{"id":1482,"date":"2020-04-18T10:06:02","date_gmt":"2020-04-18T17:06:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wirtzlawstg.wpengine.com\/?p=1482"},"modified":"2022-10-25T19:06:03","modified_gmt":"2022-10-25T23:06:03","slug":"tiene-un-consumidor-de-california-que-solicitar-la-recompra","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/does-a-california-consumer-have-to-request-a-buyback\/","title":{"rendered":"\u00bfTiene un consumidor de California que solicitar una recompra?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><u>No.<\/u><\/strong> The Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (California\u2019s lemon law) does not require that consumers contact manufacturers to request a buyback or replacement vehicle to get one. Instead, the California Lemon Law statute and cases interpreting the it have found that the manufacturers have an affirmative duty to reach out to consumers whose vehicles qualify to offer a buyback or replacement.<\/p>\n<p>In <em>Krotin v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc.<\/em> (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 294, the court concluded \u201c[t]he manufacturer has <u>an affirmative duty <\/u>to replace a vehicle or make restitution to the buyer if the manufacturer is unable to repair the new vehicle after a reasonable number of repair attempts, and the buyer need not reject or revoke acceptance of the vehicle at any time.\u201d (<em>Krotin, supra, <\/em>38 Cal.App.4th at p. 303.) The <em>Krotin <\/em>court recognized that manufacturers have access to the information needed to determine whether vehicles are lemons without a consumer\u2019s specific request for relief because they have access to electronic repair orders and invoices for work done at their dealerships. (<em>Krotin, supra, <\/em>38 Cal.App.4th at p. 303.)<\/p>\n<p>Fifteen years later, this affirmative duty was upheld in <em>Lukather v. General Motors, LLC<\/em> (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 1041. The <em>Krotin <\/em>and <em>Lukather <\/em>courts held that the consumer\u2019s only duty under the Act is to provide the manufacturer with a reasonable opportunity to fix the vehicle.<\/p>\n<p>California consumers do not have to specifically request repurchase or replacement under the lemon law in order to trigger their rights and get their money back.<\/p>\n<p><em>For more information call the experienced trial attorneys at (858) 259-5009 for a free case evaluation.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><strong><u>Disclaimer<\/u>.\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong>The information provided in this post is for informational and educational purposes only regarding aspects of the California Lemon Law.\u00a0 It is intended for California Consumers only.\u00a0 This post is considered an advertisement by attorney Richard M. Wirtz and Wirtz Law APC. You should not rely on any of the information provided in this advertisement and no legal advice is given by the advertisement. No attorney client relationship is established by viewing this advertisement. A written signed engagement agreement between you and Wirtz Law APC is required to create an attorney client relationship. You should immediately consult an attorney who is experienced in California Lemon Law. Attorney Richard M. Wirtz is responsible for the content of this post.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>No. La Ley de Garant\u00eda del Consumidor Song-Beverly (la ley del lim\u00f3n de California) no exige que los consumidores se pongan en contacto con los fabricantes para solicitar la recompra o la sustituci\u00f3n del veh\u00edculo para obtenerla. En su lugar, el estatuto de la Ley del Lim\u00f3n de California y los casos que la interpretan han encontrado que los fabricantes tienen un deber afirmativo de llegar a los consumidores cuyos veh\u00edculos...<\/p>","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1482","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-california-lemon-law"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1482","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1482"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1482\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4295,"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1482\/revisions\/4295"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1482"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1482"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wirtzlaw.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1482"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}