If you believe your new vehicle is a lemon, you may hear something that sounds annoying:
“You have to go through arbitration first.”
Sometimes that is true.
Sometimes it depends on the manufacturer’s dispute-resolution program and the specific claim you are pursuing.
And there is an important distinction between a manufacturer’s informal dispute resolution process and court litigation.
Nevada law specifically addresses manufacturer dispute procedures
Nevada law provides that if a manufacturer has established or designated an informal dispute-
settlement procedure that substantially complies with the applicable federal requirements, the buyer must first submit the claim for replacement or refund through that procedure before bringing an action under Nevada’s Lemon Law provision.
This means you should not automatically skip the manufacturer’s designated dispute process.
What is the dispute-resolution process?
Manufacturers may establish programs through which consumers present their vehicle disputes to an independent dispute-resolution mechanism.
The process may involve:
- submitting repair records;
- describing the defect;
- explaining the requested remedy;
- providing purchase documents;
- providing warranty information;
- responding to manufacturer statements; and
- participating in a hearing or review.
The exact process depends on the manufacturer.
Is arbitration the same as going to court?
No.
The procedures, evidence, deadlines and consequences can be different.
That is why you should understand exactly what process the manufacturer is requiring.
Ask:
What program is this?
Is it required under Nevada law?
Is the decision binding?
What rights do I retain afterward?
What remedy am I requesting?
Don’t accidentally ask for the wrong remedy
This can be an important strategic issue.
If your goal is a buyback, say so.
If your goal is a replacement vehicle, say so.
If you are seeking another remedy under a federal warranty claim, that may require separate consideration.
Nevada’s statute specifically discusses submission of a claim for replacement or refund through a qualifying informal dispute procedure.
Prepare before the hearing or submission
Don’t treat the process like filling out a customer-service survey.
Create a concise chronology.
For example:
January 15: Vehicle delivered.
March 2: Transmission failure.
March 4–12: Dealer repair.
April 8: Same problem returned.
April 10–17: Second repair.
May 3: Same problem returned.
May 4–25: Third repair.
June 10: Vehicle returned for fourth repair.
Then identify what you want.
That makes the case much easier to understand.
Bring the documents that prove your story
Important documents can include:
- purchase agreement;
- manufacturer’s warranty;
- repair orders;
- invoices;
- towing records;
- rental records;
- photographs;
- videos;
- emails;
- text messages;
- manufacturer correspondence;
- diagnostic reports; and
- settlement offers.
The goal is to turn your story into evidence.
What if the manufacturer says the vehicle is fixed?
You should be prepared to explain why you disagree.
Don’t simply say:
“It still doesn’t work.”
Explain:
“The vehicle was brought in for the same transmission hesitation four times. The dealership performed software updates and replaced a transmission component. The hesitation returned after each repair.”
That is much stronger.
What if the manufacturer wins the arbitration?
That does not necessarily mean every possible legal theory disappears.
The effect of a dispute-resolution decision depends on the program, the nature of the claim, the governing documents and applicable law.
What if I have a lawyer?
An attorney can help determine:
- whether the dispute process applies;
- what remedy should be requested;
- what documents should be submitted;
- how the repair history should be presented;
- whether there are federal warranty issues;
- whether deadlines are approaching; and
- what should happen after the dispute process concludes.
Don’t wait until the deadline approaches
Nevada law generally requires an action under its Lemon Law provisions to be commenced within 18 months after the original delivery of the vehicle.
Other deadlines can also matter.
The fact that a manufacturer dispute procedure is pending does not mean you should simply ignore every other deadline.
If your vehicle is approaching the statutory time limits, get the situation evaluated promptly.
The bottom line
A manufacturer may have a dispute-resolution procedure that you are required to use before bringing a Nevada Lemon Law action.
It means you should prepare for it.
A well-organized repair history can be far more persuasive than an emotional explanation of how frustrating the vehicle has been.
Take the 30-Second Nevada New Car Problem Quiz
If your new car has been in the shop repeatedly, you don’t have to figure out whether it might be a lemon by yourself.
Take our 30-second Nevada New Car Problem Quiz.
We’ll ask about your vehicle, warranty, repair history and time out of service.
Precision Injury Law represents Nevada consumers with qualifying vehicle warranty and Lemon Law problems.
This site is for informational use only, does not provide legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship through browsing or form submissions.