(a) When the consumer is the purchaser or a person entitled by the terms of the express warranty to enforce the obligations of the warranty, if the manufacturer is unable, after a reasonable number of attempts, to conform the motor vehicle to any express warranty by repairing or correcting, or arranging for the repair or correction of, any defect or condition or series of defects or conditions which substantially impair the value of the motor vehicle to the consumer, and which occurred no later than 24 months or 24,000 miles following original delivery of the vehicle, the manufacturer shall, at the option of the consumer, replace the vehicle with a comparable new motor vehicle or accept return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund to the consumer the following:
(1) The full contract price including, but not limited to, charges for undercoating, dealer preparation and transportation, and installed options, plus the non-refundable portions of extended warranties and service contracts;
(2) All collateral charges, including but not limited to, sales tax, license and registration fees, and similar government charges;
(3) All finance charges incurred by the consumer after he first reports the nonconformity to the manufacturer, its agent, or its authorized dealer; and
(4) Any incidental damages and monetary consequential damages.
(b) When consumer is a lessee, if the manufacturer is unable, after a reasonable number of attempts, to conform the motor vehicle to any express warranty by repairing or correcting, or arranging for the repair or correction of, any defect or condition or series of defects or conditions which substantially impair the value of the motor vehicle to the consumer, and which occurred no later than 24 months or 24,000 miles following original delivery of the vehicle, the manufacturer shall, at the option of the consumer, replace the vehicle with a comparable new motor vehicle or accept return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund the following:
(1) To the consumer:
a. All sums previously paid by the consumer under the terms of the lease;
b. All sums previously paid by the consumer in connection with entering into the lease agreement, including, but not limited to, any capitalized cost reduction, sales tax, license and registration fees, and similar government charges; and
c. Any incidental and monetary consequential damages.
(2) To the lessor, a full refund of the lease price, plus an additional amount equal to five percent (5%) of the lease price, less eighty-five percent (85%) of the amount actually paid by the consumer to the lessor pursuant to the lease. The lease price means the actual purchase cost of the vehicle to the lessor.
In the case of a refund, the leased vehicle shall be returned to the manufacturer and the consumer's written lease shall be terminated by the lessor without any penalty to the consumer. The lessor shall transfer title of the motor vehicle to the manufacturer as necessary to effectuate the consumer's rights pursuant to this Article, whether the consumer chooses vehicle replacement or refund.
(c) Refunds shall be made to the consumer, lessor, and any lienholders as their interests may appear. The refund to the consumer shall be reduced by a reasonable allowance for the consumer's use of the vehicle. A reasonable allowance for use is calculated from the number of miles used by the consumer up to the date of the third attempt to repair the same nonconformity which is the subject of the claim, or the twentieth cumulative business day when the vehicle is out of service by reason of repair of one or more nonconformities, whichever occurs first. The number of miles used by the consumer is multiplied by the purchase price of the vehicle or the lessor's actual lease price, and divided by 120,000.
(d) If a manufacturer, its agent, or its authorized dealer resells a motor vehicle that was returned pursuant to this Article or any other State's applicable law, regardless of whether there was any judicial determination that the motor vehicle had any defect or that it failed to conform to all express warranties, the manufacturer, its agent, or its authorized dealer shall disclose to the subsequent purchaser prior to the sale:
(1) That the motor vehicle was returned pursuant to this Article or pursuant to the applicable law of any other State; and
(2) The defect or condition or series of defects or conditions which substantially impaired the value of the motor vehicle to the consumer.
Any subsequent purchaser who purchases the motor vehicle for resale with notice of the return, shall make the required disclosures to any person to whom he resells the motor vehicle. (1987, c. 385, s. 1; 1989, c. 43, s. 1; c. 519, s. 1; 2005-436, s. 2.)
Notes of Decisions
Taylor v. Volvo North Am. Corp., 451 S.E.2d 618 (N.C. 1994).
· cites it 19× “3,” the monetary damages, as specified in N.C.G.S. § 20-351.3, shall be trebled. N.”
DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Kirkhart, 561 S.E.2d 276 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 3× “10, by failing to make certain disclosures to the Pleskaches required by N.C.G.S. § 20-351.3(d), namely: that the Dodge Caravan (“Caravan”) the Pleskaches had purchased from *574 Plaintiff had previously been repurchased by Plaintiff from its original owners as a result of the…”
Anders v. Hyundai Motor Am. Corp., 407 S.E.2d 618 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 8× “On appeal plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in ruling as a matter of law that plaintiff was not entitled to any relief pursuant to N.C.G.S. §§ 20-351.3 and 20-351.5 or under N.”
