60 Second Lemon Law Assessment™
by Kahn & Associates - October 15th, 2026
Repeated trips to a dealership can turn a vehicle warranty problem into a serious disruption, especially when the same defect returns or the vehicle sits waiting on parts. For Boca Raton drivers, repair orders and warranty records are what show whether this is an ordinary repair history or a manufacturer that cannot timely fix the vehicle.
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 ask. Contact Kahn & Associates for a case review or call 1-888-536-6671. As of the date of this article we are in our 30th year of focused work on manufacturer breach of warranty claims.
A Lemon Law attorney serving Boca Raton can review the vehicle’s repair history, warranty coverage, and the manufacturer’s responses to determine whether Florida Lemon Law or a federal warranty claim fits. Which one applies depends on the vehicle, the defect, and the records.
A vehicle problem becomes serious when it keeps returning after repair. For a Boca Raton driver, that interferes with commuting, work, school schedules, and family responsibilities, and it can mean arranging rides or renting another vehicle while the car sits at the dealership.
Repeated visits also build a record. Each repair order identifies the reported problem, the work performed, and whether the concern was resolved. That timeline is what distinguishes a single repair from an ongoing manufacturer breach of warranty, which is why preserving every repair order matters more than any other step you can take on your own.
Waiting carries a cost beyond the inconvenience. Every month you keep driving the vehicle and adding miles gives the manufacturer an argument that the defect is not substantially impairing its use, value, or safety. A vehicle driven for a long stretch after the repairs looks, to a manufacturer’s lawyer, like a vehicle that works.
Florida Lemon Law may be relevant when a motor vehicle has a significant defect affecting its use, value, or safety, and the manufacturer or its authorized service agent has been unable to correct it within a reasonable number of attempts, or the vehicle has been out of service for an unreasonable amount of time. Repeated trips to a repair facility do not, by themselves, mean a consumer qualifies.
Florida measures its coverage from the date the manufacturer originally delivered the vehicle, and the rights period ends 24 months after that date. That matters for used vehicles: one resold early in its life can still fall inside the window, while an older used purchase will not.
A vehicle outside that window is not outside the lemon laws. The federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act turns on the existence of a written manufacturer warranty rather than the vehicle’s age or mileage, and it does not require the vehicle to be under warranty today so long as repairs were performed under the manufacturer’s warranty or extended warranty. That makes it the route that fits many used and certified pre-owned purchases, and it is why a claim should be evaluated under both state and federal law rather than tested against the Florida statute alone.
The two frameworks also differ on attorney fees. State Lemon Law provisions commonly say fees shall be paid to a prevailing consumer; Magnuson-Moss says they may be awarded. In practice most claims resolve by negotiation, where the manufacturer-paid fee is typically agreed between the parties as part of the total recovery. Either way, you are not required to pay us any out-of-pocket fees or costs, win or lose. We handle manufacturer breach of warranty claims under both frameworks, and not dealer-fraud or sales-practice claims. More on Florida Lemon Law rights.
Florida measures two things, and they count separately. The first is how many times the same nonconformity has been back for repair. The second is how many days the vehicle has been out of service, meaning days it sat unavailable because of warranty repair work rather than routine maintenance. Those days do not have to be consecutive; they add up across visits, and a vehicle can reach a meaningful total through one long stay waiting on parts or several shorter ones.
Both counts matter because Florida attaches consequences to specific numbers. Reaching one threshold can trigger a procedural step; reaching another can shift the legal burden onto the manufacturer. That is why the dates on your repair orders, and the dates the vehicle actually came back to you, are worth more than a general sense that the car has been in the shop too often.
Florida ties its process to specific points in the repair history, including a formal written notice step that gives the manufacturer a final opportunity to address the problem. That step is where an otherwise strong claim can be weakened by a procedural misstep, which is a reason to involve counsel early rather than after the repair attempts have run out. The statutory language is in Florida Statute Section 681.104.
One term is worth defining, because it does a lot of work in the statute. A presumption does not decide a case. It shifts the burden: rather than the consumer proving the manufacturer had a reasonable number of opportunities to repair the vehicle, the manufacturer has to show it did not. That is a real advantage, though the manufacturer can still contest whether the visits involved the same nonconformity and whether the defect is substantial.
| Situation | What it may mean | Records to preserve |
| Three repair attempts for the same nonconformity | A formal written step may be required at this point, giving the manufacturer a final opportunity to repair. It is not simply another service appointment. | Repair orders showing the complaint, diagnosis, dates, and work performed. |
| 15 or more cumulative days out of service | The same written-notice procedure may be triggered on this basis instead. Routine maintenance downtime is excluded. | Each repair-in and repair-out date, with anything confirming the vehicle was unavailable. |
| 30 or more cumulative days out of service | This may support Florida’s statutory presumption, subject to the law’s other requirements. | A continuous timeline covering every qualifying period, including the defect involved. |
| After notice is given | The manufacturer gets a short, defined window to respond and attempt a final repair. Missing a step here can limit the options that remain. | Copies of the notice, delivery confirmation, responses, and any final repair documentation. |
The 15-day trigger and the 30-day presumption are not interchangeable. Reaching 15 cumulative days may start a notice process; reaching 30 may support a presumption. Neither number alone guarantees eligibility or a particular remedy. You also do not need to reach either before calling: two repair visits for the same issue, or 21 calendar days out of service, is enough to have our firm review the record. For more on tracking qualifying downtime, see these Florida out-of-service day rules.
