Welcome to the modern age of software problems that can lead to lemon law claims. Actually, this era has been around for a number of years already, and we’re seeing data accumulate about how over-the-air (OTA) fixes can sometimes lead to problems. Not only might they not fix the issue they were intended to, but they can also introduce new problems, which can complicate the situation.
What we’ll look at here is how these OTA repairs are treated under state lemon laws. We’ll see how these fixes can potentially go wrong, and how a lemon law attorney protects clients’ rights when OTA fixes are involved in the claim process.
The Lemon Law Process
At its core, a lemon law claim involves a vehicle that exhibits a substantial defect that severely impacts its use, value or safety. This defect remains unfixable through the state’s allotted number of repair attempts to the manufacturer (often 3–4 repair attempts; consult a lemon law lawyer for your state law’s specifics). Due to the highly computerized nature of today’s vehicles, increasingly, substantial defects involve software problems that affect vehicle systems. They also involve OTA fixes from manufacturers, who try to correct these malfunctioning software issues.
Each state’s lemon laws vary, but focus on a substantial, unfixable defect, as we mentioned. A lemon law attorney will inform their client if their vehicle’s issue qualifies it as a lemon under state law. Then, if that is the case, the attorney will move forward to prove that the manufacturer must be held accountable for the unfixable defect.
For more information on arbitration and other frequently asked lemon law questions, click here.
State law specifics on reporting of claims and number of allowed repair attempts, plus informing the manufacturer of the claim via certified letter (which usually triggers one last allowed repair attempt) are key actions that the lemon law attorney will fulfill for the client.
How the Attorney Proves the Claim
The lemon law attorney will first determine if the vehicle is a lemon under state law, as we discussed, including checking the issue against coverage under the manufacturer’s warranty. Another criterion used to determine if a claim can proceed is if the vehicle has been in the repair shop for an extended period (often 30 days, total).
The next step is reviewing the client’s evidence. This can consist of repair records, call logs, letters, emails, photos, videos and more information that proves the defect is substantial, and severely impacts its use, value or safety. Within this review, the lawyer will specifically analyze any OTA fixes, to gauge their effectiveness.
Key point: If any OTAs have occurred, they open up a host of potential debates, such as if the manufacturer tries to claim that certain OTAs aren’t repairs at all, but general updates. This can cloud the issue considerably, as then the attorney will have to determine if this is true, and if they could count as repairs in a lemon law claim.
Example OTA Fix Failures
The key point with OTA repairs and lemon law claims is that vehicle owners are protected by state lemon laws. It doesn’t matter if the repair attempt is mechanical or via software. A lemon law attorney will review the evidence and put together the timeline of the number of repair attempts and the results, to prove that the vehicle is defective, and that the owner should receive compensation.
Image Source: Unsplash
Note these two example scenarios, which illustrate how OTA fixes may factor into lemon law claims. These are but a few potential claim types; many more can, and do, occur. Consult a lemon law attorney to discuss your specific circumstances.
Scenario 1: Pickup Truck’s Persistent Transmission Glitch
A consumer purchased a brand-new, heavy-duty pickup truck. Just two months in, the owner noticed severe hesitation and sudden shifting while accelerating. She felt really unsafe when merging onto highways. She took the truck to the dealership, and they tried a physical repair by replacing a transmission sensor and updating the vehicle’s onboard control module software (these counted as the manufacturer’s first and second repair attempts). These repairs failed to fix the core problem.
The manufacturer then pushed two separate over-the-air (OTA) software updates directly to the vehicle over the next month. They told the owner these fixes would resolve the shifting logic (these OTAs counted as the third and fourth repair attempts). The issue persisted, and the vehicle owner got proactive, documenting the four distinct repair attempts for the same problem within the warranty period. That’s when she consulted a lemon law attorney.
How the attorney resolved the claim: The lawyer proved that the combination of dealership visits and remote updates—all documented by service records and communication logs—met the “reasonable number of repair attempts” threshold under state law. This made the truck eligible for a repurchase as a lemon. The client was relieved to get her buyback and moved on to purchase a different vehicle.
Scenario 2: Progressive Software Failures in a New SUV
A new electric SUV experienced a critical, safety-related software failure. The anti-lock braking system (ABS) and collision avoidance systems kept intermittently disabling themselves while driving. The manufacturer provided a mandatory over-the-air (OTA) update to patch the specific module causing the error. The fix seemed to work at first. Only a month later, the vehicle developed new issues: the infotainment screen flickered uncontrollably, and the battery management system began shutting down unexpectedly, stranding the driver. He wondered if the OTA might have triggered these new problems.
Lemon laws are confusing. Read our guide to the lemon law complaint process.
How the lemon law attorney resolved the claim: The lawyer proved through consulting an expert that the OTA “repair” attempt altered core software parameters. The SUV owner’s suspicions were on the mark: the OTA inadvertently triggered failures in other critical systems. The SUV owner had only one official “repair” attempt logged for the initial braking issue. The lawyer argued the single, failed OTA fix created a series of substantial defects. All these together warranted a lemon law claim, as the underlying software architecture’s problems got worse, and remained unfixable.
The SUV owner decided on a replacement vehicle for compensation when he won the claim, as he loved the brand. He wanted to try another of the same type, again.
Potential Compensation Remedies
Similar to claims where only physical repairs are conducted, vehicles that cannot be fixed via OTAs, and which otherwise qualify as lemons under state lemon laws, can be bought back or replaced, per the owner’s preference when they win their claim. In the examples above, one person chose a buyback and the other a replacement. The lemon law attorney will consult with the client, so all options are considered, and the client can make the best choice for them.
Why You Need a Lemon Law Attorney
As vehicles increasingly become dependent on software and, going forward, various autonomous features, lemon law claims will become more complex. That’s because these new features, when they become faulty or inoperable, will require sophisticated repairs. In our discussion of OTAs, we outlined some potential problems with these, but that’s not to say that OTAs are a poor repair method. Many do work, and manufacturers regularly rely on them to deliver updates and fixes.
It’s important to consult a lemon law attorney, especially regarding claims involving modern vehicles. That’s because sorting through what counts as a repair attempt, in addition to the specifics of state lemon laws, can be challenging for the average person. A lemon law attorney’s expertise is vital, so consumers can win compensation for defective vehicles.
Trust Allen Stewart, P.C. for Expert Lemon Law Representation
Allen Stewart, P.C. encourages you to take advantage of our free consultation. Lemon law claims are challenging, and with today’s advanced technology, they are becoming even more complicated. We have won many cases across the country, including a wide variety of claims that deal with OTAs and other technological variables. Our attorneys are well-known lemon law lawyers in California, New York, and Texas. We fight aggressively to protect our clients’ rights and hold the manufacturer accountable to provide compensation for defective vehicles.
You may wonder if you can afford a lawyer. Please know that the manufacturer will defend its interests. You need our winning legal team working for you. You won’t have to pay us as the manufacturer is obligated to pay your legal fees when you win your case.
Don’t wait to contact us; time is of the essence with lemon law claims. Contact Allen Stewart, P.C. now (866-440-2460) or schedule your free consultation online.