When your shiny new car turns out to be a lemon, it’s a distressing experience. Unfortunately, the distress of learning that a new car has one or more recurring defects despite repair attempts only intensifies at the prospect of facing a challenging legal process against a powerful manufacturer. Often, the manufacturer responds to the owner of a defective vehicle by presenting arbitration instead of simply repurchasing the vehicle as required. Consulting a California lemon lawyer can help you understand your rights and determine whether lemon law arbitration is the best option for your claim.
Understanding Arbitration In California Lemon Law Claims
Arbitration is a dispute-settling process that uses a neutral third party to resolve a legal issue. Lemon Law arbitration is less formal than a court process, but the outcome is legally binding for the manufacturer. Generally, it is best to consult with a California Lemon Law attorney before you agree to arbitration.
What are the Potential Outcomes of Lemon Law Arbitration In California?
An arbitrator reviews the details of the claim and examines evidence, such as repair invoices and communications between the car owner and the manufacturer, to evaluate the claim. Arbitration is a less formal process than court, but still requires well-documented evidence and meticulous attention to detail in all paperwork. After reviewing the evidence, the arbitrator chooses what they determine to be the appropriate remedy. The arbitrator may decide to require further repair attempts on the vehicle and deny the claim, or compel the manufacturer to provide a replacement vehicle of equal value or a buyback of the vehicle.
Are There Downsides to Choosing Arbitration for a California Lemon Law Claim?
Manufacturers may recommend arbitration over court because it is less expensive for them and the car owner’s ability to conduct discovery is limited. A manufacturer must pay the claimant’s legal fees and court costs in addition to the settlement or buyback of the defective vehicle. However, it’s important to note some potential disadvantages to choosing arbitration. Disadvantages include the following:
- An arbitrator is limited in the remedies they can provide, compared to a court claim.
- Arbitration is a faster, less complex process, but you may be required to pay a portion of the arbitration fee. In the court process with a lemon law attorney, you pay nothing, and the manufacturer pays the attorney’s fees and costs if you win your case.
- If the arbitrator decides against you, you may or may not be able to go forward with a lemon law claim in court, depending on the arbitration contract.
- If the contract allows you to pursue your case in court after a negative outcome in arbitration, it extends the overall amount of time it takes to achieve the buyback, replacement vehicle, or settlement that you deserve.
- In some cases, the arbitrators have a bias toward manufacturers that may adversely impact the outcome of your case.
You don’t have to accept the vehicle manufacturer’s suggestion of going to arbitration. Instead, it’s to your advantage to request a free consultation with a California Lemon Law lawyer who will evaluate your case and inform you of your options.
How Can Young & Young Help My California Lemon Law Case?
Whether the manufacturer of your defective vehicle is pushing your case toward arbitration, or you’ve already had a denial of your claim from an arbitrator, contact Young & Young, APC to speak to a lemon law lawyer who is ready to represent your best interests throughout the California Lemon Law process.
