Lemon Law Complaint - Mississippi

IN THE [________________________________] COURT OF [________________________________] COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

Civil Action No. [________________________________]

COMPLAINT FOR RELIEF UNDER THE MISSISSIPPI MOTOR VEHICLE WARRANTY ENFORCEMENT ACT

Plaintiff alleges as follows:

1. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [________________________________] is an individual residing in [________________________________] County, Mississippi.

2. Defendant [________________________________] is the manufacturer or distributor responsible for the express warranty on the motor vehicle described below. Defendant may be served through [registered agent and address].

3. The selling dealer was [________________________________], located at [________________________________]. A duly franchised motor vehicle dealer is an agent of the manufacturer for purposes of the Act. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-153.

2. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This is an action arising under the Mississippi Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act, Miss. Code Ann. §§ 63-17-151 through 63-17-165.

5. Section 63-17-165 subjects a violation of the Act to the rights and remedies provided by Title 75, Chapter 24. Plaintiff has suffered an ascertainable loss of money or property arising from the violations alleged below.

6. Venue is proper in this county because [Defendant resides here / Defendant has its principal place of business here / the challenged act or practice occurred here]. See Miss. Code Ann. § 75-24-15(1).

7. Counsel has confirmed that this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction and that the selected court and county satisfy all current jurisdictional and venue requirements.

3. VEHICLE, WARRANTY, AND COVERAGE

8. On [__/__/____], Plaintiff [purchased / acquired by covered transfer] the following vehicle:

9. Plaintiff acquired the vehicle other than for resale and primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. Plaintiff is entitled to enforce the applicable express warranty. See Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-155(c)-(d).

10. The vehicle was sold in Mississippi, is operated on public streets and highways, and is used to transport persons or property. It is not within an exclusion listed in Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-155(f).

11. Defendant issued an express warranty covering [________________________________] for [________________________________].

4. NONCONFORMITY AND REPAIR HISTORY

12. During the express-warranty term or within one year after original delivery, whichever expired earlier, Plaintiff reported the following warranty nonconformity to Defendant or its authorized agent: [describe the default or condition]. See Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-157.

13. The condition impairs the vehicle's [use / market value / safety] because [________________________________].

14. Plaintiff presented the vehicle for warranty repair as follows:

15. Substantially the same nonconformity was subject to repair three or more times and continues to exist. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(3)(a).

16. Alternatively or additionally, the vehicle was out of service because of repair of the nonconformity for a cumulative total of [____] working days, excluding routine-maintenance downtime. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(3)(b).

17. Any extension for repair services unavailable because of conditions beyond Defendant's control is [not applicable / calculated as follows: ________________________________].

5. NOTICE, FINAL REPAIR OPPORTUNITY, AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION

18. Before seeking replacement or refund, Plaintiff gave Defendant written notice of the need to repair the nonconformity on [__/__/____]. A copy is attached as Exhibit [____]. See Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(5).

19. Defendant [identified / failed to identify] a reasonably accessible repair facility. Plaintiff delivered the vehicle to the designated facility on [__/__/____].

20. More than ten working days after that delivery, Defendant had not conformed the vehicle to the express warranty. See Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(5).

21. Choose and complete the applicable allegation:

• ☐ Defendant maintained a procedure complying in all respects with 16 C.F.R. Part 703, gave the notice required by § 63-17-159(5), and Plaintiff first resorted to that procedure. Its final action occurred on [__/__/____].
• ☐ Section 63-17-163 does not bar the claim because Defendant did not maintain a qualifying procedure.
• ☐ Section 63-17-163 does not bar the claim because Defendant failed to notify Plaintiff of the procedure's availability as required by § 63-17-159(5).

22. Before bringing a private action under Title 75, Chapter 24, Plaintiff made a reasonable attempt to resolve the claim through an informal dispute settlement program approved by the Mississippi Attorney General, as required by Miss. Code Ann. § 75-24-15(2), by [________________________________].

23. This action is timely under Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(6) because [it was filed within the earlier of one year after expiration of the express-warranty terms or eighteen months after original delivery / it was filed within ninety days after final action by the informal-dispute panel].

6. COUNT I — MOTOR VEHICLE WARRANTY ENFORCEMENT ACT

24. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding allegations.

25. Defendant could not conform the vehicle to the applicable express warranty after a reasonable number of attempts.

26. Under Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(1), Plaintiff elected the following statutory remedy:

• ☐ Replacement with an identical or reasonably equivalent vehicle acceptable to Plaintiff; or
• ☐ Refund of the full purchase price and reasonably incurred collateral charges, less the statutory use allowance of $0.20 for each mile driven by Plaintiff.

27. Defendant failed or refused to provide the elected remedy.

28. Defendant's violation is subject to the rights and remedies provided by Title 75, Chapter 24. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-165.

29. Plaintiff finally prevailing may be awarded reasonably incurred costs and expenses, including attorney's fees based on actual time expended, in the Court's discretion. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(7).

7. REQUEST FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff requests judgment awarding:

1. The remedy elected under Miss. Code Ann. § 63-17-159(1);
2. Refund or satisfaction of lienholder interests as they appear in the vehicle;
3. Recoverable costs, expenses, and attorney's fees under § 63-17-159(7);
4. Prejudgment and post-judgment interest only to the extent authorized by applicable law; and
5. Any other relief the Court determines is available and proper.

8. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a jury trial on every issue triable by jury. See Miss. R. Civ. P. 38.

9. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]
[Attorney Name], Mississippi Bar No. [__________]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]
[Telephone]
[Email]
Counsel for Plaintiff

EXHIBIT CHECKLIST

• ☐ Purchase or covered-transfer documents
• ☐ Express warranty
• ☐ Repair orders and invoices
• ☐ Written notice to manufacturer and proof of delivery
• ☐ Manufacturer's repair-facility designation or proof none was provided
• ☐ Informal dispute settlement submissions and final action, if applicable
• ☐ Towing, rental, title, and other claimed collateral-charge records
• ☐ Mileage and out-of-service calculation

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Mississippi Motor Vehicle Commission — Motor Vehicle Warranty Enforcement Act (official 2019 compilation)
• Mississippi Legislature — 2021 H.B. 1195 signed text (electric-bicycle amendment)
• Mississippi Legislature — 2022 S.B. 2508 signed text (personal-delivery-device amendment)
• Mississippi Legislature — 2026 S.B. 2391 introduced text reproducing current § 63-17-155; bill died in committee
• Mississippi Legislature — 2026 S.B. 2669 introduced text reproducing current § 75-24-15; bill died in committee
• Mississippi Judiciary — current Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure