Consumer Law

Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against a motorcycle manufacturer asserting claims under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), based upon the manufacturer’s alleged violations of Veh. Code, §§11712.5 and 24014 by failing to hang on each motorcycle a label indicating the manufacturer's suggested retail price and additional charges. Issues in the case involved the propriety of class certification, whether the UCL required a showing of causation and injury as to unnamed class members, and whether Civ. Code, § 1781, subd. (a), allowed such a showing to be made by establishing that a reasonable person would not knowingly make an illegal purchase.

In a class action lawsuit against a car manufacturer, plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturer purposefully designed, calibrated, and altered the odometers on its vehicles to over register the actual miles driven by at least 2 percent. Plaintiffs alleged various causes of action, including unlawful business practices under the UCL, unfair or deceptive trade practices under the CLRA, and false advertising under the FAL. The primary issue was whether the “safe harbor” provision of Bus. & Prof. Code, §12500, subd. (c), which deems “correct” any odometer that is accurate within plus or minus 4 percent, absolved the manufacturer of liability.

Car purchaser sued car dealership under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civ. Code, §§ 1790, et seq., alleging that the company had been unable to repair the car’s defect to conform to applicable warranties after a reasonable number of attempts, and by refusing to repurchase the vehicle. Issues included the existence and nature of the defect, and whether the dealer’s offers to repurchase the vehicle satisfied its statutory duty.