Some of the top scams of auto sales last year which rode to the top of the list of complaints are as the following:

Hiking the actual price advertised in a purchase agreement

It is illegal if a dealership sells a vehicle for more than the price advertised, even if the customer is not aware of the price advertised. When a dealership inflates the price of a vehicle given in the window stickers or other media ads for his profit by including other items, it directly affects taxes, fees for licenses and registration and the loan.

Creating a language barrier – Violating the Civil Code §1632

The Civil Code §1632 states that if a lease or sale of a vehicle is negotiated in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Tagalog or Korean, a translation of the purchase contract in respective language must be provided to the customer much before signing the contract in English.
If the translation of the contract in his native language is not provided to a customer, he has a right to rescind the deal.

A used car dealership also violates the law if he misrepresents the truth about a used car.

A used car dealership is required to disclose the material facts he knows about a used vehicle on sale, as the following:

• If it had been involved in a serious accident
• If it had been a rental vehicle
• If it had been a lemon law buy back
• If its Odometer had been rolled back
• If it had been in an accident

It is illegal for a dealership to misrepresent the following used cars as ‘new’:

• Vehicles used as “demo” or demonstrator vehicles
• Vehicles already sold once but returned due to reasons which may include a failure to get a loan

Certified Pre-owned cars

If a used vehicle passes certain standards it is sold as a “Certified Pre-owned car”. A Certified Pre-owned car is supposed to perform as guaranteed and must be free from major structural damage from any previous accident. Often, many of these so called Certified Pre-owned cars do not qualify the tag. Many of the customers often found themselves saddled with used vehicles with serious frame damage from previous accidents.

Krohn & Moss, Consumer Law Center is a leading California lemon law firm specializing in auto fraud. The law firm of Krohn & Moss, Consumer Law Center®, was founded in 1995 by attorneys Adam Krohn and Greg Moss, to provide legal representation to consumers with defective vehicles and products. If you suspect that you have been the victim of a California auto fraud, you can get rid of your problem car by pursuing your California lemon law claim. Submit the case details for a Free* Case Review under the California lemon laws.

Auto-related complaints include misrepresentations in advertising or sales of:

• New and used cars
• Lemon buy backs
• Used cars with faulty repairs

Auto-related complaints also include misrepresentations regarding the leasing and towing disputes of the used cars.

Some of the top frauds of auto sales last year which rode to the top of the list of consumer complaints are as the following:

Negative equity on trade-In overestimation: Negative equity on trade-In overestimation occurs when more is owed on the trade-in vehicle than the cash value of the vehicle in a transaction when a trade-in is involved. Instead of valuing the trade-in vehicle at the same amount as what is owed on a newer purchase, a dealership creates an inflated difference. He then adds the difference to the cash price of the new vehicle or the capitalization costs, if it is a leased vehicle. This kind of deal is illegal as the customer is made to pay more in sales tax and registration.

Inflating the price advertised: A dealership may not sell a vehicle for more than the price he had advertised. If he does, he is violating the related laws. Even if the dealer informs the consumer of the final price after inflating the price it does not bring down the severity of the illegitimacy of the practice.

Inflating monthly installments: Here a dealer quotes an inflated monthly installment which he does by adding the price of accessories that are optional. Some of these accessories are alarms, service contracts, GAP insurance, paint/fabric protection, window etching, low jack, etc. The customer is not informed of the choice he has to refuse the accessories.

Rewriting a contract with a backdate: In order to qualify for financing a consumer may be required to increase a down payment and higher APR to qualify for a loan. The dealership cleverly gets the customer to sign a second contract with different terms. The second contract bears the date of the first contract which is a gross violation of finance disclosure laws. The customer is made to pay interest for a period of time even without the contract having gone into effect. This kind of contract is tantamount to material misrepresentation of the new contract and a violation of the single document rule.