Stunzi v. Medlin Motors, Inc., 714 S.E.2d 770 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “By “lemon,” we assume that plaintiff means not a small yellow citrus fruit, but instead a car which did not conform to express warranties and was returned to the manufacturer as described in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3 (d) (2009), as such vehicles are commonly referred to as…”
Estridge v. Ford Motor Co., 401 S.E.2d 85 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 3× “2, and 3) award the plaintiff attorney fees under N.C.G.S. § 20-351.3. The defendant’s *718 motion to dismiss was based on the plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted in that N.”
Eugene Tucker Builders v. Ford Motor Co., 622 S.E.2d 698 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “All sums previously paid by the consumer in connection with entering into the lease agreement, including, but not limited to, any capitalized cost reduction, sales tax, license and registration fees, and similar government charges; and c.”
Taylor v. Volvo North Am. Corp., 421 S.E.2d 617 (N.C. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 19× “2 or G.S. 20-351.3.” The Act is a “consumer protection statute,” and is to be interpreted by an “examination of the plain language of the statute.”
Alexander v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 2004 NCBC 2 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2004).
· cites it 17× “It is that conduct—lemon laundering—which subsection (d) of section 20-351.3 attempts to prevent. {22} To this point, the statute is clear and unambiguous.”
Fairchild v. Kubota Tractor Corp. (W.D.N.C. 2020).
· cites it 3× “Defendant further argues that Plaintiff has failed to put forth evidence that he allowed Defendant a reasonable number of attempts to repair the Tractor, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 20-351.3(a). In view of the Court’s conclusions regarding the limitations-related issues, the Court…”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(a): 5 cases
Fairchild v. Kubota Tractor Corp. (W.D.N.C. 2020).
“Defendant further argues that Plaintiff has failed to put forth evidence that he allowed Defendant a reasonable number of attempts to repair the Tractor, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 20-351.3(a). In view of the Court’s conclusions regarding the limitations-related issues, the Court…”
Alexander v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 2004 NCBC 2 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2004).
“It is that conduct—lemon laundering—which subsection (d) of section 20-351.3 attempts to prevent. {22} To this point, the statute is clear and unambiguous.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(a)(1): 1 case
Anders v. Hyundai Motor Am. Corp., 407 S.E.2d 618 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991).
“On appeal plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in ruling as a matter of law that plaintiff was not entitled to any relief pursuant to N.C.G.S. §§ 20-351.3 and 20-351.5 or under N.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(a)(4): 1 case
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(b): 4 cases
Eugene Tucker Builders v. Ford Motor Co., 622 S.E.2d 698 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005).
“All sums previously paid by the consumer in connection with entering into the lease agreement, including, but not limited to, any capitalized cost reduction, sales tax, license and registration fees, and similar government charges; and c.”
Taylor v. Volvo North Am. Corp., 421 S.E.2d 617 (N.C. Ct. App. 1992).
“2 or G.S. 20-351.3.” The Act is a “consumer protection statute,” and is to be interpreted by an “examination of the plain language of the statute.”
Alexander v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 2004 NCBC 2 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2004).
“It is that conduct—lemon laundering—which subsection (d) of section 20-351.3 attempts to prevent. {22} To this point, the statute is clear and unambiguous.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(b)(l): 1 case
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(c): 4 cases
Alexander v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 2004 NCBC 2 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2004).
“It is that conduct—lemon laundering—which subsection (d) of section 20-351.3 attempts to prevent. {22} To this point, the statute is clear and unambiguous.”
Taylor v. Volvo North Am. Corp., 421 S.E.2d 617 (N.C. Ct. App. 1992).
“2 or G.S. 20-351.3.” The Act is a “consumer protection statute,” and is to be interpreted by an “examination of the plain language of the statute.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(d): 2 cases
DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Kirkhart, 561 S.E.2d 276 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
“10, by failing to make certain disclosures to the Pleskaches required by N.C.G.S. § 20-351.3(d), namely: that the Dodge Caravan (“Caravan”) the Pleskaches had purchased from *574 Plaintiff had previously been repurchased by Plaintiff from its original owners as a result of the…”
Alexander v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 2004 NCBC 2 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2004).
“It is that conduct—lemon laundering—which subsection (d) of section 20-351.3 attempts to prevent. {22} To this point, the statute is clear and unambiguous.”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-351.3(d)(2): 1 case
Alexander v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 2004 NCBC 2 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2004).
“It is that conduct—lemon laundering—which subsection (d) of section 20-351.3 attempts to prevent. {22} To this point, the statute is clear and unambiguous.”
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.