Lemon Law and MM act

[RPM90]

I found this little tidbit, which may be helpful to some.
Here it is:

Lemon law cases can be brought under the Magnuson-Moss Act even if your state’s Lemon Law doesn’t cover your claim. For example, if your warranty and/or the lemon law period is expired, you can still bring a breach of warranty claim under the Magnuson Moss Act as long as the problems occurred during the vehicle’s warranty period.

Seems that even though Lemon law is state conditional, the MM act can also provide some LL protection as well.
I've read some threads where I think this could apply and help.

The website I got this from is:
http://www.thelemonlawyers.com/magnu...act-intro.html

I know it's a legal firm, and I'm sure they want business, but rest assured I am NOT soliciting for them. I just found that tidbit of info quite interesting and educational for anyone who may need it.

[rsjean]

Unless explicitly disallowed under State code the Federal mandate almost always stands is my understanding.

Originally Posted by RPM90

I found this little tidbit, which may be helpful to some.
Here it is:

Lemon law cases can be brought under the Magnuson-Moss Act even if your state’s Lemon Law doesn’t cover your claim. For example, if your warranty and/or the lemon law period is expired, you can still bring a breach of warranty claim under the Magnuson Moss Act as long as the problems occurred during the vehicle’s warranty period.

Seems that even though Lemon law is state conditional, the MM act can also provide some LL protection as well.
I've read some threads where I think this could apply and help.

The website I got this from is:
http://www.thelemonlawyers.com/magnu...act-intro.html

I know it's a legal firm, and I'm sure they want business, but rest assured I am NOT soliciting for them. I just found that tidbit of info quite interesting and educational for anyone who may need it.

[onefastman]

That would be correct, federal supercedes state law.

My question is can I file a claim to lemon the car when the clutch has gone out twice within 16,000 miles. The first was at 9K under warranty, the 2nd at 15,300 not under warranty. I am very sure that the second was because of the quality of workmanship. The sm even told me that it was the first clutch they had done. I didnt abuse it and only tracked it once, where as the last I drove it a lot harder and went to the track weekly for an entire season pulling 1.8 60's.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by onefastman

That would be correct, federal supercedes state law.

My question is can I file a claim to lemon the car when the clutch has gone out twice within 16,000 miles. The first was at 9K under warranty, the 2nd at 15,300 not under warranty. I am very sure that the second was because of the quality of workmanship. The sm even told me that it was the first clutch they had done. I didnt abuse it and only tracked it once, where as the last I drove it a lot harder and went to the track weekly for an entire season pulling 1.8 60's.

The clutch is going to be tricky IMO. It's a wear item, and subject to operator error/abuse induced failure. Even if you didn't abuse yours, it's giong to be hard to prove.

[rsjean]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

The clutch is going to be tricky IMO. It's a wear item, and subject to operator error/abuse induced failure. Even if you didn't abuse yours, it's giong to be hard to prove.

True.

However if you are serious about it, SAVE YOUR PARTS. Have them evaluated by someone certified in such a way as to have expert witness status in court. Let them evaluate the part, damage and root cause and issue a written statement. That might shake the opposition off their foundation.

But obviously you'd have to really serious about the situation.

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by rsjean

Unless explicitly disallowed under State code the Federal mandate almost always stands is my understanding.

Technically speaking, a state law or "code" can not disallow a federal law.

But, I'm not sure I understand your comment as it relates to the quoted MM act. Can you explain further what you mean by your comment?

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by onefastman

That would be correct, federal supercedes state law.

My question is can I file a claim to lemon the car when the clutch has gone out twice within 16,000 miles. The first was at 9K under warranty, the 2nd at 15,300 not under warranty. I am very sure that the second was because of the quality of workmanship. The sm even told me that it was the first clutch they had done. I didnt abuse it and only tracked it once, where as the last I drove it a lot harder and went to the track weekly for an entire season pulling 1.8 60's.

