Have A Case? Call Us
1 888-536-6671
60 Second Lemon Law Assessment™
60 Second Lemon Law Assessment™
by Kahn & Associates - July 15th, 2026
A vehicle that keeps going back to the dealership wears on you in a way that has little to do with money. The repairs themselves are usually covered under warranty. What costs you is everything around them — arranging the drop-off, arranging a ride, waiting on a part, picking the vehicle up, and then doing it all again a few weeks later. With some conditions there is a further worry, which is whether the vehicle is safe to drive while you wait.
Understanding how the lemon law works starts with a single idea: you may have a lemon after a reasonable number of repair attempts, or after a reasonable amount of time out of service. Every lemon law statute gives the vehicle manufacturer a fair opportunity to correct a nonconformity that substantially impairs the vehicle’s use, value, or safety. The statutes then set benchmarks for when that opportunity has been used up — commonly three or four attempts at the same condition, or roughly 30 days at the repair shop. Since 1996 our firm has maintained a 97 percent win rate, including cases filed in court rather than only those resolved before suit, for thousands of owners left with vehicles the manufacturer could not repair.
Every state draws these lines differently. This guide explains what a reasonable number of repair attempts means under both state lemon laws and the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. You do not need to wait until you hit a statutory threshold to ask about your own vehicle. Our rule of thumb is simple: if your vehicle has been in for the same issue at least twice, or has been out of service for at least 21 calendar days, request a free case review and let us look at it.
A vehicle may qualify as a lemon when a nonconformity substantially impairs its use, value, or safety and survives a reasonable number of repair attempts. The obvious question is how many trips to the dealership that takes. Rather than leave the answer to a jury every time, most states answer it by statute, setting a number of attempts or a period out of service that triggers a legal presumption in the owner’s favor.
Three or four attempts at the same condition will satisfy the test in most states. The number varies, but the purpose does not: the repair record has to show the vehicle manufacturer cannot timely fix the problem. At our firm we generally look for three or more failed repairs of a single nonconformity, or eight or more total repair visits across several different issues or number of days out of service. Any of these patterns tend to show the manufacturer has had a fair opportunity and used it up.
State law then requires the manufacturer to repurchase or replace a vehicle that meets the threshold. The Ohio lemon law is a good illustration of how these provisions are built. You do have to give the dealership a genuine chance to make the repair before a claim can proceed. Once the condition survives that chance, the law treats the manufacturer as having had enough time.
You do not necessarily need a high number of repair visits to qualify. Most states also count the days your vehicle sits at the dealership. A vehicle out of service for a reasonable amount of time — 30 or more days in most of our states — can support a claim on that basis alone. The days need not be consecutive; they accumulate across the coverage period. North Carolina measures it differently, at 20 business days within any 12-month period, but the principle is identical. This matters most when a single repair drags on for weeks while the dealership waits on a part. And in many cases, there is no requirement that the defect continue to exist.
Repair orders are what prove the case. Each one records the date you dropped the vehicle off, the date you picked it up, the complaint you reported, and the work performed. Orders that describe the customer complaint consistently from visit to visit are more persuasive than a scattered record, because they show one condition recurring rather than a series of unrelated problems.
That said, do not let paperwork stop you from calling. You do not need to organize your repair orders or build a chart before requesting a free case review. It is helpful if you have them handy, but it is not necessary.
One point worth understanding: meeting a statutory threshold creates a presumption, not an automatic win. Manufacturers do contest whether the same nonconformity was involved, whether the days out of service were attributable to repair, and whether the condition substantially impairs the vehicle. That is where representation matters.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is the federal statute governing written warranties on consumer products. State lemon laws are generally limited to new vehicles; the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act reaches considerably further, and it often supplies a claim where a state statute does not.
It is worth separating two things that sound alike. A warranty claim can simply mean bringing your vehicle in for a covered repair. A breach of warranty claim is different: it is a legal claim seeking compensation because the warranty was not honored. Lemon laws and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act govern that second category. When this article refers to a claim, it means the legal kind.
