New Mexico
New Mexico Lemon Law (2026): How to Qualify & Get a Refund
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 17, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 17, 2026. · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

New Mexico's Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act (NMSA 1978, Sections 57-16A-1 through 57-16A-9) covers new vehicles with a manufacturer's express warranty and presumes a lemon after four or more repair attempts for the same defect, or 30 or more cumulative business days out of service, within one year of delivery or the warranty term, whichever is earlier. The manufacturer (not the consumer) selects between replacing the vehicle or issuing a full refund, less a reasonable use allowance.
What Is New Mexico's Lemon Law?
New Mexico's Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act (NMSA 1978, Sections 57-16A-1 through 57-16A-9) protects consumers who purchase or lease new vehicles that turn out to have serious, unrepairable defects. The law requires manufacturers to replace the vehicle or refund the purchase price when repeated repair attempts fail to fix a problem that substantially impairs the vehicle's use and market value.

The Act also includes a separate provision for used vehicles (Section 57-16A-3.1), which prevents dealers from disclaiming the implied warranty of merchantability for a limited period after sale.
What Vehicles Does the Law Cover?
New Vehicle Coverage
The Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act applies to new motor vehicles purchased or leased in New Mexico that come with a manufacturer's express warranty and whose gross vehicle weight is under 10,000 pounds. Covered vehicle types include:
- Passenger cars (sedans, coupes, hatchbacks, convertibles)
- Motorcycles
- Light-duty trucks and pickup trucks under 10,000 lbs GVWR
- SUVs and crossover vehicles
- Vans and minivans
- Leased vehicles used for personal, family, or household purposes
Vehicles Not Covered
The following vehicles fall outside the Act's protection:
- Vehicles purchased primarily for business, commercial, or agricultural purposes
- Motor homes (the living quarters portion; chassis components may be covered separately)
- Off-road vehicles not designed for highway use
- Vehicles sold without a manufacturer's express warranty
Who Qualifies as a Consumer?
Under Section 57-16A-2, a "consumer" is a buyer or lessee of a motor vehicle for purposes other than resale. The definition also extends to any person who receives a transfer of the vehicle during the warranty period and is entitled to enforce the warranty. This means subsequent owners who acquire the vehicle while it remains under warranty can also invoke the lemon law.
Coverage Period and Reporting Requirements
New Mexico's lemon law coverage operates within a specific time window. Consumers must report nonconformities to the manufacturer, its agent, or its authorized dealer during the express warranty term or within one year following original delivery of the vehicle, whichever is earlier (Section 57-16A-3(A)). There is no mileage cap in the statute.
This "whichever is earlier" language is important. If the manufacturer's express warranty extends beyond one year, the lemon law coverage still ends at the one-year mark from delivery. Conversely, if the warranty expires before one year, the coverage ends when the warranty does.
Written Notice Requirement
The lemon law presumption (discussed below) does not apply unless the manufacturer has received prior direct written notification from the consumer and has been given an opportunity to cure the defect. If the manufacturer requires written notice before honoring a refund or replacement claim, it must clearly and conspicuously disclose that requirement to the consumer, including the name and address where the notice should be sent.
Your written notice should include:
- Your name and contact information
- Vehicle details (year, make, model, VIN)
- A description of the nonconformity
- A summary of all repair attempts
- A clear statement requesting a refund or replacement
The Lemon Law Presumption
New Mexico law creates a rebuttable presumption that a manufacturer has had a reasonable number of attempts to repair a vehicle when certain conditions are met.
When the Presumption Applies
| Trigger | Threshold | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Same Defect Repaired | 4 or more attempts | The same nonconformity must substantially impair the use and market value of the vehicle |
| Days Out of Service | 30 or more business days | Cumulative total during the coverage period; excludes routine maintenance downtime |
| Timeframe | Express warranty term or 1 year from delivery | Whichever is the earlier date |
Business Days: New Mexico counts business days rather than calendar days for the out-of-service threshold. Weekends and holidays when the dealer is closed do not count toward the 30-day total. This standard tends to work in the consumer's favor because it takes longer to accumulate 30 business days than 30 calendar days, giving more time for the defect to reoccur and strengthen the claim.
What Is a Substantial Nonconformity?
The defect or condition must "substantially impair the use and market value" of the motor vehicle. The statute uses the conjunction "and," meaning both use and market value must be affected. Examples of qualifying nonconformities include:
- Engine problems causing stalling, loss of power, or failure to start
- Transmission defects that affect shifting or drivability
- Brake system malfunctions or repeated failures
- Steering problems that create safety hazards
- Electrical system failures affecting critical vehicle functions
- Air conditioning or heating system failures
- Persistent water leaks causing interior damage
- Safety system malfunctions (airbags, ABS, stability control)
- Excessive oil consumption requiring frequent attention
Minor cosmetic defects, isolated rattles, or problems that do not affect how you use the vehicle or its resale value typically do not qualify.
Extension of Time Periods
The warranty term and out-of-service period may be extended by any period during which repair services were unavailable to the consumer because of conditions beyond the consumer's control, such as natural disasters, strikes, or war.
Consumer Remedies: Refund or Replacement
When a vehicle qualifies as a lemon under the Act, the statute directs the manufacturer to either replace the vehicle or accept its return and issue a refund. Under Section 57-16A-3(B), "the manufacturer shall replace the motor vehicle with a comparable motor vehicle or accept return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund to the consumer the full purchase price." This means the manufacturer selects which remedy to offer; New Mexico does not give the consumer an explicit right to demand one remedy over the other. However, a replacement vehicle must be "comparable" and "acceptable to the consumer," so in practice a consumer who rejects an unsatisfactory replacement may push the manufacturer toward a refund.
Option 1: Replacement Vehicle
The manufacturer provides a comparable new motor vehicle. The replacement should be of the same make and model with similar equipment, options, and accessories. If the consumer does not accept the replacement as comparable, the manufacturer must work with the consumer to find an acceptable substitute.
Option 2: Full Refund (Vehicle Buyback)
The manufacturer accepts the return of the vehicle and refunds the consumer the full purchase price, including all "collateral charges." Under Section 57-16A-2, collateral charges are defined as additional charges not directly attributed to the manufacturer's suggested retail price, including:
- All applicable taxes
- License fees
- Title and registration fees
- Other governmental charges related to the purchase
The refund is the full purchase price plus 'collateral charges' as statutorily defined above, less a reasonable use allowance; the statute does not separately list towing costs, rental car expenses, or other incidental damages as refund components.
The Usage Deduction
Under both the refund and replacement options, the manufacturer may subtract a reasonable allowance for the consumer's use of the vehicle. Under Section 57-16A-3(B), this use allowance covers only the period before the consumer first reported the nonconformity and any subsequent time when the vehicle was not out of service for repairs.
The statute does not specify a numeric formula, but a common industry calculation is:
Usage Deduction = (Purchase Price x Miles Before First Repair Report) / 120,000
For example, if you paid $40,000 and drove 5,000 miles before reporting the defect, the deduction would be approximately $1,667.
Refund Distribution
When there is an outstanding loan on the vehicle, the manufacturer pays the lender the remaining loan balance and refunds any excess to the consumer. Refunds are distributed to the consumer and any lienholder according to their respective interests.
UCC Remedy Limitation
Under Section 57-16A-5, a consumer who seeks enforcement under the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act cannot also pursue Uniform Commercial Code remedies found in Sections 55-2-602 through 55-2-608 NMSA 1978. You must choose between lemon law remedies and UCC remedies.
Federal Backstop: Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
New Mexico's state lemon law works alongside the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.), which governs written warranties on consumer products nationwide. If a manufacturer fails to honor its written warranty on a vehicle, you may have a claim under Magnuson-Moss even if you do not meet New Mexico's specific lemon law thresholds. A successful Magnuson-Moss claim allows recovery of attorney fees, making it easier to find counsel. In practice, attorneys handling New Mexico lemon law cases typically plead both state and federal claims together.
Dispute Resolution Procedures
New Mexico's lemon law establishes a framework for resolving disputes without going directly to court.