Unless there is an underlying cause for the premature clutch wear, it is a "wear" item as others have stated.

But, why do you think your first clutch failed?
If you didn't abuse it, and there is not evidence of abuse, then I would wonder why it failed. And, more so, why did the second fail as well?
Clutch wear, normal wear, probably wouldn't be a lemon issue.
But, 2 clutches in 15k miles would have me wanting to know why this happened. It's much too early to have 1 let alone 2 go out within those miles, IF you drive the car normally.

Ask the dealer tech for an explanation as to what he thinks is the cause. Just because this is their 1st 1 series clutch that shouldn't be a touch job for an experienced mechanic. There isn't anything special about our clutch.
If you find an underlying cause and they can't fix it, then you would have lemon status.
If you don't like their answer, and you feel there is something mechanically wrong, and not your driving, then you can go to trans specialist to get their finding.

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by rsjean

True.

However if you are serious about it, SAVE YOUR PARTS. Have them evaluated by someone certified in such a way as to have expert witness status in court. Let them evaluate the part, damage and root cause and issue a written statement. That might shake the opposition off their foundation.

But obviously you'd have to really serious about the situation.

Good advice there.

[jkp1187]

Originally Posted by RPM90

Technically speaking, a state law or "code" can not disallow a federal law.

This is correct.

Generally, state laws can provide additional privileges/protections for state citizens beyond what is called for by federal law (which I'm guessing is what rsjean meant to say here,) but states cannot 'nullify', if you will, Federal law just by passing their own statute.

[DISCLAIMER: This is not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created by your review of the information in your post. If you need legal advice on this or any other issue, please hire and consult your own counsel.]

[onefastman]

I will look into this, they did not give any feedback other than the clutch did NOT show signs of abuse nor did the fly wheel or they would not have been able to warranty it. By my treatment of the first and how kind I was to the second I would be surprised if it were anything different. My concern with the second is that since there was "no damage to the DMF" and that bmw does not recommend that they resurface it so they put a new clutch on an old flywheel that has already been worn. From everything I have read it is good practice to resurface the fly wheel so they wear evenly.

I also have access to many kinds of free legal help as my father has 30+ attorneys that could help me file and if need be litigate.

[esses]

Originally Posted by jkp1187

This is correct.

Generally, state laws can provide additional privileges/protections for state citizens beyond what is called for by federal law (which I'm guessing is what rsjean meant to say here,) but states cannot 'nullify', if you will, Federal law just by passing their own statute.

Kind of. But not really. Federal field vs issue preemption, choice of law/conflict of law, and constitutionality come into play.

The short answer is that if your state has a lemon law, you will probably want to go with that. Federal court is more expensive.

The clutch is a wear item, but if it does not survive its usable life you may still have a claim. Really depends on the facts. E.g., if you post vids ripping 12s at the local strip your claim is going nowhere.

[onefastman]

noted

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by esses

Kind of. But not really. Federal field vs issue preemption, choice of law/conflict of law, and constitutionality come into play.

The short answer is that if your state has a lemon law, you will probably want to go with that. Federal court is more expensive.

The clutch is a wear item, but if it does not survive its usable life you may still have a claim. Really depends on the facts. E.g., if you post vids ripping 12s at the local strip your claim is going nowhere.

We all agree on point 3.

But, what do you mean with the first statement?
And, let's keep this separate. The MM act can give remedy to someone where the state law may be exhausted or not in play, or compliance.

Then, a comment was made about state vs federal law.
Federal supercedes state law.
Now, you're saying "kind of", "But not really"
What do you mean by that?
You seems to imply that state law can supercede federal law.

Granted, it would be easier to use the state laws, but the things I posted was for people who do not have that remedy, for whatever reason. Thus, the MM act can give them some remedy.

[jkp1187]

Originally Posted by esses

Kind of. But not really. Federal field vs issue preemption, choice of law/conflict of law, and constitutionality come into play.

Well, of course, but the issue presented was whether or not state law could trump federal. No, it can't.