U.S. Code » Title 15 » Chapter CHAPTER 50— CONSUMER PRODUCT WARRANTIES

15 U.S.C. § 2310

Remedies in consumer disputes

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Informal dispute settlement procedures; establishment; rules setting forth minimum requirements; effect of compliance by warrantor; review of informal procedures or implementation by Commission; application to existing informal procedures(1) Congress hereby declares it to be its policy to encourage warrantors to establish procedures whereby consumer disputes are fairly and expeditiously settled through informal dispute settlement mechanisms.(2) The Commission shall prescribe rules setting forth minimum requirements for any informal dispute settlement procedure which is incorporated into the terms of a written warranty to which any provision of this chapter applies. Such rules shall provide for participation in such procedure by independent or governmental entities.(3) One or more warrantors may establish an informal dispute settlement procedure which meets the requirements of the Commission’s rules under paragraph (2). If—(A) a warrantor establishes such a procedure,(B) such procedure, and its implementation, meets the requirements of such rules, and(C) he incorporates in a written warranty a requirement that the consumer resort to such procedure before pursuing any legal remedy under this section respecting such warranty,then (i) the consumer may not commence a civil action (other than a class action) under subsection (d) of this section unless he initially resorts to such procedure; and (ii) a class of consumers may not proceed in a class action under subsection (d) except to the extent the court determines necessary to establish the representative capacity of the named plaintiffs, unless the named plaintiffs (upon notifying the defendant that they are named plaintiffs in a class action with respect to a warranty obligation) initially resort to such procedure. In the case of such a class action which is brought in a district court of the United States, the representative capacity of the named plaintiffs shall be established in the application of rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In any civil action arising out of a warranty obligation and relating to a matter considered in such a procedure, any decision in such procedure shall be admissible in evidence.(4) The Commission on its own initiative may, or upon written complaint filed by any interested person shall, review the bona fide operation of any dispute settlement procedure resort to which is stated in a written warranty to be a prerequisite to pursuing a legal remedy under this section. If the Commission finds that such procedure or its implementation fails to comply with the requirements of the rules under paragraph (2), the Commission may take appropriate remedial action under any authority it may have under this chapter or any other provision of law.(5) Until rules under paragraph (2) take effect, this subsection shall not affect the validity of any informal dispute settlement procedure respecting consumer warranties, but in any action under subsection (d), the court may invalidate any such procedure if it finds that such procedure is unfair.(b) Prohibited acts

It shall be a violation of section 45(a)(1) of this title for any person to fail to comply with any requirement imposed on such person by this chapter (or a rule thereunder) or to violate any prohibition contained in this chapter (or a rule thereunder).

(c) Injunction proceedings by Attorney General or Commission for deceptive warranty, noncompliance with requirements, or violating prohibitions; procedures; definitions(1) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of any action brought by the Attorney General (in his capacity as such), or by the Commission by any of its attorneys designated by it for such purpose, to restrain (A) any warrantor from making a deceptive warranty with respect to a consumer product, or (B) any person from failing to comply with any requirement imposed on such person by or pursuant to this chapter or from violating any prohibition contained in this chapter. Upon proper showing that, weighing the equities and considering the Commission’s or Attorney General’s likelihood of ultimate success, such action would be in the public interest and after notice to the defendant, a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction may be granted without bond. In the case of an action brought by the Commission, if a complaint under section 45 of this title is not filed within such period (not exceeding 10 days) as may be specified by the court after the issuance of the temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, the order or injunction shall be dissolved by the court and be of no further force and effect. Any suit shall be brought in the district in which such person resides or transacts business. Whenever it appears to the court that the ends of justice require that other persons should be parties in the action, the court may cause them to be summoned whether or not they reside in the district in which the court is held, and to that end process may be served in any district.(2) For the purposes of this subsection, the term “deceptive warranty” means (A) a written warranty which (i) contains an affirmation, promise, description, or representation which is either false or fraudulent, or which, in light of all of the circumstances, would mislead a reasonable individual exercising due care; or (ii) fails to contain information which is necessary in light of all of the circumstances, to make the warranty not misleading to a reasonable individual exercising due care; or (B) a written warranty created by the use of such terms as “guaranty” or “warranty”, if the terms and conditions of such warranty so limit its scope and application as to deceive a reasonable individual.(d) Civil action by consumer for damages, etc.; jurisdiction; recovery of costs and expenses; cognizable claims(1) Subject to subsections (a)(3) and (e), a consumer who is damaged by the failure of a supplier, warrantor, or service contractor to comply with any obligation under this chapter, or under a written warranty, implied warranty, or service contract, may bring suit for damages and other legal and equitable relief—(A) in any court of competent jurisdiction in any State or the District of Columbia; or(B) in an appropriate district court of the United States, subject to paragraph (3) of this subsection.(2) If a consumer finally prevails in any action brought under paragraph (1) of this subsection, he may be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of cost and expenses (including attorneys’ fees based on actual time expended) determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the plaintiff for or in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action, unless the court in its discretion shall determine that such an award of attorneys’ fees would be inappropriate.(3) No claim shall be cognizable in a suit brought under paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection—(A) if the amount in controversy of any individual claim is less than the sum or value of $25;(B) if the amount in controversy is less than the sum or value of $50,000 (exclusive of interests and costs) computed on the basis of all claims to be determined in this suit; or(C) if the action is brought as a class action, and the number of named plaintiffs is less than one hundred.(e) Class actions; conditions; procedures applicable