As a car consumer you must bear in mind that:

• A dealership only has 10 days to inform the consumer of the required changes to the contract
• After the 10 days time the dealership cannot change the deal
• A customer also has a choice to cancel the contract and return the new vehicle and get refunded
• If a customer is not informed of the changes in the deal it is a violation of the single document rule

One Document rule:

Often, dealerships violate the One document rule by getting the customers sign more than one document, such as:

• Trade-in forms that bind the consumer to pay the difference of the value between the trade in and the new car
• Agreement for attorney fees, if any
• A purchase agreement for payments the dealership agrees to make on a trade-in vehicle
• A “hold check agreement” by the customer for extra future payment towards the down payment with dates, in case the customer fails to make the entire down payment
• Agreement for additional provisions for bounced checks

This is illegal because these obligations are not included in the single document purchase agreement and the One Document rule requires that all the above agreements by both the parties must be in the same document.

Krohn & Moss, Consumer Law Center is a leading California law firm specializing in auto fraud. The law firm of Krohn & Moss, Consumer Law Center®, was founded in 1995 by attorneys Adam Krohn and Greg Moss, to provide legal representation to consumers with defective vehicles and products. If you suspect that you have been a victim of auto fraud, you can get rid of your problem vehicle by pursuing your California lemon law claim. Submit the case details for a Free* Case Review under the California lemon laws.

Why is the ownership of a gray/parallel market vehicle deemed precarious?

• Unlike an automobile intended for sale in the US, the gray/parallel market vehicles are not protected under the manufacturer’s warranty
• Gray/parallel imports are generally used vehicles, although some are new
• They generally carry no certified warranty or the original factory warranty and are typically not eligible for extended warranties
• A gray/parallel vehicle often does not meet the US standards and carries no manufacturer warranty
• These vehicles are not manufactured for retail sales in the United States
• They are not authorized to be resold by a manufacturer or a distributor
• Gray/parallel market vehicles are also subject to recalls

Some of the most popular Japanese vehicles and, BMW and Mercedes-Benz are also available in the gray/parallel market.

In 1998, the NHTSA granted exemption from the rules for gray/parallel market vehicles aged over 25 years, since these are considered to be collector vehicles.

Generally, many gray/parallel market vehicles carry no warranty coverage. Some manufacturers may offer warranty coverage on certain gray/parallel market vehicles. California requires a gray/parallel market retailer to inform a potential buyer of its warranty eligibility status if a vehicle is not covered by a manufacturer’s express written warranty.

According to California laws:

• A gray/parallel market vehicle must have a sign prominently displayed next to it while it is on sale
• It should also be disclosed if the vehicle is not covered by a manufacturer’s express written warranty valid in the United States, through a prominently displayed ticket, label or tag
• This sign is absolutely necessary if the vehicle has electrical currents and broadcast frequencies which are not compatible with those of the United States
• A sign will be of help to a buyer if replacement parts are not available through the manufacturer’s United States’ dealers
• An instruction manual in English should be provided with the said vehicle
• If the vehicle is eligible for a manufacturer’s rebate it should be disclosed by the seller
• The presence of any incompatibility or nonconformity to domestic standards as known to the seller, should also be disclosed by him

Information given above is not intended as legal advice. You may continue your lemon law claim or any other contention with your automobiles by contacting California Lemon Law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

The Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act was the first federal statute and it protects the buyer of any product that costs more than $25 with an express written warranty. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act does not mandate the manufacturers or sellers of consumer products to provide written warranties but it does mandate manufacturers and sellers to clearly disclose the terms of the warranty if they warrant their products so that a consumer gets to know his rights under the warranty. This law applies to an automobile you buy too if it does not perform as it should.

Any vehicle or any part of the vehicle has a written warranty and has a defect, the car is considered to be defective. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act states that, a written warranty on a consumer product that costs more than $10 must be clearly labeled as “full” or “limited.” A full warranty means that whoever promises to fix the car must do so in cases of defect or where the car does not conform to the warranty. This action must be done within a reasonable time and without charge. A limited warranty can contain reasonable restrictions regarding the responsibilities of the manufacturer or seller for the repair or replacement of the defects in the car.

The Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act (15 USCA § 2301 et seq.) mandates that a written warranty on any consumer product that costs more than $5 must completely and conspicuously disclose the terms and conditions of the warranty in simple and easily understood words. A warranty on a car guarantees that it performs as specified and if it does not, the car manufacturer will repair or replace the car. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act was sponsored by Senators Warren G. Magnuson and Frank E. Moss and passed in 1975.

