Published on:

by

At my Dallas based law office, I often refer to the Texas lemon law as the manufacturer’s lemon law, because it is arguably apparent that the law favors car manufacturer more than consumers. For example, the mileage deduction that the manufacturers are entitled to in the event of a repurchase or replacement may often be so high that it causes consumers to be upside down; making the consumer worse off then a regular car trade in.

Last week, I posted an article comparing the “Texas Lemon Law” against the upcoming new Australian Lemon Law. This morning, I stumbled upon an update with Australia’s drafting and legislation of the upcoming lemon law.

It looks like Tony Robinson, Australia’s Consumer Affairs Minister will invite both consumers and industry representatives to provide feedback and input on the new law. Those who are interested in participating in drafting the new Australian lemon law has until November 23, 2007 to write to the ministry.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

A consumer in Missouri is suing British car manufacturer, Aston Martin, for selling him a defective lemon car. His theory of recovery is derived from Missouri Lemon Law, federal warranty laws, and state consumer protection laws.

Like most of my clients throughout Texas ranging from the Houston, Austin, Laredo, and Dallas area, Gary Mathes paid full price for a new vehicle and later found out that the vehicle is defective. The vehicle has been subject to 12 separate repair attempts for engine, brakes, electrical, and miscellaneous other issues.

The difference between this situation and a typical lemon law case is that only a limited number of this particular Aston Martin vehicle is sold each year. This means that if the Aston Martin vehicle is deemed a lemon, then the remedy of replacement will not be available to Mr. Mathes. Alternatively, the remedy of repurchase or a monetary settlement is certainly an option.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

Too often, when faced with a new broken car, consumers are unfamiliar with their lemon law rights. Burdened with frustration and the runaround from car dealerships and the manufacturer, some consumers resort to trading in their vehicle at a substantial loss.

Recently, the Fort Worth Star Telegram wrote a brief summary about the Texas lemon law. Personally, I think that this public announcement is a very commendable thing that our local newspaper is doing.

In summary, the newspaper article accurately states that a consumer with a suspected lemon should contact the Texas Department of Transportation by calling the local toll free number immediately. In addition, there is a $35 fee, which is refundable to the consumer if the consumer wins the lemon case via the Texas DOT.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

Update: See 10/9/07.

Often times, my lemon law practice in Dallas receives potential client calls from consumers who purchase defective cars from out of state. In such cases, I would direct them to find a lemon law attorney in that particular state — as the vehicle’s state of purchase is often the proper jurisdiction for these type of claims. Interestingly, I have not run into a situation where the consumer purchased the vehicle from out of the country….such as Australia.

According to the Australian Broadcasting Company (ABC), the Australian Government will soon join the ranks of other states and countries in providing its citizens with consumer lemon law protections. The proposed Australian lemon law is currently being drafted and is tentative.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

Under most state lemon laws (including Texas Lemon Law), when a consumer gets a new repurchase or replacement settlement from the car manufacturer, they are also entitled to a reimbursement for sales tax, title, license (TTL), and other relevant fees. Thereafter, car manufacturers such as Mazda and General Motors (GM) will in turn apply to the state to get those TTL fees refunded back to it. However, such is not the case in the state of Connecticut.

Chrysler (LLC), once known as DaimlerChrysler Corporation, is appealing its case to the Connecticut Supreme Court on the issue presented above. Previously, the Connecticut tax department, along with the state’s Superior Court both ruled against the private car manufacturer.

Although TTL fees may seem like small amounts to be fighting over — especially to the state Supreme Court; when you consider the aggregate costs of all TTL fees involved in lemon law buybacks to all fifty states, then the amount may significantly reach the potential million of dollars.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

In a civilian context, when you buy your new car, chances are that you will drive it on paved highways and roads — perhaps rarely on a dirt road or park it on the grass. (For example, I commute from Fort Worth to my office in downtown Dallas on a regular basis and normally drive on concrete roadways such as interstate 75 and 360). Most production cars are designed with this assumption in mind, although some are designed specifically or off-roading.

If you were to take your average economy sedan and start driving over hills and into ditches,…you would soon be in trouble. A car manufacturer would probably not be overly sympathetic if you claimed that your Kia Rio was a lemon because it experienced multiple system failures while you were creating your own path through the Amazon rain forest.

Vehicles used by the military have quite different requirements. Military vehicles need to be able to traverse unpaved paths and go cross-country. There are some vehicles that have made the transition from military to consumer use. A recent example of this is GM’s High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle HMMWV (aka Hummer). The model line was expanded for the civilian market with scaled down versions, the H2 and H3. In 2006, GM announced that it would no longer market the original full sized H1 Hummer.

