California has some of the strongest consumer protection laws in the country, and its lemon law has long been a model for holding manufacturers accountable for defective vehicles. But in 2024 and 2025, the state made sweeping changes to how lemon law claims are handled: changes that are now fully shaping how disputes are resolved in 2026. If you own a defective vehicle and are trying to understand the new rules, this guide breaks down exactly what changed, why lawmakers acted, and what it means for you.
The Problem That Forced California to Act
To understand why the California lemon law changed, you have to understand the pressure that pushed lawmakers to act in the first place. For years, lemon law filings in California climbed steadily. The number of lemon law cases filed under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act surged from about 15,000 in 2022 to over 22,000 in 2023, and more than 25,000 in 2024, placing a significant strain on the court system and delaying case resolutions.
The California Judges Association estimates that nearly 10% of all civil filings in Los Angeles County alone are now related to lemon law disputes. That level of court congestion meant consumers with legitimate claims were waiting years for resolution: not because their cases were weak, but because the system was overwhelmed.
The message was clear: the existing framework was not built to handle this volume, and without reform, wait times would only grow longer.
Have a lemon law claim under the new rules? Seven Law helps California consumers navigate AB 1755 and get the compensation they deserve. Contact Seven Law today for a free case evaluation.
What Is AB 1755 and What Did It Change?
Assembly Bill 1755 (AB 1755), authored by Assemblymember Kalra, was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 29, 2024. It is the most significant overhaul of California’s lemon law process in years. Rather than changing who qualifies for lemon law protection, AB 1755 focused on how disputes are resolved: with the goal of getting consumers faster outcomes and relieving pressure on the courts.
The core changes AB 1755 introduced include:
- A mandatory pre-suit notice requirement: Before filing a legal claim, consumers must now send a written notice to the manufacturer, giving them a formal opportunity to resolve the dispute: a step that encourages settlement without court intervention. This requirement took effect in mid-2025. Skipping this step means a claim cannot move forward, so understanding the notice requirement is essential for any consumer pursuing a claim today.
- Shorter, stricter timelines: AB 1755 introduces specific deadlines for manufacturers to act on lemon law claims, including mandatory mediation and early document exchanges, which help avoid the long delays that defined the old process. Manufacturers who fail to meet these deadlines face financial penalties: a meaningful incentive to take claims seriously from the start.
- Early document disclosure: Manufacturers are now required to share critical documents upfront, such as repair records and communication logs. Previously, this information was often produced slowly or only after extended legal wrangling. Early disclosure levels the playing field and helps consumers understand the strength of their claim sooner.
- A new statute of limitations framework: AB 1755 requires consumers to file a lemon law lawsuit within one year after the expiration of the vehicle’s express warranty, with an absolute cap of 6 years from the vehicle’s original delivery date. The practical takeaway: do not wait. The new deadlines make delays costly.
Why SB 26 Followed: And What It Added
AB 1755 did not arrive without controversy. Governor Newsom’s signing message acknowledged that many automakers, including smaller electric-vehicle manufacturers, raised serious concerns that certain procedures prescribed in AB 1755 were unworkable for them. To address this, lawmakers agreed to introduce a follow-up bill.
Senate Bill 26 (SB 26), signed into law on April 2, 2025, was intended as a cleanup bill to clarify and structure the framework created by AB 1755. SB 26 introduced an opt-in system for manufacturers: those who wish to participate in the new streamlined process must submit a written notice, and once opted in, they commit to the AB 1755 procedures for five years. Manufacturers that do not opt in remain subject to the older, pre-AB 1755 rules.
One of the key provisions of SB 26 is the mandate that the Arbitration Certification Program within the California Department of Consumer Affairs publish a list of manufacturers that have chosen to be governed by the new procedures, updated every December 15. This list matters because the process you follow as a consumer depends entirely on which framework your manufacturer has opted into. Knowing where your manufacturer stands before you file is no longer optional: it is essential.