Most state lemon laws reach new vehicles only, which leaves a great many owners without a state remedy. The federal act fills that gap. Importantly, a vehicle does not have to be under warranty right now for a claim to exist. There may be an implied warranty claim as well as a claim for breach of the written warranty covering repairs already performed under it. What we do need is that repairs were made under the manufacturer’s warranty or the manufacturer’s extended warranty.
The federal act also covers a wider range of products than most state lemon laws — boats, motorhomes, and ATVs among them. It can extend to vehicles used in business as well. State statutes such as the Michigan lemon law generally limit coverage to vehicles bought for personal, family, or household use. Under Magnuson-Moss, courts ask whether the type of product is normally used for personal purposes rather than examining one particular buyer’s use, which is why a work truck may still qualify, depending on the court. The federal act can function as a safety net for owners who fall outside the narrower state law definitions.
Both frameworks turn on whether the vehicle manufacturer had a reasonable number of attempts, but what you recover can differ. A state lemon law claim typically produces a repurchase or a replacement vehicle. A federal claim more often produces damages measured by diminished value — the difference between what the vehicle would have been worth as warranted and what it is actually worth with the condition. That is usually less than a full refund, though a federal claim can also result in payment for repair costs and incidental expenses.
Attorney’s fees work differently as well. Many state lemon laws provide that fees shall be paid to a prevailing owner. That is mandatory language. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is permissive: it provides that fees may be awarded to a prevailing consumer.
Each state defines the threshold its own way. To prevail, you have to show the vehicle manufacturer had a fair opportunity to repair and did not succeed, except in some cases with days out of service. In most states that means three or four attempts at the same condition, or roughly 30 days out of service, within a defined window of time and mileage.
Ohio looks to whether the nonconformity persists after three attempts, and also recognizes eight total repair visits across any combination of conditions. Michigan and North Carolina set the same-condition threshold at four. Where the nonconformity is one likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, Ohio lemon law requires only a single unsuccessful attempt — a rarely used provision that may matter enormously in brake, steering, and restraint system cases. Days out of service count independently of the number of visits.
There is a procedural step that catches many owners off guard when filing suit on a lemon law case, and it is why some otherwise strong claims fail. Florida, Michigan, and North Carolina each require written notice to the vehicle manufacturer before the presumption attaches, giving it a final opportunity to cure. The notice generally has to go to the manufacturer directly rather than to the dealership, by registered or certified mail.
Florida is the strictest. After the third failed attempt at the same nonconformity, or once the vehicle has been out of service for 15 cumulative days, written notice by registered or express mail is mandatory. The manufacturer then has 10 days to designate a repair facility and 10 more to complete a final attempt. North Carolina requires certified mail and allows the manufacturer 15 days to cure. Michigan requires notice after the third attempt or 25 days out of service. Miss the notice and the manufacturer has a clean procedural defense no matter how bad the repair history looks. This is among the most common reasons an unrepresented owner loses ground on a viable claim.
When a vehicle manufacturer repurchases a vehicle, most states allow it to deduct an allowance for miles driven. The formulas differ meaningfully, and they are not all measured from the first repair attempt. Ohio is the outlier: it allows for no mileage offset at all, on a repurchase or on a replacement, which means an Ohio owner recovers materially more than an owner in a neighboring state on identical facts. Florida calculates the offset on mileage at settlement. Michigan counts miles before the first repair plus miles over 25,000. North Carolina uses mileage at the third repair attempt, or at the 20th cumulative business day out of service if that comes first. Pennsylvania takes the lesser of 10 cents per mile at first repair or 10 percent of the purchase price.