Manufacturer's Informal Dispute Settlement Program
If the manufacturer maintains an informal dispute settlement procedure that complies with Federal Trade Commission regulations (16 CFR Part 703), consumers may be required to submit their claim to that program before pursuing refund or replacement remedies. For the program to be valid, it must:
- Meet all requirements under 16 CFR Part 703
- Be reasonably accessible to consumers
- Deliver decisions within the timeframes set by federal regulations
- Not force the consumer to waive any statutory rights
Certified Third-Party Arbitration
New Mexico may certify independent arbitration programs that meet specific standards. These programs offer a faster, lower-cost alternative to litigation. BBB AUTO LINE is one commonly available program for certain manufacturers.
Court Action
If no qualifying dispute settlement program exists, or if the consumer is dissatisfied with the outcome, the consumer can file a lawsuit. Consumers who win their lemon law case in court are entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees and court costs from the manufacturer (Section 57-16A-9). This fee-shifting provision makes it easier for consumers to find attorneys willing to take lemon law cases on a contingency or fee-recovery basis.
Manufacturer Defenses
Manufacturers may raise several affirmative defenses under Section 57-16A-4 to avoid liability.
Valid Affirmative Defenses
| Defense | What the Manufacturer Claims | How Consumers Can Respond |
|---|---|---|
| No substantial impairment | The defect does not substantially impair use and market value | Document how the defect affects daily driving, safety, or resale value |
| Consumer abuse or neglect | The nonconformity was caused by the consumer's abuse, neglect, or misuse | Provide maintenance records showing proper care |
| Unauthorized modifications | The defect resulted from unauthorized modifications or alterations | Demonstrate the defect existed before modifications or is unrelated |
| Bad faith claim | The consumer's claim was not filed in good faith | Maintain thorough records of all communications and repair visits |
The burden of proving any affirmative defense falls on the manufacturer. Consumers should keep detailed documentation to counter these claims.
Dealer vs. Manufacturer Liability
New Mexico's lemon law places primary responsibility on the manufacturer, not the dealer. However, dealers must provide repair services and documentation. Dealers who engage in deceptive conduct may face separate liability under the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act (Sections 57-12-1 through 57-12-26 NMSA 1978).
Used Vehicle Protections (Section 57-16A-3.1)
New Mexico provides a separate layer of protection for used car buyers. Under Section 57-16A-3.1, a used motor vehicle dealer cannot exclude, modify, or disclaim the implied warranty of merchantability for a limited period after sale.
Duration of Used Car Warranty
The implied warranty of merchantability lasts until midnight of the fifteenth calendar day after delivery or until the vehicle has been driven 500 miles after delivery, whichever comes first.
What "Merchantability" Means
A used motor vehicle meets the implied warranty of merchantability if it functions substantially free of any defect that significantly limits its use for ordinary transportation on public highways.
Required Dealer Disclosure
The purchase agreement must include a conspicuous statement in boldface, 10-point or larger type, set off from the rest of the agreement:
"New Mexico law requires that this vehicle will be fit for the ordinary purposes for which the vehicle is used for fifteen days or five hundred miles after delivery, whichever is earlier, except with regard to particular defects disclosed on the first page of this agreement. You (the consumer) will have to pay up to twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each of the first two repairs if the warranty is violated."
If the agreement lacks this disclosure, the entire purchase agreement is voidable at the consumer's option.
Consumer Repair Cost Sharing
If the used vehicle does not meet the implied warranty, the seller must have a reasonable opportunity to repair it. The consumer pays one-half the cost of the first two repairs needed to bring the vehicle into compliance, up to $25 per repair.
Consequence of Warranty Violations
Any attempt to exclude, modify, or disclaim the implied warranty in violation of this section makes the purchase agreement voidable at the buyer's option. This gives the consumer the potential right to unwind the entire transaction.
Title Branding and Disclosure
The Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act's definitions section does not itself set out title-branding or resale-disclosure procedures for lemon law buybacks. If you are buying a used vehicle in New Mexico, check the vehicle history report and ask the seller directly whether it was ever returned to a manufacturer as a lemon, and contact the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division for current guidance on any separate title or disclosure rules that may apply.
Electric Vehicle Considerations
Electric vehicles (EVs) sold in New Mexico with manufacturer warranties are covered under the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act. As EV adoption grows in the state, understanding how the lemon law applies to these vehicles is increasingly relevant.