Its aims at improving the quality of the information available to consumers and prevent deception, in the marketing of consumer products used for personal, family, or household purposes. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act provides a federal Cause of Action for consumers who face problems with warranted durable goods. If a consumer prevails against a seller in a lawsuit brought under the act, he is entitled to recover all litigation expenses, which include attorney’s fees based on actual time expended, as determined by the court.

Regarding lemon cars, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty-Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act greatly affects the rights of car buyers.

The warrantor must:

• Allow the buyer the choice of either a refund or replacement of the product
• Be given three chances to attempt to fix the defect
• Not be allowed repair attempts beyond the initial three

A consumer may pursue a legal action in any court of general jurisdiction in the United States to enforce his rights under the Magnuson-Moss Act. Attorney’s fees based on actual time spent will be covered if the consumer prevails.

The directives given above are not intended as legal advice. You may pursue your lemon law claim or any other dispute with your automobiles by being in communication with California Lemon Law Attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

The executive director of the advocacy organization for the Center for Auto Safety feels that Jeep Grand Cherokee is the most dangerous vehicle on the road today and they want it recalled. He feels that the problem is the fuel tank that is located behind the rear axle which can have the tank ruptured. The filler hoses may pull off as they did in some of their crash tests.

Chrysler’s statement is on the contrary. Chrysler disputes the Center for Auto Safety’s test results. According to Chrysler, the test was three times as severe as the government standards. They stick to their guns that the vehicle meets or exceeds federal standards for safety. Chrysler assures that rear impacts resulting in a fire are extremely rare. The figures, according to Chrysler are by far lower in 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles than were in peer vehicles.

The National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is investigating the vehicle’s safety, declined to comment on the crash test after a New Jersey mom died in a Cherokee when it burst into flames after she was rear-ended and her 1996 Grand Cherokee burst into flames. Her remains were found in the passenger seat. She died trying to escape the flames.

The Center for Auto Safety independently tested the Grand Cherokees after the NHTSA and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) also independently tested them. Chrysler disputes the test results by the center and is very confident that the vehicle has exceeded federal standards for safety.

However, Chrysler changed the Cherokee’s design in 2005, moving the fuel tank in front of the rear axle and claimed that the change was made to expand cargo space but not for safety.

Gas tank fires were reported a year even before the NHTSA investigation

The US officials earlier opened an investigation into claims that the improperly located and poorly protected gas tanks could cause fires in some crashes. The investigation was for 3 million Jeep Grand Cherokees. The alleged problem was first highlighted in reports by a news channel and it led to the process of determining if the Jeep Grand Cherokee recall of the MY 1993 to 2004 was necessary. Grand Cherokees of the MY 1993 to 2004 had plastic gas tanks and they were placed in the rear of the vehicle, which would make the vehicle highly vulnerable during certain types of accidents.

According to the agency, its initial review shows that the Grand Cherokee did not have more fires after crashes than did the other vehicles have, endorsing the fact that the post-crash fires do not necessarily establish a defect. 44 Grand Cherokee crashes and 55 deaths since 1992 were reported to the NHTSA, where fire was listed as the most harmful factor. According to the NHTSA, ten crashes and 13 deaths were most likely associated with rear-end collisions.

Chrysler had refuted the reports and claimed that the Grand Cherokee has an excellent safety record and that the company was cooperating with the government investigation.

In the year 2009, the Center for Auto Safety claimed that:

• The gas tank’s position below the rear bumper and behind the rear axle could cause fuel to spill if the SUV were struck from behind
• The neck of the fuel tank could tear off in crashes increasing fire hazard

It is claimed by a manager at Chrysler, that the design of the gas tank is fundamentally defective for safety issues. Because the plastic fuel tank is in the rear of the Jeep and unprotected, in some models a vehicle that hits it from behind and slides under the bumper could tear the tank open and create a risk where gas would slosh into the interior of the vehicle and coat everything there.