If a claim supports a repurchase, the mileage offset affects what is ultimately returned to you. Florida’s approach is not a first-repair formula. The relevant mileage is generally considered at settlement, so the vehicle’s use through the resolution of the claim matters, and the calculation depends on the facts rather than a number that can be responsibly estimated from mileage alone.
A repurchase involves more than the vehicle’s purchase price. Florida law provides for a reasonable offset for use and requires that a refund or replacement include reasonably incurred collateral and incidental charges. The outstanding loan is also paid off: the lienholder is paid directly, and you are separately returned what you have put into the vehicle, so the financing is retired rather than carried into your next vehicle. Attorney fees belong in the picture as well, which is why pursuing the claim may not reduce your recovery.
Florida law also provides for a replacement vehicle in appropriate circumstances, while giving the consumer an unconditional right to choose a refund instead if you win. Beyond those two, a claim may resolve for cash. Which remedy is available is usually not the consumer’s choice: it normally depends on whether the claim qualifies under the state statute at all. Where it does not, cash is typically the only offer, with the matter resolving under federal law as a breach of warranty. If a claim does resolve for cash, you remain free to trade or sell the vehicle afterward, the money can go toward negative equity or a down payment on a replacement, or you can simply keep it. See our Florida mileage-offset calculation for how the numbers work.
A useful initial review starts with your account of what happened, not with a promise that a claim will qualify. If you are comparing attorneys for a Boca Raton claim, these are the questions worth asking.
The review begins with your account, not a stack of paperwork. Tell us the vehicle’s symptoms, when they began, how they have affected your daily life, and what the dealership or manufacturer has done so far. You do not need to judge whether that meets a legal standard such as substantial impairment of use, value, or safety. That is our job. We represent Florida consumers statewide and handle the process remotely, by phone, email, and electronic documents.
Once the matter is underway, repair orders, invoices, warranty documents, purchase or lease records, and any photos or video you captured can be submitted electronically, and we can request anything missing on your behalf. Gaps are normal and are not a reason to delay the call. We then evaluate the facts under the Florida and federal requirements that may apply, examining warranty status, the nature of the nonconformity, the repair attempts, and the effect on the vehicle. Most claims resolve without a lawsuit.
Two repair visits for the same issue, or 21 calendar days out of service, is enough to start. Contact us for a free case review or call 1-888-536-6671..
A claim may be possible when a covered vehicle has a substantial defect affecting its use, value, or safety, and the manufacturer has not corrected it after a reasonable number of opportunities, or the vehicle has been out of service for an unreasonable amount of time. Florida’s process also includes specific notice rules, so repeated repairs alone may not decide eligibility. Florida Statute 681.104 describes the relevant procedures.
No. Those are statutory thresholds, not the point at which it makes sense to call. Our rule of thumb is that two visits for the same issue, or 21 calendar days out of service, is enough to request a free case review.
Possibly. Magnuson-Moss turns on the existence of a written manufacturer warranty rather than the vehicle’s age, and it does not require the vehicle to be under warranty today so long as repairs were performed under the manufacturer’s warranty or extended warranty. It is a fact-specific analysis, not an automatic alternative.
No. We do not maintain a Boca Raton office, and no office visit is required. Florida consumers can submit records electronically, and we handle cases remotely through online forms, electronic documents, and digital signatures.
You are not required to pay our fees out-of-pocket, win or lose. In a negotiated resolution the manufacturer-paid fee is typically agreed between the parties as part of the total recovery rather than awarded by a court.
Florida’s rights period runs from the date of original delivery and does not pause while you keep trying to get the vehicle fixed, so the sooner the file is reviewed, the more options remain.
Two repair visits for the same issue, or 21 calendar days out of service, is enough to find out where you stand. Contact us for a case review or call 1-888-536-6671. There are no out-of-pocket fees or costs to you, win or lose.
.
*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.
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.
Every dealership visit can strengthen or weaken the record behind your warranty claim. A missing date, vagu...
Kahn & Associates, L.L.C. is an Ohio-based lemon law firm that represents consumers with defective ...
A missing repair date can weaken an otherwise well-documented warranty claim. A clear day-by-day record sho...
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.