Common EV Defects That May Qualify
- Battery degradation significantly beyond normal parameters
- Charging system failures (onboard charger, charging port)
- Range substantially below manufacturer specifications
- Electric motor or drivetrain malfunctions
- Thermal management system failures affecting battery performance
- Software defects affecting vehicle operation or safety
- Regenerative braking system problems
EV-Specific Challenges
- Software updates: Manufacturers may argue that over-the-air updates resolved the issue, potentially resetting the repair attempt count
- Battery warranty: Separate battery warranties (often 8 years/100,000 miles) may complicate coverage analysis
- Limited service options: Fewer New Mexico dealers may have EV-certified technicians
- Documentation: Electrical and software defects may require specialized diagnostic records
Statute of Limitations
Timing is critical when filing a New Mexico lemon law claim.
Key Deadlines
| Deadline | Timeframe | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Report defects | During express warranty term or within 1 year of delivery (whichever is earlier) | Section 57-16A-3(A) |
| File a lawsuit | Within 18 months of original delivery | Section 57-16A-8 |
| Post-arbitration court action | Within 90 days after final panel action | Section 57-16A-8 |
The 18-month and 90-day deadlines work on a "whichever is later" basis. If you go through a dispute settlement program and receive a decision after the 18-month window has passed, you still have 90 days from that decision to file suit.
How to Protect Your Rights
- Report every defect in writing during the warranty period
- Keep copies of all repair orders, invoices, and communications
- Track the number of days your vehicle spends at the dealer for repairs
- Follow manufacturer notice procedures exactly
- Use the manufacturer's dispute settlement program if required before going to court
- Consult a consumer protection attorney if informal resolution fails
Filing a Lemon Law Complaint
If you believe your vehicle qualifies as a lemon, follow these steps:
- Document everything. Keep every repair order, invoice, and written communication. Record dates the vehicle was dropped off and picked up.
- Send written notice to the manufacturer. Mail a detailed letter via certified mail describing the defect, listing all repair attempts, and requesting a refund or replacement.
- Use the manufacturer's dispute settlement program if one exists and complies with FTC regulations.
- Contact the New Mexico Attorney General's Consumer Protection Division if you need guidance. You can reach them at 1-844-255-9210 or file a complaint online at nmag.gov.
- Consult an attorney. If informal efforts fail, a consumer protection attorney experienced with New Mexico lemon law can evaluate your case. Remember that prevailing consumers recover attorney fees under the Act.
More New Mexico Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How many repair attempts trigger New Mexico's lemon law?
New Mexico law presumes a vehicle is a lemon after four or more repair attempts for the same nonconformity that substantially impairs the vehicle's use and market value, or after the vehicle has been out of service for 30 or more cumulative business days during the coverage period. The coverage period runs during the express warranty term or one year from original delivery, whichever is earlier.
Does New Mexico count business days or calendar days for the out-of-service period?
New Mexico uses business days for calculating the 30-day out-of-service threshold. Weekends and holidays when the dealer is closed do not count. This is more favorable to consumers than states that use calendar days, because it takes longer to reach the 30-day mark, giving more time for the defect to recur.
Who chooses between a refund and a replacement vehicle in New Mexico?
Under the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act, the manufacturer selects whether to replace the vehicle or accept its return and issue a refund. The statute directs the manufacturer to replace the vehicle or accept return and provide a refund; it does not give the consumer an explicit right to demand one remedy over the other. However, a replacement must be comparable and acceptable to the consumer, so a consumer who rejects an inadequate replacement may effectively push the manufacturer toward a refund.
Does New Mexico's lemon law cover used cars?
New Mexico has a separate used car protection under Section 57-16A-3.1. Used motor vehicle dealers cannot disclaim the implied warranty of merchantability for 15 calendar days or 500 miles after delivery, whichever comes first. The consumer pays up to $25 for each of the first two warranty repairs. This is not the same as the full lemon law for new vehicles, but it does provide meaningful short-term protection.
How long do I have to file a lemon law claim in New Mexico?
