Lemon Law Complaint - Minnesota

MINNESOTA NEW MOTOR VEHICLE WARRANTIES COMPLAINT

1. CAPTION

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT

[________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT

COUNTY OF [________________]

Court File No. [________________]

COMPLAINT UNDER MINN. STAT. § 325F.665

Plaintiff alleges:

2. PARTIES, COURT, AND VEHICLE

1. Plaintiff [NAME] resides in [COUNTY, STATE] and is a “consumer” under Minn. Stat. § 325F.665, subd. 1(b), because Plaintiff is the [PURCHASER / LESSEE / WARRANTY-PERIOD TRANSFEREE] of the Vehicle for personal, family, or household use at least 40% of the time.

2. If Plaintiff is a lessee, the written lease exceeds four months. § 325F.665, subd. 1(e).

3. Defendant [NAME] manufactures, assembles, or distributes at least ten new motor vehicles to dealers under normal annual business conditions and is a “manufacturer” under subdivision 1(c). Defendant may be served through [AGENT AND ADDRESS].

4. On [DATE], Plaintiff [PURCHASED / LEASED / RECEIVED] a new [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL], VIN [VIN] (the “Vehicle”). The transaction and original-delivery documents are attached as Exhibit A.

5. The Vehicle is a covered [PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE, INCLUDING PICKUP OR VAN / SELF-PROPELLED RV CHASSIS OR VAN PORTION / SELF-PROPELLED AMBULANCE CHASSIS OR VAN PORTION] under subdivision 1(f).

6. Defendant's applicable written express warranties are attached or identified in Exhibit B.

7. This Court has jurisdiction because subdivision 9 authorizes an injured consumer to bring a civil action to enforce § 325F.665.

8. Venue is proper in this County because [STATE THE CURRENT FACTUAL AND LEGAL BASIS].

3. INFORMAL-MECHANISM PREREQUISITE AND DEADLINE

9. Select the applicable route under subdivisions 6, 7, and 10:

A. Consumer Used the Required Mechanism

10. ☐ Plaintiff submitted the dispute on [DATE] to Defendant's Minnesota informal dispute settlement mechanism complying with 16 C.F.R. Part 703. The request, record, and final decision are attached as Exhibit C.

11. The mechanism issued its final decision on [DATE]. The decision is nonbinding unless the parties agreed otherwise.

12. Plaintiff is aggrieved by the decision and commenced this action no later than six months after the final decision. Plaintiff applied to the mechanism within three years after original delivery. § 325F.665, subd. 10.

B. Manufacturer Allowed Suit Without First Use

13. ☐ Defendant allowed Plaintiff to commence a civil action without first using its informal mechanism, as shown in Exhibit C. Subdivision 6(a) therefore does not bar this action.

14. Plaintiff commenced this action within three years after original delivery. Subdivision 10.

C. Confirmation of Unremoved Decision

15. ☐ The mechanism issued the decision attached as Exhibit C on [DATE], Defendant received it on [DATE], and Defendant did not apply to remove the decision within 30 days.

16. Plaintiff requests an order confirming the decision under subdivision 7.

4. TIMELY REPORT AND REPAIR DUTY

17. Plaintiff first reported each nonconformity to Defendant, its agent, or its authorized dealer during the earlier of the applicable express-warranty term or two years after original delivery. Subdivision 2.

18. Defendant, its agent, or its authorized dealer was required to make the repairs necessary to conform the Vehicle to the applicable express warranties even if those repairs occurred after that reporting period.

19. The report and repair facts are:

20. The following defect or condition continues and substantially impairs the Vehicle's [USE / MARKET VALUE] to Plaintiff: [DETAILS].

21. The nonconformity did not result from abuse, neglect, or unauthorized modification or alteration by anyone other than Defendant, its agent, or its authorized dealer. Subdivision 3(a).

5. REASONABLE-NUMBER PRESUMPTION AND NOTICE

22. Select each presumption supported by the evidence:

• ☐ Four same-nonconformity repairs. The same nonconformity was subject to repair four or more times within the earlier of the express-warranty term or two years after original delivery and continues to exist. Subdivision 3(b)(1).
• ☐ Thirty business days. The Vehicle was out of service by reason of repair for a cumulative total of at least 30 business days within the earlier of the express-warranty term or two years after original delivery. Subdivision 3(b)(2).
• ☐ Complete braking or steering failure. A nonconformity resulting in complete failure of the braking or steering system, likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if driven, was subject to repair at least once within the applicable period and continues to exist. Subdivision 3(c).

23. The facts supporting the selected presumption are: [DETAILS].

24. Before relying on a subdivision 3(b) presumption, Plaintiff gave Defendant, its agent, or its authorized dealer written notification at least once and an opportunity to cure. Subdivision 3(e). The notice and delivery proof are attached as Exhibit D.

25. If an agent or dealer received the notice, it was required to forward the notice to Defendant by certified mail, return receipt requested.

26. If no presumption is selected, the repair history and surrounding facts nevertheless establish a reasonable number of attempts: [DETAILS].

27. If any attempt occurred after the periods in subdivision 3(b), Plaintiff first reported the nonconformity during the express-warranty term and a reasonable number of attempts occurred within three years after original delivery. Subdivision 3(f).