No action (other than a class action or an action respecting a warranty to which subsection (a)(3) applies) may be brought under subsection (d) for failure to comply with any obligation under any written or implied warranty or service contract, and a class of consumers may not proceed in a class action under such subsection with respect to such a failure except to the extent the court determines necessary to establish the representative capacity of the named plaintiffs, unless the person obligated under the warranty or service contract is afforded a reasonable opportunity to cure such failure to comply. In the case of such a class action (other than a class action respecting a warranty to which subsection (a)(3) applies) brought under subsection (d) for breach of any written or implied warranty or service contract, such reasonable opportunity will be afforded by the named plaintiffs and they shall at that time notify the defendant that they are acting on behalf of the class. In the case of such a class action which is brought in a district court of the United States, the representative capacity of the named plaintiffs shall be established in the application of rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

(f) Warrantors subject to enforcement of remedies

For purposes of this section, only the warrantor actually making a written affirmation of fact, promise, or undertaking shall be deemed to have created a written warranty, and any rights arising thereunder may be enforced under this section only against such warrantor and no other person.

(Pub. L. 93–637, title I, § 110, Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2189.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsecs. (a)(3) and (e), is set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,186 cases (426 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: Samuel-Bassett v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., 34 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Samuel-Bassett v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., 34 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2011). · cites it 24× “Costs included a significant legal fee, entered pursuant to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Improvement Act (the "MMWA"), 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(2). For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part, with reversal being limited to the lower courts' approval of an…”
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., 808 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 30× “" 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(1) (1994). The consumer may bring an action in either federal or state court and may recover costs and expenses that were reasonably incurred in connection with the commencement and prosecution of the action.”
Scott v. Blue Springs Ford Sales, Inc., 215 S.W.3d 145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 27× “2-314(2)(a), respectively, and attorney’s fees, pursuant to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA), Title 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d). As to Balderston, in Count IX, Scott sought both compensatory and punitive damages for Balderston allegedly conspiring with BSF to defraud him as to the…”
Nicholas Shoner v. Carrier Corp., 30 F.4th 1144 (9th Cir. 2022). · cites it 10× “15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(3)(B). At issue in this case is whether attorneys’ fees count toward the MMWA’s amount in controversy requirement.”
In Re Am. Homestar of Lancaster, Inc., 50 S.W.3d 480 (Tex. 2001). · cites it 10× “15 U.S.C. § 2310 (a)(1) (“Congress hereby declares it to be its policy to encourage warrantors to establish procedures whereby consumer disputes are fairly and expeditiously settled through informal dispute settlement mechanisms.”
Chavis v. Fid. Warranty Servs., Inc., 415 F. Supp. 2d 620 (D.S.C. 2006). · cites it 19× “See 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(3). On June 23, 2005, Defendant removed the case to federal court alleging jurisdiction under 28 U.”
Kolev v. Euromotors West/The Auto Gallery, 658 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 30× “See 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (a)(2). 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…”
