Volusiano wrote:For example, if you reach turtle all of a sudden without seeing LBW and VLBW first, then that's an obvious safety issue that Nissan has to concede and address. Or if the speedometer is insanely wrong, causing you to drive much faster than the speed limit, which constitute a safety hazard. Or if the odometer is insanely wrong, causing you to underestimate your trip, resulting in not being able to complete it before the battery juice runs out. But almost anything else probably does not require Nissan to guarantee instrument accuracy. They can simply say that they don't have to guarantee the accuracy of anything else that is not a safety related issue.
Right, and I'm not going to claim that I have extensive experience pursuing lemon law coverage. It's my understanding however that it does not have to be a safety issue. Take my ActiveE for example. It often fails to complete a charge, which is very annoying. If I don't notice it, I don't have the range to get to my destination or need to come up with contingency plans for charging.
I reported this problem to the dealer and to BMW, and although they been working on it and I'm hearing that there is a fix, my car still suffers from the issue. It spent nine weeks in the shop, we had to visit the dealer three times and broke down on the freeway as a consequence of a faulty battery sensor. I was told that the charging issue alone and the length spent at the dealer and in the technical service center in Oxnard would be sufficient to seek coverage under California lemon law.
I'm not sure if any of the issues we encountered in Phoenix would come close. Seeing how saintyohann has difficulty getting any traction
, I have my own doubts about the viability of this approach. I just wanted to entertain the idea.