The table below compares the standards across the states where we practice. You can also learn more about these rules in our frequently asked lemon law questions section.
| Repair Attempt Standard | Written Notice to Manufacturer | Mileage Offset | |
| Ohio | 3 attempts for the same nonconformity, 8 total attempts for any nonconformity, 30 days out of service, or 1 attempt for a condition likely to cause death or serious bodily injury | Not required | None, on a repurchase or a replacement |
| Florida | 3 attempts for the same nonconformity, or 30 cumulative days out of service | Required. Registered or express mail after the 3rd attempt or 15 days out of service; the manufacturer gets a final repair opportunity | Mileage at the time of settlement |
| Michigan | 4 attempts for the same nonconformity, or 30 days out of service | Required. Written notice after the 3rd attempt or 25 days out of service | Miles before the first repair, plus miles over 25,000 |
| North Carolina | 4 attempts for the same nonconformity, or 20 business days out of service in any 12-month period | Required. Certified mail; the manufacturer has 15 days to cure | Mileage at the third repair attempt or the 20th cumulative business day out of service, whichever comes first |
| Pennsylvania | 3 attempts for the same nonconformity, or 30 days out of service | Condition must be reported within 1 year, 12,000 miles, or the warranty term, whichever comes first | Lesser of 10 cents per mile at first repair or 10% of the purchase price |
Once you meet the standard, the vehicle manufacturer is generally obligated to replace the vehicle or refund what you paid. Expect it to argue that the attempts do not count — that the visits involved different conditions, that the days out of service were not repair-related, or that the nonconformity does not substantially impair the vehicle. That is where experience earns its keep. After nearly 30 years we know the tactics manufacturers use, we know the attorneys who represent them, and we know who to reach inside each manufacturer to get a claim resolved quickly. If your vehicle has a condition the manufacturer and their dealership cannot fix, contact Kahn & Associates today for a free evaluation of your claim.
Meeting the threshold is the pivot point of a lemon law claim. Once the vehicle has spent an unreasonable amount of time out of service or has failed to be repaired after a reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer must provide a remedy. Depending on the state and the facts, that means a repurchase, a replacement vehicle, or a cash settlement.
If the vehicle manufacturer cannot correct the nonconformity, the remedy is generally a repurchase or a replacement. A repurchase returns the purchase price along with sales tax, title and registration fees, finance charges you paid, and incidental costs such as towing and rental. Where state law permits, the manufacturer may deduct a mileage offset, calculated under whichever formula that state uses. Our lemon laws overview compares how these thresholds and remedies differ by state. The purpose of the statute is straightforward: to put you back in the position you occupied before you bought the vehicle.
A cash settlement usually comes into play when a vehicle does not qualify under the state lemon law for a repurchase or a replacement. In that situation the claim is resolved under the federal lemon law, essentially as a breach of warranty with cash as the remedy. It does happen that a client who qualifies for a repurchase would rather keep the vehicle and take cash instead, but that is the less common path. Where a claim is resolved before a lawsuit is filed, the attorney’s fee is agreed between the parties rather than awarded by a court, which is how fees are set after a trial verdict.
Cost should not decide whether you pursue a valid claim. We handle lemon law matters on a pure contingency basis. You are not required to pay us any out-of-pocket fees or costs, win or lose — not to open the file, not while the claim is pending, and not at the end of it.
That structure exists because Congress and the state legislatures built fee-shifting into these statutes deliberately, so that owners could take on manufacturers who have in-house warranty counsel and outside firms on retainer. Our firm has recovered more than $65 million for over 13,000 clients across nearly 30 years, with a very high win rate including cases filed in court, as of the date of this article. If you think your vehicle may be a lemon, reach out for a free case evaluation and we will review your repair history with you.
Repair visits are only half the analysis. Most lemon laws also track the total days your vehicle sits at the dealership, known as time out of service. A vehicle can qualify on that basis alone, even where the dealership has attempted only a small number of repairs.
In most states the benchmark is 30 cumulative days out of service. The days need not run consecutively; each day the vehicle is unavailable for repair adds to the total. Once the total reaches 30 within the applicable time and mileage window, the law generally presumes the vehicle is a lemon. North Carolina uses 20 business days within any 12-month period instead. Our frequently asked lemon law questions guide sets out the windows that apply in each state.
