Lemon Law Cases
- Audi A6 Sedan
- Bentley
- Cadillac Escalade
- Cadillac STS Sedan
- Cadillac XLR Convertible Roadster
- Chevrolet Corvette
- Chevy Equinox
- Dodge Intrepid
- Ford Cougar
- Ford Escape
- Ford Expedition
- Ford F350 Pickup Truck
- Ford Windstar
- Ford Windstar
- Ford Windstar
- General Motors
- General Motors GMC Acadia
- Hummer
- Infiniti G35 Sport Sedan
- Infiniti Q45
- Kia Sephia
- Land Rover Discovery
- Lexus SC430
- Nissan Maxima
- Nissan Maxima
- Nissan Quest
- Porsche Cayenne
- Volkswagen Passat
- Volkswagen Touareg
Infiniti Q45 Lemon
Consumer Protection: Car's oil-guzzling thirst couldn't be quenched, owner alleged
| Settlement: | $57,984.00 | |
| Case Type: | Lemon Law, Motor Vehicle - Lemon Law | |
| Case: | David Honigman v. Nissan North America-Infiniti Division , No. 34869 | |
| Venue: | Education & Assistance Corp., Smithtown, NY | |
| Judge: | Sheldon Lasher | |
| Date: | Monday, May 08, 2006 | |
| Plaintiff Attorney(s): | Anthony T. Ballato; Massapequa, NY, for Sheldon Honigman | |
| Defendant Attorney(s): | Amumi Suenaga; Los Angeles, CA, for Nissan North America Inc.-Infiniti | |
| Facts: | In March 2004, claimant David Honigman purchased a new 2003 Infiniti 0-45 sedan. The $57,984 purchase included a standard manufacturer's warranty. Honigman claimed that the vehicle subsequently experienced functional problems that began in June 2005. He contended that the problems included oil leaks, excessive oil consumption and other engine malfunctions. During the ensuing seven months, those problems necessitated five separate adjustments and/or repair attempts, which included three reconstructions or replacements of the car's engine. As a result of that work, the vehicle accumulated more than 30 days of repair-shop time. Honigman claimed that the problems were never resolved. He attempted to return the vehicle, but it was refused by the manufacturer, the Infiniti division of Gardena, Calif.-based Nissan North America Inc. Honigman sought recovery via application of the New Car Lemon Law, General Business Law article 11 -A, ยง 198-a. The parties proceeded to an arbitration hearing. Honigman's counsel claimed that the vehicle's poor condition constituted a violation of the Lemon Law, which specifies that a vehicle's first 24 months and/or 18,000 miles should not include more than four repair attempts and/or 30 days of repair-shop time. | |
| Injury: | Honigman claimed that his vehicle experienced functional problems that included oil leaks excessive oil consumption and other engine malfunctions. He sought recovery of $57,984, which represented the vehicle's full replacement value. He also sought recovery of the arbitration 's $250 filing fee. | |
| Verdict: | Arbitrator Sheldon Lasher rendered a claimant's decision. Honigman was awarded $57,984, which represented the vehicle's full replacement cost. He also recovered the arbitration's $250 filing fee. | |