Information given above is not intended as legal advice. You may continue your lemon law claim or any other contention with your automobiles by contacting California lemon law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

• The California lemon law for used cars provides protection for anyone who has purchased or leased a used car or vehicle that is still covered by a manufacturer’s original factory warranty
• The California lemon law for used cars also covers demonstrator vehicles, vehicles previously bought back under the California lemon law and resold with a manufacturer’s warranty
• The California lemon law for used cars provides legal protection for any vehicle that has been certified
• The California lemon law for used cars provides legal protection for any vehicle with an extended warranty for the manufacturer’s original warranty
• The California lemon law for used cars provides compensation in the form of a refund, a replacement or cash compensation

The California lemon law for used cars

The California lemon law for used cars covers:

• Used cars or vehicles bought and used primarily for personal, family or household purposes
• Used cars or vehicles with a gross weight which are below 10,000 pounds and used primarily for business purposes where five or fewer vehicles are registered to the company
• Used cars or vehicles that are sold with a written warranty
• Lemon cars or vehicles that are bought back by a manufacturer and then resold to consumers with a manufacturer’s warranty covering the defects

The California lemon law for used cars – the Statutory warranty Period

There is a statutes of limitations of four years to file a lawsuit for breach of warranty.

The California lemon law for used cars applies:

• For the entire period of a manufacturer’s warranty
• After the original warranty if the vehicle has been certified
• To a manufacturer’s extended warranty

If a vehicle is covered by a three year warranty and a defect or nonconformity is discovered two years from the warranty start date, the manufacturer is required by law to:

• Either repurchase or replace the vehicle
• Compensate the owner for the defective vehicle
• Provide the manufacturer a reasonable number of attempts to repair the car or vehicle

The California lemon law for used cars and the manufacturer’s duty to repair

The California lemon law for used cars provides the manufacturer and its authorized dealers with a reasonable number of attempts to repair the defect or nonconformity in a used car or vehicle under warranty

.

A reasonable number of opportunities may be exceeded if the vehicle has experienced:

• One to two repair attempts for a serious safety defect such as a brake failure
• Two or more repair attempts for a recurring issue which is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if the vehicle is driven
• The same nonconformity or defect has been allowed four or more attempts but the defect continues to exist
• The vehicle is in for warranty repairs for a total of 30 or more days

What would you do if you think that you have landed a California used lemon car

• Document the repair orders that indicate the problem in your used lemon car
• Notify the manufacturer of your car or vehicle of the defects and nonconformities, directly
• Submit the warranty dispute to the arbitration program listed with the help of your California lemon law attorney for used cars, to improve your chances of receiving proper compensation

If you are not qualified for the California lemon law for the used cars

If you are not qualified for the CA lemon law for the used cars you may still get protected by other laws of the State. If you feel that you have been deceived by a California used car dealership, an experienced California lemon law can review your documents.

If you are having problems with your certified used car or vehicle:

• Get in touch with a California lemon law attorney for used cars and get to know your California lemon rights
• Check with your California lemon law attorney for used cars for the best recourse available for you to claim, if you do not qualify for the California lemon protection for your used car
• You may not have to pay out of your pocket and you will have the best chance for success if your California lemon law attorney for used cars represents you

The directives given above are not intended as legal advice. You may pursue your lemon law claim or any other dispute with your automobiles by being in communication with California lemon law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

This California lemon law had been given the right impetus by a mother who testified that such a rule could have saved the lives of her two daughters. According to the mother of the victims Carol Houck, the PT Cruiser her daughters were killed in was rented out three times after the rental company received the recall notice.

Enterprise is the largest car rental company in the US, with $12 billion in annual revenue and 1.1 million vehicles in its fleet. It includes the Alamo, Enterprise and National brands. The Houck sisters, Rachel, 24, and Jacqueline, 20 were killed in 2004 when the steering on a Chrysler PT Cruiser rented from Enterprise failed, in central California. The car crashed into a truck and caught fire. The company had received a recall notice for the vehicle about a month earlier.

According to the investigators hired by the Houck family:

• The power steering fluid line that was the subject of the recall leaked
• This leak, in turn caused the steering to fail

Enterprise fought a wrongful death case brought by the family for five years before admitting negligence. A jury awarded the parents $15 million.

Auto dealers are not allowed to sell or lease cars that have been recalled and this bill should be able close a loophole that allows rental car companies to continue to sell or lease recalled cars.

