts.

14. The nonconformities were not caused by unauthorized or unreasonable use of the Vehicle after sale.

5. THIRD-PARTY PROCESS AND MANUFACTURER ELECTION

15. Select the applicable qualified-process allegation:

• ☐ A qualified third-party dispute resolution process existed, Plaintiff received timely written notice of its availability and effect, and Plaintiff initially resorted to it on [DATE] before asserting the Tanner Act presumption. The decision is attached as Exhibit D.
• ☐ No qualified third-party process satisfying Cal. Civ. Code § 1793.22(d) existed.
• ☐ Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the qualified process's decision [OR THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT PROMPTLY FULFILL AN ACCEPTED DECISION].

16. Select the applicable Code of Civil Procedure branch:

• ☐ Defendant elected under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 871.29 or § 871.30 to be governed by §§ 871.20-871.30 for the Vehicle's sale year. Paragraphs 17 through 20 apply.
• ☐ Defendant did not make an election covering the Vehicle's sale year. Paragraphs 17 through 20 are deleted, and counsel has separately confirmed the applicable limitations and pre-suit rules.

17. [ELECTING MANUFACTURER ONLY] Plaintiff sent the § 871.24 written notice at least 30 days before commencing this action seeking a Cal. Civ. Code § 1794(c) civil penalty. The notice identified Plaintiff, the accurate VIN, a repair/problem summary, and a demand for repurchase or replacement; it was sent by an authorized method. The notice and delivery proof are attached as Exhibit E.

18. [ELECTING MANUFACTURER ONLY] Plaintiff possessed the Vehicle when the notice was sent and maintained possession for the period required by § 871.24.

19. [ELECTING MANUFACTURER ONLY] Defendant did not timely complete a qualifying restitution or replacement after notice as provided in § 871.24(e).

20. [ELECTING MANUFACTURER ONLY] This action is timely under § 871.21 because it was filed within one year after expiration of the applicable express warranty and no later than six years after original delivery, accounting only for statutory tolling.

6. COUNT I — EXPRESS WARRANTY / SONG-BEVERLY

21. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 20, with inapplicable election alternatives deleted.

22. Plaintiff is a buyer or lessee of covered consumer goods, and Defendant is the manufacturer or warrantor obligated under the express warranty.

23. Defendant did not service or repair the Vehicle to conform to the express warranty after a reasonable number of attempts.

24. Under Cal. Civ. Code § 1793.2(d)(2), Plaintiff elects:

• ☐ Restitution under § 1793.2(d)(2)(B); or
• ☐ Replacement with a substantially identical new motor vehicle under § 1793.2(d)(2)(A).

25. The recoverable restitution or replacement components, collateral charges, official fees, incidental damages, and statutory use offset must be calculated under § 1793.2(d)(2) and, when applicable, Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 871.27.

26. Defendant's failure to comply was willful because [PLEAD SPECIFIC FACTS SUPPORTING WILLFULNESS]. Plaintiff seeks the civil penalty permitted by Cal. Civ. Code § 1794(c), subject to every applicable notice and election requirement and without duplicating another penalty for the same violation.

27. Plaintiff seeks reasonable costs, expenses, and attorney fees under Cal. Civ. Code § 1794(d).

7. COUNT II — IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY (OPTIONAL)

28. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 14.

29. Under Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1791.1 and 1792, the manufacturer and retail seller impliedly warranted that the Vehicle was fit for its ordinary transportation purposes and otherwise merchantable during the applicable implied-warranty period.

30. The Vehicle breached that warranty because [PLEAD FACTS SHOWING LACK OF FITNESS FOR ORDINARY TRANSPORTATION OR ANOTHER § 1791.1(a) STANDARD].

31. Plaintiff seeks the damages and other relief authorized by Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1791.1(d) and 1794, excluding any penalty unavailable on a solely implied-warranty claim.

8. COUNT III — MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT (OPTIONAL)

32. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 15.

33. The Vehicle is a consumer product, Plaintiff is a consumer, Defendant is a warrantor, and Exhibit A is a written warranty within 15 U.S.C. § 2301.

34. Defendant failed to comply with its written-warranty obligations by [IDENTIFY THE WARRANTY PROMISE AND FACTUAL BREACH].

35. Plaintiff satisfied any applicable notice and qualifying informal-procedure prerequisite under 15 U.S.C. § 2310(a) and 16 C.F.R. Part 703.

36. Plaintiff seeks damages and other legal or equitable relief under 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(1)(A), together with costs and reasonable attorney fees if awarded under § 2310(d)(2).

9. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff requests judgment awarding:

1. The restitution or substantially identical replacement remedy elected under Cal. Civ. Code § 1793.2(d)(2);
2. Recoverable incidental and consequential damages proved under Cal. Civ. Code § 1794;
3. A civil penalty under § 1794(c) if willfulness and every procedural prerequisite are proved;
4. Damages and other relief proved under 15 U.S.C. § 2310, if Count III is retained;
5. Reasonable costs, expenses, and attorney fees where authorized;
6. Prejudgment and post-judgment interest where authorized; and
7. Any further relief the Court deems proper.

10. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on every issue so triable.

11. SIGNATURE BLOCK

Date: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[ATTORNEY NAME]

California Bar No. [NUMBER]

[FIRM]

[ADDRESS]

[PHONE]

[EMAIL]

Attorney for Plaintiff

12. EXHIBIT CHECKLIST

• ☐ Exhibit A — Express warranty
• ☐ Exhibit B — Purchase or lease documents and current registration
• ☐ Exhibit C — Complete repair orders and out-of-service calculation
• ☐ Exhibit D — Qualified third-party process submission and decision, if applicable
• ☐ Exhibit E — Code of Civil Procedure § 871.24 notice and delivery proof, if applicable
• ☐ Exhibit F — Finance, payoff, incidental-damage, and restitution documents

13. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• California Legislature — Civil Code § 1791
• California Legislature — Civil Code § 1791.1
• California Legislature — Civil Code § 1792
• California Legislature — Civil Code § 1793.2
• California Legislature — Civil Code § 1793.22
• California Legislature — Civil Code § 1794
• California Legislature — Code of Civil Procedure §§ 871.20-871.30
• GovInfo — 15 U.S.C. § 2301
• GovInfo — 15 U.S.C. § 2310
• eCFR — 16 C.F.R. Part 703