California AB 1755 Explained: New Pre-Suit Notice Requirements for Lemon Law Claims

California AB 1755

California Lemon Law provides important protections for consumers dealing with defective vehicles. Recent legislative changes have added new procedural requirements for certain claims. For anyone researching the best Lemon Law attorney in San Diego, understanding Assembly Bill 1755 (AB 1755) provides useful context before pursuing a vehicle repurchase or replacement.

Signed into law on September 29, 2024, AB 1755 introduced new procedures for qualifying Lemon Law actions. The law addresses pre-suit notice, manufacturer response periods, mediation, documentation, and case timelines. These requirements can affect how a claim proceeds from the initial demand through potential litigation.

What Is California AB 1755?

AB 1755 amended California’s procedures for certain actions seeking restitution or replacement of qualifying motor vehicles. The legislation applies to covered claims based on noncompliance with an applicable express warranty.

The law created Chapter 12 of Title 10 of Part 2 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Several provisions became operative beginning in 2025, including the formal pre-suit notice procedure.

For consumers and attorneys, the changes create specific procedural steps that require careful attention.

The New Pre-Suit Notice Requirement

Beginning April 1, 2025, a consumer seeking civil penalties must provide written notice to the manufacturer at least 30 days before filing the action.

The notice must contain specific information, including:

  • The consumer’s name
  • The vehicle identification number (VIN)
  • A brief summary of repair history and vehicle problems
  • A demand for repurchase or replacement

The notice must be sent in writing through an approved manufacturer email address or by certified or registered mail with return receipt requested.

This requirement makes accurate documentation particularly valuable. Repair records, warranty information, purchase documents, and communications can help establish the details included in the notice.

How Manufacturer Response Periods Work

AB 1755 establishes a defined period for manufacturers to respond after receiving qualifying notice.

A manufacturer can make an offer for restitution or replacement within 30 days of receiving the notice. If the manufacturer makes a qualifying offer, the transaction must be completed within 60 days from the original notice date under the statutory procedure.

The California Department of Consumer Affairs also explains additional procedures established through subsequent legislation. These include manufacturer acknowledgments, payment requirements, and specific timelines for completing agreed restitution or replacement.

Vehicle Possession Also Has Requirements

Vehicle possession is another important consideration under Section 871.24.

A consumer generally must retain possession of the vehicle for at least 30 days after the manufacturer receives the written notice. If the manufacturer makes an offer for restitution or replacement, possession may need to continue for the full 60-day period described in the statute.

These requirements make timing relevant when evaluating the next step in a Lemon Law matter.

Mandatory Mediation Changes the Litigation Process

AB 1755 also establishes mediation requirements for covered civil actions. The statute requires the parties to schedule mediation within a specified period after the defendant’s responsive pleading.

The law generally stays discovery until mediation concludes, subject to specific disclosures and limited depositions. The statute also establishes deadlines for initial disclosures and mediation scheduling.

This structure encourages early evaluation of the dispute while giving both sides defined procedural obligations.

At Cline APC, we recognize that these requirements can make Lemon Law claims more detail-oriented. Our strategy focuses on reviewing the vehicle history, warranty documents, repair records, and communications before determining the appropriate legal strategy.

Which Claims Are Covered?

AB 1755 applies to certain actions seeking restitution or replacement of a motor vehicle under California’s Lemon Law statutes. The legislation specifically addresses claims involving noncompliance with an applicable express warranty.

The covered definition of motor vehicle includes certain new motor vehicles, motor homes, and travel trailers. The statute also excludes service contract claims and actions seeking remedies outside its specified restitution or replacement framework.

Because eligibility depends on the facts and applicable warranty, each claim requires individual review.

Why Documentation Remains Essential

Strong documentation helps establish the history behind a Lemon Law dispute. Relevant records can include:

  • Purchase or lease agreements
  • Warranty documents
  • Repair orders
  • Service invoices
  • Registration records
  • Financing information
  • Records of incidental expenses
  • Communications with dealerships or manufacturers

AB 1755 specifically requires certain vehicle and claim documents during the litigation process. Organized records can therefore support both the initial evaluation and later procedural requirements.

How Cline APC Can Help With California Lemon Law Claims

California’s updated Lemon Law procedures create specific requirements for notice, timing, documentation, and mediation. Understanding those requirements can help clarify the process surrounding a potential vehicle repurchase or replacement claim.

At Cline APC, we help clients evaluate defective vehicle claims and identify the legal procedures that apply to each case. Our team can review repair histories, warranty coverage, manufacturer communications, and other relevant records.

For those searching for the Best Lemon Law Attorney in San Diego, Cline APC offers guidance focused on California Lemon Law and the procedures created by AB 1755.

Speak With Cline APC

A defective vehicle can create repeated repair appointments, unexpected expenses, and significant disruption. California law provides specific remedies when statutory requirements are satisfied.

Contact Cline APC for a free case evaluation and learn how our Lemon Law attorneys can assess the facts of a potential claim.

Share this post

Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Email
Picture of Brian Cline

Brian Cline

Brian Cline is an experienced California Lemon Law attorney and founder of Cline, APC, based in La Jolla. With nearly 20 years representing consumers statewide, Brian has achieved successful results for clients under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, taking on auto giants such as BMW, Ford, and Mercedes-Benz. He earned his law degree from the Columbus School of Law in Washington, D.C., and a BA in Economics from UC San Diego. Brian is an active member of the State Bar of California (Bar #243933) and the La Jolla Bar Association. Earlier in his career, he also served as defense counsel for the San Diego Police Department in a high-profile civil case. Outside of practicing law, Brian enjoys surfing along California’s coast with his family. Schedule your free consultation or connect with Brian on LinkedIn to understand your Lemon Law rights.
Table of Contents