Hawkins v. Ford Motor Co., 566 S.E.2d 624 (W. Va. 2002). · cites it 16× “" Subsequent to trial, the Hawkins filed a motion seeking attorney fees pursuant to the Magnuson-Moss Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(2) (1975), and costs.”
Cara Rowland v. BISSELL Homecare Inc, 73 F.4th 177 (3rd Cir. 2023). · cites it 11× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(1). Paragraph 3, in turn, provides that: No claim shall be cognizable in a suit brought under [paragraph (d)(1)(B)]— 4 We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.”
John F. \Jack\" Walsh v. Ford Motor Co.", 807 F.2d 1000 (D.C. Cir. 1986). · cites it 8× “17 The District Court wisely rejected this contention, refusing to “read section 110 [ 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (1982) ] so broadly as to have it supersede the Rule 23 class action provision.”
Tang v. C.A.R.S. Prot. Plus, Inc., 2007 WI App 134 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 12× “a consumer who is damaged by the failure of a supplier, warrantor, or service contractor to comply with any obligation under this chapter, or under a *787 written warranty, implied warranty, or service contract, may bring suit for damages and other legal and equitable relief— If…”
Koons Ford of Baltimore, Inc. v. Lobach, 919 A.2d 722 (Md. 2007). · cites it 9× “In furtherance of these goals, § 2310(d)(1) of the MMWA gives consumers a statutory private right of action, in either state or federal court, if they are "damaged by the failure of a supplier, warrantor, or service contractor to comply with any obligation under this title [ 15…”
Show all 1,186 citing cases →
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(2)(d)(3)(A) — 1 case
Siqueiros v. Gen. Motors LLC (N.D. Cal. 2020).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(a)(1) — 1 case
Auto. Importers of Am., Inc. v. State of Minn., 681 F. Supp. 1374 (D. Minnesota 1988).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(a)(2) — 4 cases
Motor Veh. Mfrs. Ass'n of the United States, Inc. v. Abrams, 697 F. Supp. 726 (S.D.N.Y. 1988).
Auto. Importers of Am., Inc. v. State of Minn., 681 F. Supp. 1374 (D. Minnesota 1988).
Tucker v. Ford Motor Co., 72 Va. Cir. 420 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2007).
Auto. Importers of Am., Inc. v. Minnesota, 681 F. Supp. 1374 (D. Minnesota 1988).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(a)(3)(c) — 1 case
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., 808 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. 2004). “" 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(1) (1994). The consumer may bring an action in either federal or state court and may recover costs and expenses that were reasonably incurred in connection with the commencement and prosecution of the action.”
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(b) — 1 case
Bass v. Gen. Motors, LLC (M.D. Fla. 2024).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d) — 3 cases
Fode v. Capital RV Ctr., Inc., 1998 ND 65 (N.D. 1998).
Jameson Chem. Co., Ltd. v. Love, 401 N.E.2d 41 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980).
Walley Isle Motors, LTD. v. La Costa (Haw. App. 2026).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(1) — 3 cases
In Re Gen. Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Prods. Liab. Litig., 55 F.3d 768 (3rd Cir. 1995).
Angarita v. Hypertoyz, Inc. (S.D. Fla. 2024).
Chisum v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (M.D. La. 2021).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(2) — 4 cases
Scott v. Blue Springs Ford Sales, Inc., 215 S.W.3d 145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). “2-314(2)(a), respectively, and attorney’s fees, pursuant to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA), Title 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d). As to Balderston, in Count IX, Scott sought both compensatory and punitive damages for Balderston allegedly conspiring with BSF to defraud him as to the…”
Troutman v. Pierce, Inc., 402 N.W.2d 920 (N.D. 1987).
Volkswagen Grp. of Am., Inc. v. Kimmel & Silverman, 74 A.3d 1042 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
Butcher v. Gen. R.V. Ctr., Inc. (Va. 2026).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(3)(B) — 1 case
Hatchigian v. Carrier Corp. (E.D. Pa. 2021).
— 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(3)(C) — 1 case
In Re Hager, 812 A.2d 904 (D.C. 2002).
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.