The strength of the out-of-service standard in Ohio traces to a single case. Craig Kahn and his team handled the landmark case Royster v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. from the trial court all the way to the Ohio Supreme Court in 2001, establishing the legal precedent that 30 or more cumulative days out of service creates a presumption of lemon law relief, regardless of whether the vehicle is ultimately repaired. That decision is now used by professors and attorneys and continues to benefit lemon owners in Ohio and beyond.
That last point is what gave the case its reach. Toyota argued that no presumption should apply because the vehicle had eventually been repaired — it had sat 55 days waiting on a part. The Court rejected that reading, holding the presumption attaches under R.C. 1345.73(B) whether or not the vehicle is fixed after the thirty-day mark. Our Ohio lemon law page covers the decision and its effect in more detail.
Get a written repair order every time you leave the vehicle, and check that it shows both the drop-off date and the pickup date. Loaner and rental paperwork help establish the same timeline. If the dealership is waiting on a part, ask for that in writing. None of this is a prerequisite to calling us, though. If your vehicle has been in for the same issue at least twice, or has been or will be out of service for at least 21 calendar days, that is enough to warrant a free case review.
Not every vehicle with a nonconformity fits within a state lemon law. The statutes impose limits on vehicle age, mileage, and how the vehicle is used. Falling outside those limits does not leave you without options, because the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act frequently covers what the state statute does not.
State lemon laws generally cover new vehicles only. If you purchased a used vehicle with time remaining on the original manufacturer warranty, or a certified pre-owned vehicle with its own written warranty, your state statute may not apply. Magnuson-Moss often does. The vehicle does not need to be under warranty at this moment, but repairs must have been performed under the manufacturer’s warranty or the manufacturer’s extended warranty for us to take the case.
One scope note: our practice is limited to claims against vehicle manufacturers for warranty matters. We do not handle claims against car dealers for fraud or related sales practices violations. An auto fraud attorney is better suited to handle those cases.
State lemon laws typically limit coverage to vehicles purchased for personal, family, or household use, which can exclude commercial vehicles and sometimes a vehicle you rely on for work. Magnuson-Moss draws the line differently, so a truck or van used commercially may still be covered. For commercial vehicles in particular, other laws also apply, including express and implied warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code.
The trade-off for broader coverage is a narrower remedy. A state claim can produce a repurchase of the vehicle. A federal claim is generally measured by the difference between the vehicle’s value as warranted and its actual value with the nonconformity, though repair costs and incidental expenses may be recoverable as well. A successful Magnuson-Moss claim can still result in substantial compensation, together with attorney fees. Where both statutes apply, we frequently pursue them together.
Most states require three or four unsuccessful attempts at the same nonconformity. Many also recognize a reasonable amount of time out of service — commonly 30 cumulative days — as an independent basis. Florida, Michigan, and North Carolina additionally require written notice to the manufacturer before the presumption attaches before filing arbitration or a lawsuit. You do not need to reach any of these numbers before calling: two visits for the same issue, or 21 days out of service, is reason enough to request a review.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act does not fix a number. It requires that the vehicle manufacturer be given a reasonable opportunity to repair conditions covered by a written warranty, and leaves what is reasonable to the finder of fact. That flexibility helps owners whose vehicles have intermittent or unusual problems that do not fit neatly within a state statute’s counting rules.
State lemon laws generally cover new vehicles only. The federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act reaches used vehicles more broadly. The vehicle does not need to be under warranty today, but repairs must have been made under the manufacturer’s warranty or the manufacturer’s extended warranty. There may also be an implied warranty claim alongside the written warranty claim.
In most states, 30 cumulative days out of service creates a presumption that the vehicle is a lemon. The days need not be consecutive; they add up across the coverage period. In Ohio, the Royster decision confirmed the presumption applies even if the vehicle is eventually repaired after the thirty-day mark. This same language appears in many other state lemon law statutes. North Carolina applies a 20-business-day standard instead.
Yes, and it is common to plead both. The state lemon law offers the stronger remedy where the vehicle qualifies, while Magnuson-Moss reaches vehicles that fall outside state coverage. Pleading both preserves your options if the manufacturer contests eligibility under one of them.