Long before the Hummer, there was the Jeep. The Jeep was the prototypical army-to-civilian vehicle. The U.S. Army received its first shipment of Jeeps in 1941 and the vehicle proved instrumental in the successful outcome of the war for the Allies. In the years since, it has proved popular with civilians, spawning a long line of derivative vehicles. Now, once again, the Jeep is returning to military use.
Continue reading

Published on:

by

The 2008 Chevrolet Aveo has an EPA estimated rating of 24/34. It has a 1.6L 103 horsepower engine which gets you from 0 to 60 in a whiplash inducing 10.8 seconds. Standard equipment includes air conditioning (A/C). This vehicle can be yours for only $9,995 (base MSRP). Or — if you haggle — perhaps for a bit less. In the Houston and Austin area, that’s about all the new car you are going to get for under $10,000 (with the exception of arguably the Kia Rio). At minimum, the Aveo will be covered under the Texas lemon law in the event that there is a problem with its manufacturing.

But, cheaper cars are being produced.

Recently, Tata Motors Ltd. of Mumbai India announced that it would soon unveil a new car that would cost $2,472.18 (100,000 Rupees, as of 9/18/07). No name has been revealed yet. These will be manufactured at a plant in West Bengal.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

Mike Stegall is suing Raiford Motors, an authorized Ford dealership, for selling him a lemon F50 pickup truck. According to the pleadings that was filed in the 136th Judicial District court, Stegall alleges that the vehicle was subject to repairs for at least 10 times since it was purchased. It appears that the case is currently pending in Judge Milton Shuffield’s courtroom.

Stegall’s causes of action stems from both the Texas Lemon Law and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). Stegall is asking the court to award him damages in the cost of the truck, damages under the DTPA, and court costs.

To learn more about the suit, go here. If you are in a similar situation as Mr. Stegall, then feel free to contact my Texas lemon law office for a free case review.

Published on:

by

Today I am going to do something a little different and talk about a recent personal experience with a consumer product – not a lemon car, not a big-ticket purchase, but an inexpensive electric toothbrush.

We use toothbrushes everyday and normally do not spend much time thinking about their design or history. We do not know when humans first started using tools to clean their teeth, but there is evidence of the use of “chewing sticks” by ancient Babylonians as far back as 3500 BC. The first appearance of such devices in literature is around 1600 BC in China. Following on this long history of oral hygiene, in 15th century China, boar’s hairs were fixed in bamboo to make the first toothbrush. The 19th century brought the mass production of the toothbrush in America, then modified in the 1930’s to include nylon bristles. The electric toothbrush made its appearance on the US markets in the 1960’s with continuing evolution up to the present day.

So, how does this tie in with my experience? A few months back, I saw a battery powered Crest Spin brush on sale at the grocery store in Lewisville, TX. I do not remember the exact price, but it was around $5. If you consider what electric and battery powered toothbrushes cost a few years ago (and even what expensive models go for today), this is incredibly inexpensive – especially since batteries are included.

After a month or two of use, the batteries died and I replaced them. Shortly thereafter, I noticed a loss of powered and checked the battery compartment. I found that, despite having a gasket, water had leaked into the compartment and a battery had corroded a bit as well as one of the contacts.
Continue reading

Published on:

by

Regardless of what sort of vehicle we have, whether it is new or old, a great car or a lemon, most of us speed. Some of the time we go with the traffic flow, a few miles an hour over the speed limit and occasionally zip around considerably faster. It is almost inevitable that eventually we get pulled over for speeding and may get a ticket. Here in Dallas and the surrounding Fort Worth and Arlington areas, these tend to be for a few hundred dollars.

There are a few places where this behavior is much costlier. Back in July, the state of Virginia implemented a new law which dramatically increases what offenders will be assessed for many traffic infractions. This new “civil remedial fee” dwarfs the normal penalty. For example, going 20 mph over the speed limit is considered “reckless driving” and carries a $1000 civil penalty in addition to the regular fine. Other examples are a $300 fee for failing to stop at a stop sign, and a $300 fee if an in car DVD player is playing a movie and an “obscene video image” is seen from outside the vehicle. The state expects to raise between $65-$120 million.

In the case of Virginia, the state legislature is trying to fill the state’s coffers from the pockets of drivers. In contrast, the Finnish system for penalizing misbehaving drivers can result in even bigger fines, – recently a wealthy internet entrepreneur was fined $71,400 for driving 43 mph in a 25 mph zone – but the rationale is very different. In Finland, the idea is that a penalty should impact everyone equally.
Continue reading

Contact Information
6244 E. Lovers Lane
Dallas , TX 75214
Phone: 1 888-333-3813 texaslemon@gmail.com

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Kevin Le
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design