C.F.R. » Title 16 » CHAPTER I—FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION › SUBCHAPTER G—RULES, REGULATIONS, STATEMENTS AND INTERPRETATIONS UNDER THE MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT › PART 703—INFORMAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES

16 C.F.R. § 703.5

Operation of the Mechanism

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Mechanism shall establish written operating procedures which shall include at least those items specified in paragraphs (b) through (j) of this section. Copies of the written procedures shall be made available to any person upon request.

(b) Upon notification of a dispute, the Mechanism shall immediately inform both the warrantor and the consumer of receipt of the dispute.

(c) The Mechanism shall investigate, gather and organize all information necessary for a fair and expeditious decision in each dispute. When any evidence gathered by or submitted to the Mechanism raises issues relating to the number of repair attempts, the length of repair periods, the possibility of unreasonable use of the product, or any other issues relevant in light of Title I of the Act (or rules thereunder), including issues relating to consequential damages, or any other remedy under the Act (or rules thereunder), the Mechanism shall investigate these issues. When information which will or may be used in the decision, submitted by one party, or a consultant under § 703.4(b) of this part, or any other source tends to contradict facts submitted by the other party, the Mechanism shall clearly, accurately, and completely disclose to both parties the contradictory information (and its source) and shall provide both parties an opportunity to explain or rebut the information and to submit additional materials. The Mechanism shall not require any information not reasonably necessary to decide the dispute.

(d) If the dispute has not been settled, the Mechanism shall, as expeditiously as possible but at least within 40 days of notification of the dispute, except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section:

(1) Render a fair decision based on the information gathered as described in paragraph (c) of this section, and on any information submitted at an oral presentation which conforms to the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section (A decision shall include any remedies appropriate under the circumstances, including repair, replacement, refund, reimbursement for expenses, compensation for damages, and any other remedies available under the written warranty or the Act (or rules thereunder); and a decision shall state a specified reasonable time for performance);

(2) Disclose to the warrantor its decision and the reasons therefor;

(3) If the decision would require action on the part of the warrantor, determine whether, and to what extent, warrantor will abide by its decision; and

(4) Disclose to the consumer its decision, the reasons therefor, warrantor's intended actions (if the decision would require action on the part of the warrantor), and the information described in paragraph (g) of this section. For purposes of paragraph (d) of this section a dispute shall be deemed settled when the Mechanism has ascertained from the consumer that:

(i) The dispute has been settled to the consumer's satisfaction; and

(ii) The settlement contains a specified reasonable time for performance.

(e) The Mechanism may delay the performance of its duties under paragraph (d) of this section beyond the 40 day time limit:

(1) Where the period of delay is due solely to failure of a consumer to provide promptly his or her name and address, brand name and model number of the product involved, and a statement as to the nature of the defect or other complaint; or

(2) For a 7 day period in those cases where the consumer has made no attempt to seek redress directly from the warrantor.

(f) The Mechanism may allow an oral presentation by a party to a dispute (or a party's representative) only if:

(1) Both warrantor and consumer expressly agree to the presentation;

(2) Prior to agreement the Mechanism fully discloses to the consumer the following information:

(i) That the presentation by either party will take place only if both parties so agree, but that if they agree, and one party fails to appear at the agreed upon time and place, the presentation by the other party may still be allowed;

(ii) That the members will decide the dispute whether or not an oral presentation is made;

(iii) The proposed date, time and place for the presentation; and

(iv) A brief description of what will occur at the presentation including, if applicable, parties' rights to bring witnesses and/or counsel; and

(3) Each party has the right to be present during the other party's oral presentation. Nothing contained in this paragraph (b) of this section shall preclude the Mechanism from allowing an oral presentation by one party, if the other party fails to appear at the agreed upon time and place, as long as all of the requirements of this paragraph have been satisfied.

(g) The Mechanism shall inform the consumer, at the time of disclosure required in paragraph (d) of this section that:

(1) If he or she is dissatisfied with its decision or warrantor's intended actions, or eventual performance, legal remedies, including use of small claims court, may be pursued;

(2) The Mechanism's decision is admissible in evidence as provided in section 110(a)(3) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 2310(a)(3); and

(3) The consumer may obtain, at reasonable cost, copies of all Mechanism records relating to the consumer's dispute.

(h) If the warrantor has agreed to perform any obligations, either as part of a settlement agreed to after notification to the Mechanism of the dispute or as a result of a decision under paragraph (d) of this section, the Mechanism shall ascertain from the consumer within 10 working days of the date for performance whether performance has occurred.