However, representatives of several rental car companies claim that

• They repair 90 percent of vehicles within 30 days of receiving recall notices
• They are very particular with their safety policies as such it deems such bills unwarranted
• Adopting such a law in California could prompt other States to do the same
• If other States are to follow suit, a patchwork of laws is created that would be difficult for them to follow
• The bill is targeting only their industry unfairly
• The bill is ignoring other vehicle fleets, such as those operated by taxi, limousine and shuttle bus services
• The bill is ignoring other vehicle fleets, such as those operated by private companies and governments

Consumers should be aware of the recall status of the cars they rent. They must ascertain that the cars they rent are safe.

Information given above is not intended as legal advice. You may continue your lemon law claim or any other contention with your automobiles by contacting California lemon law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

The roll-sensing curtain shield airbag system contains two sensors that detect roll angle. In case any one of the sensors malfunctions, the airbag warning light illuminates indicating that the side-curtain airbags won’t work in a roll-over, but the airbags are still be available in the event of a side collision. If both sensors fail at the same time both the seat belt pretensioner and the curtain shield airbag automatically get activated.

According to the Toyota, vehicles equipped with this system have been sold only in the North American market. Vehicles sold elsewhere are not equipped with the same system for rollover sensing.

According to the Toyota, problems in RAV4 and Highlanders are as the following:

• Two of the airbag sensors meant to detect vehicle roll angle could malfunction in specific models sold in the North American market
• If both the sensors fail simultaneously, it may lead to an unintended deployment of the airbag
• Malfunctioning sensors could activate both the seat belt tension device and the side, or ‘curtain,’ airbag by mistake
• With only one sensor failing the airbag would still work, however the roll detection system would be suspended
• This could happen after the airbag system goes through its routine checks at start up
• The routine airbag check could trigger both the pretensioner and the side airbags
• Part of the seat belt affected is the pretensioner that automatically tightens in the event of a crash

Toyota will inform the car owners of the recall in May 2011 and instruct them to take the vehicle to a local Toyota dealership. The customer can approach the Toyota dealer for free repairs on his RAV4 or Highlander. The technician will do the necessary tests and replace the defective roll sensing sensor assembly free of cost to him.

This recall is yet another setback for Toyota Motor Corp, as it is still reeling under the impact of last month’s tsunami that led to closing its production units. The closure of Toyota’s production units has affected the flow of parts to assembly units in the US and the world over.

Last week, Ford recalled the 1.2 million pickup trucks demanded by the NHTSA over the same issue of unintended airbag deployment.

Information given above is not intended as legal advice. You may continue your lemon law claim or any other contention with your automobiles by contacting California lemon law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

Who are the consumers protected under the California lemon law?

The California lemon law protects both the new and used car consumers.

• The Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (beginning with Civil Code section 1790) provides protection for consumers who lease or buy new motor vehicles

What is the protection afforded to me for my lemon buy, by the California lemon law?

The California lemon law states that the manufacturer is required promptly to replace the vehicle or return the purchase price to you, as a lessee or buyer:

• If the manufacturer or its representative in California, such as an authorized dealer, is unable to service or repair a new motor vehicle to meet the terms of an express written warranty after a reasonable number of repair attempts

What does the purchase price returned include, under the California lemon law?

According to the California lemon law the purchase price that is returned:

• Includes the price paid for manufacturer-installed items and transportation
• Does not include the price paid for non-manufacturer items installed by the dealer

What is the choice afforded to me for my lemon buy, by the California lemon law?

According to the California lemon law as a lessee or buyer you are completely free to choose whether to accept a replacement or a refund of the lemon buy.

What is the other monetary protection afforded to me for my lemon buy, by the California lemon law?

According to the California lemon law, whatever is your choice, the manufacturer is also responsible to pay for the:

• Sales or use tax
• License, registration and other official fees
• Incidental damages that you, as a lessee or buyer, may have incurred such as finance charges, repair, towing and rental car costs

What will I be charged for the use of my lemon car, under the California lemon law?