28. Any claimed extension is limited to time repair services were unavailable because of war, invasion, strike, fire, flood, or other natural disaster. Subdivision 3(d).

6. PURCHASED-VEHICLE REMEDY

29. After a reasonable number of attempts, Defendant was unable to conform the Vehicle to the applicable express warranty by correcting a defect or condition substantially impairing its use or market value.

30. Defendant was therefore required either to replace the Vehicle with a comparable motor vehicle or accept return and make the refund specified by subdivision 3(a).

31. Plaintiff [REJECTED / DID NOT RECEIVE] a replacement and requires a refund.

32. The purchased-Vehicle refund is:

33. The full purchase price includes the dealer-stated trade-in value plus the additional amount Plaintiff paid for the new Vehicle; those figures are components of the purchase price and must not be added twice.

34. The use allowance may not exceed the lesser of ten cents per mile driven or 10% of the purchase price and is limited to use during periods when the Vehicle's use and market value were not substantially impaired.

35. The sales or excise tax component is the tax paid, less the tax paid multiplied by the use allowance divided by the purchase price. Subdivision 3(h).

36. Refund must be made to Plaintiff and any lienholder as their interests appear in registrar records, with an itemized statement.

7. LEASED-VEHICLE REMEDY

37. Under subdivision 4, Defendant must accept return, terminate the written lease, and provide refund rather than replacement.

38. Plaintiff's refund is the full amount Plaintiff actually paid on the written lease, including subdivision 3 charges Plaintiff actually paid, less the subdivision 3 use allowance.

39. Defendant must separately refund the lessor the Vehicle's original purchase price plus early termination costs not exceeding 15% of that original purchase price, less the amount Plaintiff actually paid on the lease.

8. COUNT I — MINNESOTA LEMON LAW

40. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 39, with unused alternatives deleted.

41. Plaintiff is a consumer, Defendant is a manufacturer, and the Vehicle is covered under subdivision 1.

42. Plaintiff timely reported the nonconformity, gave prior written notice and an opportunity to cure when required for the presumption, and completed or was excused by Defendant from the subdivision 6 mechanism.

43. Defendant failed after a reasonable number of attempts to correct a defect or condition substantially impairing the Vehicle's use or market value.

44. Defendant did not provide the refund or, for a purchased Vehicle, comparable replacement required by subdivision 3 or 4.

45. Plaintiff was injured by Defendant's violation and brings this action under subdivision 9.

46. Plaintiff requests the statutory remedy plus costs and disbursements, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred in this action.

9. OPTIONAL BAD-FAITH REMOVAL ALLEGATIONS

47. Defendant removed the mechanism's decision on [DATE].

48. Defendant's removal or litigation position was in bad faith because it asserted [A FRIVOLOUS AND COSTLY CLAIM OR DEFENSE / AN UNFOUNDED POSITION SOLELY TO DELAY RECOVERY]: [SPECIFIC FACTS].

49. If Plaintiff prevails and the Court makes the findings required by subdivision 8, Plaintiff requests three times actual damages, costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorney's fees.

10. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff requests judgment:

1. Determining that Defendant violated Minn. Stat. § 325F.665;
2. For a purchased Vehicle, ordering [A COMPARABLE REPLACEMENT / RETURN AND THE CORRECT ITEMIZED REFUND] under subdivision 3;
3. For a leased Vehicle, ordering return, lease termination, and the consumer and lessor refunds under subdivision 4;
4. Confirming an unremoved informal-mechanism decision if Route C is selected;
5. Awarding treble actual damages only upon the bad-faith-removal findings required by subdivision 8;
6. Awarding costs and disbursements, including reasonable attorney's fees, under subdivision 9 and, when applicable, subdivision 8;
7. Awarding allowable interest; and
8. Granting any further relief authorized by the pleaded statute and proved at trial.

11. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues so triable. Confirm jury availability for the selected procedural route and requested relief before filing.

12. SIGNATURE BLOCK

Dated: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[ATTORNEY NAME], No. [NUMBER]

[FIRM]

[ADDRESS]

[PHONE]

[EMAIL]

Attorney for Plaintiff

13. EXHIBIT CHECKLIST

• ☐ Exhibit A — Purchase, lease, transfer, and original-delivery documents
• ☐ Exhibit B — Applicable express warranties
• ☐ Exhibit C — Informal-mechanism request, record, final decision, receipt, removal, waiver, or confirmation records
• ☐ Exhibit D — Prior written notice, opportunity-to-cure evidence, and any dealer forwarding proof
• ☐ Exhibit E — Complete repair orders and business-day calculation
• ☐ Exhibit F — Evidence of continuing nonconformity and substantial impairment of use or market value
• ☐ Exhibit G — Purchase-price, trade-in, options, modifications, taxes, fees, towing, rental, mileage, lienholder, and refund calculation
• ☐ Exhibit H — Lease payments, charges, use allowance, lessor purchase price, and early-termination calculation, if leased
• ☐ Exhibit I — Evidence supporting bad-faith removal, if subdivision 8 relief is requested

14. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Minnesota Revisor — Minn. Stat. § 325F.665
• Electronic Code of Federal Regulations — 16 C.F.R. Part 703