Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act: Difference between revisions
m notice |
m References archived, also "Toyota" not "toyota" |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
*There are additional requirements imposed upon manufacturers if they choose to advertise a "full warranty." | *There are additional requirements imposed upon manufacturers if they choose to advertise a "full warranty." | ||
*prevents manufactures from using misleading or unfair disclaimers to circumvent their warranty obligations. | *prevents manufactures from using misleading or unfair disclaimers to circumvent their warranty obligations. | ||
**one example of such disclaimers is "warranty void if removed stickers" <ref>https://www.ifixit.com/News/74736/warranty-void-stickers-are-illegal-in-the-us-what-about-elsewhere</ref> | **one example of such disclaimers is "warranty void if removed stickers" <ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20250129195020/https://www.ifixit.com/News/74736/warranty-void-stickers-are-illegal-in-the-us-what-about-elsewhere "Warranty Void Stickers Are Illegal in the US. What about Elsewhere?"] - archive.org - archived 2025-01-29</ref> | ||
In cases of violation, consumers are encouraged to negotiate with warrantors under arbitration. Additionally, the federal government and consumers are able to file civil suits in the courts. | In cases of violation, consumers are encouraged to negotiate with warrantors under arbitration. Additionally, the federal government and consumers are able to file civil suits in the courts. | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
The act is an important piece of legislation, but its enforcement is a mixed bag. Although it is enforced, often the fines are little to nothing, which encourages manufacturers to disregard it. This effectively prevents the act from properly keeping vendors accountable. | The act is an important piece of legislation, but its enforcement is a mixed bag. Although it is enforced, often the fines are little to nothing, which encourages manufacturers to disregard it. This effectively prevents the act from properly keeping vendors accountable. | ||
Toyota held labile for all damages in used car's in-warranty repair case - June 16, 1992. <ref name=":0">https://law.justia.com/cases/north-carolina/court-of-appeals/1992/9110dc643-1.html | Toyota held labile for all damages in used car's in-warranty repair case - June 16, 1992. <ref name=":0">[https://web.archive.org/web/20250129195115/https://law.justia.com/cases/north-carolina/court-of-appeals/1992/9110dc643-1.html "Ismael v. Goodman Toyota"] - archive.org - archived 2025-01-29</ref> | ||
" | |||
"Due to the purchase of the subject vehicle in used `as is' condition, the Defendant (Toyota) dealer assumed and bore no responsibility for subsequent repair of the vehicle or its road worthiness. " the plaintiff (vehicle owner) was found to be correct and the defendant (toyota) was found liable for damages plaintiff (vehicle owner) suffered as a result of that violation<ref name=":0" /> | |||
== References == | |||
<references /> | <references /> | ||