SB 26 also pushed back the effective date for the pre-suit notice requirement from April 1 to July 1, 2025, and includes a sunset review provision that allows lawmakers to revisit the policy in 2029.
Not sure which rules apply to your manufacturer? Seven Law tracks which automakers have opted into AB 1755, and will tell you exactly what process applies to your case. Talk to a Seven Law attorney today.
How the Changes Affect Used Car Buyers
One of the most consequential and least discussed aspects of the 2026 lemon law landscape in California involves used vehicles. AB 1755 narrowed lemon law coverage for used cars. If you bought a second-hand vehicle that is still covered by the manufacturer’s original warranty, you may still be protected. The same applies to certified pre-owned vehicles. However, if the original warranty has expired or the car came with a basic dealer warranty, your options are more limited.
This change aligns with the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Rodriguez v. FCA US LLC (2024), which significantly reduced the scope of used-car lemon law protection in the state. Together, the Rodriguez decision and AB 1755 mean that used car buyers have a narrower window for relief than they did even two years ago. Acting quickly and consulting an attorney before warranty coverage lapses has become more important than ever.
Who the New Rules Are Actually Designed to Help
The stated goals of AB 1755 and SB 26 are to help consumers obtain faster resolutions and to reduce the backlog weighing on California’s civil courts. In practice, the answer to who benefits depends heavily on how the rules are applied.
- Consumers with strong, documented cases: The new mandatory mediation and early disclosure requirements are designed to bring well-supported claims to resolution faster. If your repair history is clear and your defect is well-documented, the new timeline structure works in your favor by forcing manufacturers to engage early rather than drag the process out.
- Consumers who send proper notice: The pre-suit notice requirement sounds like a bureaucratic hurdle, but it also gives manufacturers formal notice that a claim is coming, and triggers specific response deadlines. A manufacturer who ignores or delays after proper notice is now exposed to penalties. Used correctly, this notice is leverage.
- Consumers with legal representation: The new procedural landscape is more complex than the old one. Knowing which opt-in tier your manufacturer falls under, how to draft a proper pre-suit notice, what documents to demand in early disclosure, and how to handle mandatory mediation strategically: none of this is intuitive. The consumers who navigate these changes most effectively are those working with attorneys who have already been operating under the new rules.
What Has Not Changed
Amid all the procedural updates, the core protections of California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act remain intact. A manufacturer is still required to repurchase or replace your vehicle if it cannot fix a covered defect within a reasonable number of repair attempts. The legal standard: four or more repair attempts for the same defect, or 30 or more cumulative days out of service within the first 18 months or 18,000 miles: has not changed. Manufacturers are still required to pay your attorney’s fees if you prevail, meaning legal representation often costs consumers nothing out of pocket.
The Bottom Line on California’s 2026 Lemon Law Changes
AB 1755 and SB 26 represent a genuine effort to fix a system that was buckling under its own volume. Whether those reforms fully deliver on that promise will become clearer as more cases move through the new process in 2026. What is clear right now is that the procedural rules have changed, the deadlines are stricter, and the opt-in framework means the process you follow depends on decisions your manufacturer has already made: decisions most consumers have no idea about.
If you are dealing with a defective vehicle in California today, understanding the changes to the California lemon law outlined in AB 1755 and SB 26 is not optional. The rules that protected consumers in 2022 have been meaningfully updated, and navigating the current landscape without guidance carries real risk.
The 2026 Lemon Law Is More Nuanced Than Ever. Seven Law Can Help.
California’s lemon law reforms were designed to speed up the process, but they also added layers that can trip up consumers who go it alone. At Seven Law, we stay current on every procedural update so our clients don’t have to. We know which manufacturers have opted into the new framework, how to file a proper pre-suit notice, and how to use the mandatory mediation and early disclosure rules to your advantage.
Because California law requires manufacturers to pay attorneys’ fees when consumers prevail, our representation typically costs you nothing out of pocket.
Do not let a procedural misstep cost you your claim. Contact Seven Law for a free consultation today.