Case Against Toyota Ends in Victory for the Consumer
» Posted July 11, 2016 Resources | Share This Post
In some cases, individuals who have purchased a motor vehicle that turns out to have problems can benefit from taking advantage of the protections provided under California’s lemon law. Actually achieving success can be challenging, though, even though the lemon laws are clearly designed to protect consumers. The complexities of lemon law cases demonstrate why hiring a San Diego lemon law attorney to help is very important when you have a lemon.
While there are sometimes challenges associated with successfully making a claim that your vehicle is a lemon, these types of cases can and do work out in the customer's favor in many situations. Just recently, ABC Action News reported on a couple who won a lemon law case against Toyota.
A Look at What Happened
According to ABC Action News, a disabled Air Force veteran purchased a Toyota Avalon after he got hurt in an accident when the car he previously owned was rear-ended. He wanted all of the safety features he could get in his new car since he knows firsthand the severe impact that car accident injuries can have on an individual.
One of those safety features that was included in his Avalon was a pre-collision avoidance system. The system was supposed to brake automatically in order to avoid an impact with something in front of the vehicle.
Unfortunately, this safety feature did not work properly. Toyota had to recall the system since it started going off when it should not have in more than 30,000 vehicles. The affected cars included the Avalon, Avalon Hybrid, Lexus ES 350, and Lexus ES300H sedans.
In cars with the problems, the front collision avoidance system was reading all sorts of things (like manhole covers) as a threat. The system was braking, the cars were stopping and people were getting rear-ended.
The vet who had purchased the car because he thought it was safe said Toyota gave him the run-around and just turned off the system instead of fixing it. They reportedly put a sticker on the car and told him that the sticker should not be removed. This left him without a collision avoidance system in the vehicle.
This wasn't satisfactory to him because the vet paid $1,900 for a safety feature that did not work properly. He decided to pursue a lemon law claim and according to ABC Action News, he prevailed. He was allowed to give the Avalon back after winning his claim, and he plans to purchase another new vehicle from a different car maker.
Some have speculated that this decision could mean Toyota needs to make changes to how it is handling repair issues with its front collision avoidance system because there could be future lemon law cases against the car manufacturer.
Anyone who believes they have purchased a lemon should know their rights under the lemon law, as they too could have available legal remedies like this veteran did after buying a car that turned out not to work as the car maker had promised.