According to the California lemon law, as a lessee or buyer:

• You may be charged for the use of the vehicle regardless of whether the vehicle is replaced or the purchase price is refunded
• The amount that may be charged for use is determined by multiplying the actual price of the new vehicle by a factor that includes the number of miles traveled by the vehicle before it was first brought in for correction of the problem
• For example, if your lemon car had traveled 6,000 miles before it was first brought in for correction of the problem, you as a lessee or buyer could be charged 5% (6,000/120,000 = 5%) of the purchase price for usage

How long does the California lemon law apply to my new lemon vehicle?

The California lemon law applies for the entire period of your warranty on your lemon vehicle:

• If your vehicle is covered by a three-year warranty and you discover a defect after two years, the manufacturer will have to replace the vehicle or reimburse you as outlined above
• The California lemon law applies for the entire period of your warranty on your lemon vehicle, if the manufacturer or its representative is unable to conform the vehicle to the express warranty after a reasonable number of attempts to do so

When is the California lemon law NOT applicable to my new lemon vehicle?

The California lemon law/Song-Beverly does not apply if the problem was caused by abuse after the vehicle was delivered to you. Follow the terms of the warranty for maintenance and proper use of your vehicle.

What is the statute of limitations for my lemon buy, under the California lemon law?

According to the California lemon law, there is a four-year statute of limitations to bring a law suit for breach of warranty or for violations of Song-Beverly.

To get the best advantage through the California lemon law, you should act promptly to try to resolve the problem fairly and quickly to your advantage.

The directives given above are not intended as legal advice. You may pursue your lemon law claim or any other dispute with your automobiles by being in communication with California lemon law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.

The car rental association represents 94 rental-car companies, including all the major operators except Hertz, said Sharon Faulkner, its executive director. Bob Barton, the association president, said the word “recall” covered a wide range of problems. Rental car companies – as well as all other fleet operators and even consumers – need more information from the manufacturers about how quickly a recall should be conducted, he said.

“We can’t determine the significance of a recall and whether a vehicle is no longer safe to operate or whether it can continue to operate and then should simply be brought in for service at some point in time,” he said. “We simply want the manufacturers to instruct us when a vehicle needs to be grounded and we will absolutely comply.”

Asked how recalls are handled now, Mr. Barton said: “If we get a notice that says the vehicle needs to be grounded, every company will set their own policy. But as a general rule I would suggest everybody would ground that vehicle.”

Asked about recalls for which the automaker does not say the vehicle should be parked until fixed? “Every company will set their own policy, but ultimately that repair will get done, but maybe not immediately,” he said.

Karen Aldana, a spokeswoman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said the agency had no comment other than its position that “recalls are a serious safety matter that should not be ignored.” Several consumer organizations said the association’s proposal would be bad for renters.

Ami Gadhia, policy counsel with Consumers Union, said a consumer whose vehicle was recalled could — and should – take the vehicle in quickly to have it fixed. But, she said, people renting vehicles should be assured that all recalls have been carried out without delay. “There is a tremendous amount of trust that consumers put in that transaction,” she said.

Rosemary Shahan, the president of Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety of Sacramento, said in an e-mail that the proposal would “perpetuate rental-car roulette and allow rental car companies to get away with renting out vehicles that are so unsafe they are being recalled.” The idea of a two-tier system amounts to a license to rent cars with “with unrepaired safety defects,” Clarence Ditlow, the executive director of the Center for Auto Safety, wrote in an e-mail.

Currently the federal safety agency cannot force rental-car companies — or consumers — to carry out recalls. But the rental car companies are under scrutiny from the agency, which is interested in how quickly repairs are done. Mr. Barton said he wished the government was as concerned about recall repair rates for other fleets, like taxis and shuttle buses.

The rental car companies insist they do a good job of fixing recalled vehicles and are concerned about the safety of their customers. But they are facing increasing pressure from the federal government over the issue.

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, has asked the Federal Trade Commission to explain why rental car companies are allowed to rent out vehicles that have not been repaired even though auto dealers may not sell a new vehicle if a recall is pending. He has also said he plans to introduce a bill this year that would put rental-car companies under the same restriction as new-car dealers.

The directives given above are not intended as legal advice. You may pursue your lemon law claim or any other dispute with your automobiles by being in communication with California lemon law attorneys of Krohn & Moss Ltd., or Call 1-800 US LEMON® (800-875-3666) toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE initial consultation.