You must file a lawsuit within 18 months of the original delivery date. If you use a manufacturer's informal dispute settlement program, you have 90 days after the panel's final decision to file suit, even if the 18-month window has already closed. Defects must be reported during the express warranty period or within one year of delivery, whichever is earlier.
What is the usage deduction on a New Mexico lemon law refund?
The manufacturer may subtract a reasonable allowance for your use of the vehicle before you first reported the defect. The statute does not specify a fixed formula, but a common calculation is purchase price multiplied by miles driven before first repair report, divided by 120,000. For example, if you paid $40,000 and drove 5,000 miles before the first report, the deduction would be roughly $1,667.
Can I recover attorney fees if I win my lemon law case?
Yes. Under Section 57-16A-9, a consumer who prevails in court is entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees and court costs from the manufacturer. This fee-shifting provision makes it easier to find attorneys willing to take lemon law cases. Federal claims under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act also carry attorney fee recovery.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the refund description to match the statute's closed 'collateral charges' definition (removed unsupported towing/rental/incidental-damages claim), added motorcycles and the 10,000-lb GVWR cap to the covered-vehicle list per Section 57-16A-2.F, and reduced the uncited 'Title Branding and Disclosure' section to a hedged general statement since no linked statute supports its specific title-branding claims.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 57
§ 57-12-1Short titleIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
Chapter 57, Article 12 NMSA 1978 may be cited as the "Unfair Practices Act".
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 239 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Romero v. Philip Morris Inc. (New Mexico Supreme Court 2010, 148 N.M. 713)“…MSA 1978, §§ 57-1-1 to -15 (1979, as amended through 1987); NMSA 1978, §§ 57-12-1 to -22 (1967, as amended through 1999).…”
- Cordova v. World Finance Corp. of NM (New Mexico Supreme Court 2009, 146 N.M. 256)“…hin the meaning of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act. See NMSA 1978, §§ 57-12-1 to -24 (1967, as amended through 2003).…”
- Quynh Truong v. Allstate Insurance (New Mexico Supreme Court 2010, 147 N.M. 583)“…cability of an exemption to the Unfair Practices Act (UPA), NMSA 1978, Sections 57-12-1 to -22 (1967, as amended through 1999),…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Mexico Data Privacy Laws: Breach Notification, AG Enforcement & 2026 Legislation, New Mexico Biometric Privacy Laws: Collection, Consent & Penalties (2026), New Mexico Data Breach Notification Laws: Reporting Rules & Timelines (2026)
§ 57-16A-1Short titleIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
This act [57-16A-1 to 57-16A-9 NMSA 1978] may be cited as the "Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act".
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cross-referenced in the statute itself: § 57-16A-9
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1998
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Chavez v. U-Haul Co. of New Mexico, Inc. (New Mexico Supreme Court 1997, 124 N.M. 165)“…ging violations of the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 57-16A-1 to -9 (1985), and the Unfair Practices…”
- Jones v. General Motors Corp. (New Mexico Court of Appeals 1998, 124 N.M. 606)“…emedies to certain purchasers of defective automobiles. See NMSA 1978, §§ 57-16A-1 through -9 (1985). We hold that Plainti…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 57-16A-2DefinitionsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
As used in the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act: A. "collateral charges" means additional charges to a consumer not directly attributed to a manufacturer's suggested retail price label for a new motor vehicle and includes all taxes, license, title and registration fees and other governmental charges related to the purchase of the vehicle; B. "comparable motor vehicle" means an identical or reasonably equivalent motor vehicle; C. "consumer" means the purchaser, other than for purposes of resale, of a new or used motor vehicle normally used for personal, family or household purposes, a person to whom such a motor vehicle has been transferred during the duration of an express warranty applicable to the motor vehicle and any other person entitled by the terms of the warranty to enforce the obligations of the warranty; D.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
§ 57-16A-3Conformation to express warrantiesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A. If a new motor vehicle does not conform to all applicable express warranties and the consumer reports the nonconformity to the manufacturer, its agent or its authorized dealer during the term of such express warranties or during the period of one year following the date of original delivery of the motor vehicle to a consumer, whichever is the earlier date, the manufacturer, its agent or its authorized dealer shall make such repairs as are necessary to conform the vehicle to such express warranties. B. If the manufacturer or its agent or authorized dealer, after a reasonable number of attempts, is unable to conform the new motor vehicle to any applicable express warranty by repairing or correcting any defect or condition which substantially impairs the use and market value of the motor vehicle to the consumer, the manufacturer shall replace the motor vehicle with a comparable motor vehicle or accept return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund to the consumer the full purchase price including all collateral charges, less a reasonable allowance for the consumer's use of the vehicle.