Lemon Law for California

Build Dates : July 01,2005 - August 31,2005 
NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number : 05V455000 
Date Owner’s Notified: 20051014  Date Received by ODI: 20051005  Date Added to Databse: 20051006 
Manufacturer’s Involved: GENERAL MOTORS CORP. 
Manufacturer’s Responsible for the Recall: GENERAL MOTORS CORP. 
Manufacturer Campaign Number: 05086 
Component: STEERING:HYDRAULIC POWER ASSIST:HOSE, PIPING, AND CONNECTIONS 
Potential Number Of Units Affected : 123592 
Summary:
Certain passenger vehicles may have been built with a power steering hose that is not to specification. Under extreme steering maneuvers, such as turning the steering wheel fully to the left or right while braking, the hose may fracture and leak fluid.

Consequence:
If this were to occur, power steering assist would be lost and increased steering effort would be required. On vehicles equipped with hydro-boost power brakes, it could also result in loss of power brake assist and increased braking effort would be required. If the power steering fluid spray were to spray onto hot engine parts, an engine compartment fire could occur.
     
Remedy:
Dealers will inspect the power steering hose(s) for two suspect date codes and replace them if required. The recall will begin on October 14,2005. Owners may contact Chevrolet at  1-800-630-2438 ,GMC at ,1-866-996-9463,BUICK at 1-866-608-8080,CADILLAC at 1-866-982-2339, ISUZU at 1-800-255-6727 ,or HUMMER at 1-800-732-5493.

Punitive damages are intended to punish vehicle manufacturers and encourage them to fix inherent defects in vehicle designs that have resulted in injury. An interesting recent trend in vehicle product liability cases is a higher monetary level for awards of punitive damages in successful claims against manufacturers or sellers. These punitive damages awards are above and beyond damages that compensate plaintiffs for their injuries and can sometimes range into the tens of millions of dollars.

Traditionally, vehicle manufacturers have engaged in what is known as a “cost-benefit” analysis when deciding whether to change a potentially defective vehicle design. In this process, the manufacturer will calculate the cost of implementing a design change, including vehicle recalls and repairs, and weigh that cost against the potential cost of litigation and settlement after the defect causes injuries. Punitive damages are often awarded in order to add to the potential costs a manufacturer will face if it decides not to fix a design defect, thus shifting the cost-benefit analysis toward the elimination of defects.

Liability in motor vehicle defect cases is usually controlled by the doctrine of strict liability.

Regardless of what safety steps a manufacturer or dealer claims it takes in making and handling a motor vehicle, you can make a strict liability claim based on a motor vehicle defect, without making any showing as to carelessness, if all three of the following conditions exist:

* The vehicle or one of its components had an “unreasonably dangerous” defect that injured you as a driver, passenger, or otherwise. The defect can come into existence either in the design of the vehicle, during manufacture, during handling or shipment, including delivery from the manufacturer, or through a failure to warn consumers of a dangerous aspect of the vehicle.
* The defect caused an injury while the vehicle was being used in a way that it was intended to be used. For example, you may not be able to recover if a sports sedan were used to cross a stream. Reasonably foreseeable use of a vehicle includes its involvement in collisions with another vehicle, so a manufacturer’s duty in designing a vehicle includes the duty to come up with a design that is reasonably safe in the event of a collision. The result is that the absence of certain safety features may result in a determination that the vehicle is defectively designed.
* The vehicle had not been substantially changed from the condition in which it was originally sold. “Substantially” means in such a way that the performance of the vehicle is affected.