You’ve been back to the dealership three times for the same problem. They keep saying it’s “fixed.” It never is. At some point you start asking: doesn’t the manufacturer have to actually repair my car? That’s exactly what California’s right to repair act addresses — and it’s one of the most misunderstood standards in lemon law.
Here’s the short version: manufacturers don’t get unlimited chances. California law gives them a reasonable number of attempts to fix a defect. When they can’t get the job done, you have the right to a replacement vehicle or a full refund. No more waiting. No more excuses.
But what counts as “reasonable”? That’s where a lot of people get confused — and where manufacturers love to stall. Let’s break it down.
The Right to Repair Is Built Into California Lemon Law
When people search for California’s “right to repair act,” they’re usually thinking of one of two things: the general consumer right to have products repaired, or the specific repair attempt standard baked into the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. For vehicle owners, it’s the second one that matters.
Under California Civil Code § 1793.22(b) — also called the Tanner Consumer Protection Act — a vehicle is presumed to be a lemon if the manufacturer or its authorized dealers have made a reasonable number of repair attempts without success. The law sets a clear benchmark: four or more repair attempts for the same defect, or two or more attempts for a defect that could cause death or serious injury, or 30 or more days out of service for repairs.
That’s your right to repair in practice. The manufacturer gets their shots. If they can’t fix it, the law steps in on your side.
The key word is “presumed.” Once you hit those thresholds, you don’t have to argue about whether your car is a lemon — the law presumes it. That shifts the burden onto the manufacturer to prove it isn’t.
What “Reasonable” Repair Attempts Actually Means
Courts have wrestled with what counts as a “reasonable” repair attempt, and the answer isn’t always straightforward. The California Court of Appeal addressed this directly in Krotin v. Porsche Cars North America, 38 Cal. App. 4th 294 (1995). In that case, the court made clear that even a single repair attempt can count if the manufacturer had a genuine opportunity to fix the defect and failed.
This matters more than most people realize. Manufacturers sometimes argue that an “attempt” only counts when a specific repair procedure was performed. Courts have pushed back on that. If you brought your car in, the dealer documented the complaint, and the problem still wasn’t fixed, that counts.
What you need to document every single time:
- The date your car went in and the date you got it back: Days out of service add up. Once you hit 30, the presumption kicks in regardless of how many repair attempts there were.
- The exact defect you described to the service advisor: Use the same language every time. “Transmission shudders at highway speed” should appear on every repair order — not a different description each visit.
- What work the dealer said they performed: Get the repair order in writing before you drive away. “Test drove — no issues found” is still a repair attempt.
- Whether the problem came back after: Keep a log. Dates, symptoms, conditions. This is what we use when we take your case to the manufacturer.
If you’re not sure whether your repair history is strong enough to file a claim, our free lemon law qualifier walks you through it in minutes.
The Right to Repair Act vs. What You’re Actually Owed
Here’s where a lot of consumers leave money on the table. They think the right to repair just means more repair attempts. It doesn’t. Once the Tanner presumption kicks in, you’re entitled to choose between two remedies: a replacement vehicle of comparable value, or a full refund — including your down payment, monthly payments, registration fees, and taxes.
The manufacturer pays our attorney’s fees too. That’s written directly into the statute. You don’t owe us anything out of pocket, win or lose. The manufacturer covers it.
We’ve seen settlements on lemon law cases ranging from $25,000 to over $165,000 depending on the vehicle, the defect, and how aggressively we pushed. The right to repair isn’t just a legal standard — it’s leverage. And we know how to use it.
One thing manufacturers count on: Most people don’t know what they’re entitled to. They accept a fourth repair attempt when they should be demanding a refund. Don’t let that be you.
What If the Manufacturer Says the Defect Isn’t “Substantial”?
This is the most common pushback you’ll hear. Manufacturers routinely argue that the defect doesn’t substantially impair the vehicle’s use, value, or safety — which is required for a lemon law claim. But courts have interpreted “substantially impairs” broadly. A recurring electrical problem that drains your battery, a transmission that hesitates at highway speeds, a sunroof that leaks — these all qualify under California law.
The FTC offers federal guidance on lemon law protections that can help you understand where state and federal rights overlap, but California’s Song-Beverly Act goes further than most states. You have more protection here than almost anywhere else in the country.
We’ve covered what qualifies as a substantial defect in detail in our post on what counts as a substantial defect under California lemon law — worth a read if you’re unsure whether your specific problem rises to the level of a claim.
How Many Repair Attempts Do You Actually Need?
The Tanner presumption gives you a clear starting point: four attempts for the same defect, or two for anything involving safety. But you don’t have to wait that long before calling us. We’ve built strong cases for clients who had two or three documented repair attempts and clear evidence the manufacturer couldn’t fix the problem.
The legal standard is a floor, not a ceiling. If the defect is serious and the manufacturer has had multiple genuine opportunities to fix it, you have a case. Period.
Learn more about how repair attempt counts affect your claim in our breakdown of how many repair attempts qualify a car as a lemon.
And if you’ve already hit the threshold? Don’t wait. Claims under Song-Beverly have a four-year statute of limitations from the date you discovered the defect — but the sooner you move, the stronger your documentation, and the less time the manufacturer has to muddy the record.
Think your car qualifies? Let’s find out.
We’ve recovered millions for California drivers who were stuck with defective vehicles. The manufacturer pays our fees — not you. Start with a free case review and we’ll tell you exactly where you stand. Get Your Free Case Review →