Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 681.101 (2025)

Legislative intent.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

681.101 Legislative intent.—The Legislature recognizes that a motor vehicle is a major consumer purchase and that a defective motor vehicle undoubtedly creates a hardship for the consumer. The Legislature further recognizes that a duly franchised motor vehicle dealer is an authorized service agent of the manufacturer. It is the intent of the Legislature that a good faith motor vehicle warranty complaint by a consumer be resolved by the manufacturer within a specified period of time; however, it is not the intent of the Legislature that a consumer establish the presumption of a reasonable number of attempts as to each manufacturer that provides a warranty directly to the consumer. It is further the intent of the Legislature to provide the statutory procedures whereby a consumer may receive a replacement motor vehicle, or a full refund, for a motor vehicle which cannot be brought into conformity with the warranty provided for in this chapter. However, nothing in this chapter shall in any way limit or expand the rights or remedies which are otherwise available to a consumer under any other law.

History.—s. 2, ch. 83-69; s. 1, ch. 84-55; ss. 1, 19, ch. 88-95; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 1, ch. 97-245.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: Holzhauer-Mosher v. Ford Motor Co., 772 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Holzhauer-Mosher v. Ford Motor Co., 772 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). · cites it 7× “" § 681.101, Fla. Stat. (1997). In this case, the dispute as to the correct amount of the refund centers on the amount considered to be the purchase price of the "lemon.”

King v. King Motor Co. of Fort Lauderdale, 780 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). · cites it 2× “§ 681.101, Fla.Stat. (2000). For a nonconforming [2] vehicle that the manufacturer cannot conform to the warranty, the primary statutory remedy is either a replacement vehicle or a refund, at the consumer's option.”

Chrysler Corp. v. Pitsirelos, 721 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 1998). · cites it 2× “[7] The legislative intent of the Lemon Law is set forth in section 681.101, Florida Statutes (1989): The Legislature recognizes that a motor vehicle is a major consumer purchase and that a defective motor vehicle undoubtedly creates a hardship for the consumer.”

Gelinas v. Forest River, Inc., 931 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). · cites it 2× “Gelinas further asserts that this contention is supported *974 by the legislative intent section of the Lemon Law, which indicates that "nothing in this chapter shall in any way limit or expand the rights or remedies which are otherwise available to a consumer under any other…”

DeMayo v. Chames, 934 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). · cites it 2× “(1973)(establishing the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act); § 681.101, Fla. Stat. (1981)(establishing Florida's automobile Lemon Law); Wickman v.”

Results Real Est., Inc. v. Lazy Days RV Ctr., Inc., 505 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). · cites it 2× “The intent of the legislature in passing section 681.101, Florida Statutes (1985), was expressed in the following manner: 681.”

Indus. Valley Bank & Trust Co. v. Howard, 533 A.2d 1055 (Pa. 1987). “Florida’s act, at Fla.Stat. Ann. § 681.101 et seq. (West 1984), likewise defines “consumer” to include the lessee of a motor vehicle primarily used for personal, family or household purposes.”

Tobin v. Alfieri Maserati, SPA, 513 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). “First, we reject the plaintiff's point in which he contends that he was entitled to a directed verdict at trial, or at least new trial, because (a) the jury verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, (b) the plaintiff's evidence showing violations of the "Lemon…”

BMW of North Am., Inc. v. Singh, 664 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). “The statement of legislative intent found in section 681.101 supports this view as it acknowledges the goal "that a good faith motor vehicle warranty complaint by a consumer be resolved by the manufacturer within a specified period of time.”

Thielen (S.D. Fla. 2026). · cites it 4× “Finally, Fla. Stat. § 681.101 acknowledges the possibility of such preemption, stating “nothing in this chapter shall in any way limit or expand the rights or remedies which are otherwise available to a consumer under any other law.”

Joyce v. Forest River, Inc. (S.D. Fla. 2024). · cites it 2× “at 714–15; see also Fla. Stat. § 681.101 (The Florida Legislature’s intent is “to provide the statutory procedures whereby a consumer may receive a replacement motor vehicle, or a full refund, for a motor vehicle which cannot be brought into conformity with the warranty provided…”

Joyce v. Forest River, Inc. (S.D. Fla. 2024). · cites it 2× “Fla. Stat. Ann. § 681.101 (West). A consumer is entitled to replacement or refund of the vehicle “[i]f the manufacturer, or its authorized nonconformity after a reasonable number of attempts[.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

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.