(i) A requirement that a consumer resort to the Mechanism prior to commencement of an action under section 110(d) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 2310(d), shall be satisfied 40 days after notification to the Mechanism of the dispute or when the Mechanism completes all of its duties under paragraph (d) of this section, whichever occurs sooner. Except that, if the Mechanism delays performance of its paragraph (d) of this section duties as allowed by paragraph (e) of this section, the requirement that the consumer initially resort to the Mechanism shall not be satisfied until the period of delay allowed by paragraph (e) of this section has ended.

(j) Decisions of the Mechanism shall not be legally binding on any person. However, the warrantor shall act in good faith, as provided in § 703.2(g) of this part. In any civil action arising out of a warranty obligation and relating to a matter considered by the Mechanism, any decision of the Mechanism shall be admissible in evidence, as provided in section 110(a)(3) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 2310(a)(3).

[40 FR 60215, Dec. 31, 1975, as amended at 80 FR 42722, July 20, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., 808 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., 808 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 11× “" In enforcing the Magnuson-Moss Act, the FTC has determined that decisions of an informal dispute settlement mechanism "shall not be legally binding on any person" ( 16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (j) (2003)) and has defined the term "mechanism" broadly to include binding arbitration.”
Kolev v. Euromotors West/The Auto Gallery, 658 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 8× “Pursuant to this authority, the FTC construed the MMWA as barring pre-dispute mandatory binding arbitration provisions covering written warranty agreements and issued a rule prohibiting judicial enforcement of such provisions with respect to consumer claims brought under the…”
In Re Am. Homestar of Lancaster, Inc., 50 S.W.3d 480 (Tex. 2001). · cites it 2× “The Magnuson-Moss Act does not define what qualifies as an informal dispute settlement mechanism.”
Loretta Gayle Galea v. Fca US LLC, 917 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “See 16 CFR 703.5(j); Davis, 305 F3d at 1277 (compiling federal register citations).”
Christine Seney v. Rent-a-Ctr., Inc., 738 F.3d 631 (4th Cir. 2013). · cites it 6× “See 16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (j) (2013). The district court rejected the argument that the FTC regulations ban binding arbitration, and so granted RAC’s motion to compel arbitration.”
Graham v. Hyundai Motor Am., 855 N.E.2d 562 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 17× “16 C.F.R. §703.5 (2006). Section 703.5 provides that “[t]he Mechanism shall establish written operating procedures which shall include at least those items specified in [sections 703.”
Cunningham v. Fleetwood Homes of Georgia, Inc., 253 F.3d 611 (11th Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “” 16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (j). The Cunninghams contend, and the district court agreed, that the only permissible conclusion to be drawn from the text of § 2310 and the attendant legislative history is that Magnuson-Moss makes the nonbinding § 2310 mechanism the sole exception to its…”
Koons Ford of Baltimore, Inc. v. Lobach, 919 A.2d 722 (Md. 2007). · cites it 2× “" In 16 C.F.R. 703.5, the FTC explains how the Mechanism will operate and states explicitly that "[d]ecisions of the Mechanism shall not be legally binding on any person.”
Fred F. Wolf v. Ford Motor Co., 829 F.2d 1277 (4th Cir. 1987). · cites it 4× “16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (c). It may allow oral presentations if specified procedures are followed.”
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., 772 N.E.2d 256 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 3× “) 16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (j) (2001). Moreover, and to bring this point further home, the regulations add that “The mechanism shall inform the consumer *** that *** [i]f he or she is dissatisfied with its decision or warrantor’s intended actions, or eventual performance, legal…”
Motor Veh. Mfrs. Ass'n of the United States, Inc. v. Abrams, 697 F. Supp. 726 (S.D.N.Y. 1988). · cites it 5× “regulations permit mechanisms to allow an oral presentation only if both warrantor and consumer expressly agree to the presentation ( 16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (f)(1)). 2) a requirement making the arbitrator’s decision binding on the manufacturer, while it is not binding upon the…”
Wilson v. Waverlee Homes, Inc., 954 F. Supp. 1530 (M.D. Ala. 1997). · cites it 2× “” 16 C.F.R. § 703.5 (j). Moreover, and to bring this point further home, the regulations add that “The mechanism shall inform the consumer .”
Show all 49 citing cases →
— 16 C.F.R. § 703.5(j) — 4 cases
Loretta Gayle Galea v. Fca US LLC, 917 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “See 16 CFR 703.5(j); Davis, 305 F3d at 1277 (compiling federal register citations).”
Abela v. Gen. Motors Corp., 669 N.W.2d 271 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
Tucker v. Ford Motor Co., 72 Va. Cir. 420 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2007).
Loretta Gayle Galea v. Fca US LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.