Under a state lemon law, recovery generally includes the purchase price along with taxes, fees, and finance charges, less any mileage offset the state requires. Ohio does not allow a mileage offset. Under federal law, recovery is typically measured by the difference between the vehicle’s value as warranted and its actual value. Either way, you are not required to pay us any out-of-pocket fees or costs, win or lose. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome in any particular case.
If your vehicle has been to the repair shop repeatedly without a fix, or has spent more time at the dealership than is reasonable, you may have a claim. Kahn & Associates represents consumers in Ohio, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Since 1996 we have recovered more than $65 million for over 13,000 clients, with a very high success rate, as of the date of this article.
You are not required to pay us any out-of-pocket fees or costs, win or lose. When a claim resolves, the vehicle manufacturer usually pays our entire fee. Our team will review your repair history and explain your options under both state and federal law, and you do not need to have your paperwork organized first.
Call (216) 621-6101 or fill out our free case review form to speak with our friendly lemon team today.
*Disclaimer: The information contained in this Website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as offering legal advice, or creating an attorney client relationship between the reader and the author. While we aim for accuracy, the law is constantly changing and we make no guarantees regarding the completeness or timeliness of the information. You should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in this Website without seeking appropriate legal advice about your individual facts and circumstances from an attorney licensed in your state.
To see if you qualify, fill out the form below or call us at 1-888-536-6671 – No Office Visit Needed!
I had a great experience with Kahn & Associates! They made the process of dealing with an extremely frustrating lemon situation painless. They have very quick response times and everyone I dealt with was very friendly and helpful. Would definitely recommend!
Kahn and Associates did an awesome job with our lemon law case! We were getting nowhere with VW Customer Service and decided to hire an attorney who specialized with lemon law cases. We couldn’t be happier with the outcome. We were able to get a full refund on our lemon VW Atlas.
What a great experience! I was on the fence about hiring an attorney for my ongoing automotive issues and continued frustration with the manufacturer. It was a very simple process and I am very grateful Kahn and Associates for helping get me a settlement!
Real Honest attorneys!!! They are the real deal! I went back and forth with them and they explained to me every step and my rights under the law! I give them 5 stars because I won!!! Yes and my check is coming to me much sooner than I thought! I was stuck ! I own a brand new car and the dealer was giving me a hard time !
This page has been written, edited, and reviewed by a team of legal writers following our comprehensive editorial guidelines. This page was approved by Attorney Craig A. Kahn, who has more than 20 years of legal experience in lemon law.
Kahn & Associates, L.L.C. is an Ohio-based lemon law firm that represents consumers with defective ...
You’ve been back to the dealership so many times for the same issue that the service team knows your orde...
If you recently purchased a used car in Ohio and it has been in and out of the repair shop with no end in s...
Stuck with a defective car in Ohio? State Lemon Laws protect you. Get a refund, replacement, or cash settlement. Learn your rights today!
Florida Lemon Laws cover new and used vehicles. If your car’s a lemon, you deserve compensation. Let us help you fight for justice!
Michigan’s Lemon Law protects you from faulty vehicles. Don’t settle for endless repairs—claim your refund or replacement now.
North Carolina Lemon Laws ensure defective vehicles are replaced or refunded. Know your rights and take action today!
Pennsylvania Lemon Law covers new cars with repeated issues. Get the compensation you deserve. Click to learn more!
To see if you qualify, fill out the form below or call us at 1-888-536-6671 – No Office Visit Needed!
The Truth About Attorney’s Fees in Lemon Law Cases Learn more
*Disclaimer: The information contained in this Website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as offering legal advice, or creating an attorney client relationship between the reader and the author. While we aim for accuracy, the law is constantly changing and we make no guarantees regarding the completeness or timeliness of the information. You should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in this Website without seeking appropriate legal advice about your individual facts and circumstances from an attorney licensed in your state.
Message Us 
Call Us