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Barile v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (District Court, D. New Mexico 2020)“…sonable allowance for the consumer’s use of the vehicle.” NMSA 1978, § 57-16A-3(B) (2000 Repl. Pamp.). “[A] reasonabl…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 57-16A-3.1Used motor vehiclesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A. Unless a seller is a used motor vehicle dealer, before the seller attempts to sell a used motor vehicle, the seller shall possess the title to the used motor vehicle and the title shall be in the seller's name. B. Except as otherwise provided in the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act, a used motor vehicle dealer shall not exclude, modify or disclaim the implied warranty of merchantability prescribed in Section 55-2-314 NMSA 1978 or limit the remedies for a breach of the warranty before midnight of the fifteenth calendar day after delivery of a used motor vehicle or until a used motor vehicle is driven five hundred miles after delivery, whichever is earlier. In calculating time under this subsection, a day on which the warranty is breached and all subsequent days in which the used motor vehicle fails to conform with the implied warranty of merchantability are excluded. In calculating distance under this subsection, the miles driven to obtain or in connection with the repair, servicing or testing of the used motor vehicle that fails to conform with the implied warranty of merchantability are excluded.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
§ 57-16A-4Affirmative defensesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
It shall be an affirmative defense to any claim under the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act that: A. an alleged nonconformity does not substantially impair the use and market value of the motor vehicle; B. a nonconformity is the result of abuse, neglect or unauthorized modifications or alterations of the motor vehicle; C. a claim by a consumer was not filed in good faith; or D. any other affirmative defense allowed by law.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
§ 57-16A-5Limitation of remedyIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Any consumer who seeks enforcement of the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act shall be foreclosed from pursuing any Uniform Commercial Code remedy set forth in Sections 55-2-602 through 55-2-608 NMSA 1978.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
§ 57-16A-8Limitation of actionIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Any action brought to enforce the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act shall be commenced within eighteen months following the date of original delivery of the motor vehicle to a consumer, or, in the event that a consumer resorts to an informal dispute settlement procedure pursuant to Section 6 [57-16A-6 NMSA 1978] of the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act, within ninety days following the final action of the panel, whichever is later.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
§ 57-16A-9Reasonable attorney feesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A consumer who prevails in an action brought to enforce the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance Act shall be entitled to receive reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs from the manufacturer. If a consumer does not prevail in such an action and brings that action for frivolous reasons or in bad faith, the manufacturer shall be entitled to receive reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs from the consumer.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Barile v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (District Court, D. New Mexico 2020)“…titled to receive reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs….” NMSA 1978, § 57-16A-9 (2000 Repl. Pamp.). 3. Plainti…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 15
§ 2301DefinitionsIn forcecited in 39 of our articles
For the purposes of this chapter: The term “consumer product” means any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes (including any such property intended to be attached to or installed in any real property without regard to whether it is so attached or installed). The term “Commission” means the Federal Trade Commission. The term “consumer” means a buyer (other than for purposes of resale) of any consumer product, any person to whom such product is transferred during the duration of an implied or written warranty (or service contract) applicable to the product, and any other person who is entitled by the terms of such warranty (or service contract) or under applicable State law to enforce against the warrantor (or service contractor) the obligations of the warranty (or service contract). The term “supplier” means any person engaged in the business of making a consumer product directly or indirectly available to consumers. The term “warrantor” means any supplier or other person who gives or offers to give a written warranty or who is or may be obligated under an implied warranty.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 1,671 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Walsh v. Ford Motor Company (1986) held that except where Magnuson-Moss expressly prescribes a rule, the Act applies state written and implied warranty law, citing Section 2301(7)'s definition of implied warranty as one arising under state law. Birdsong v. Apple (2009) dismissed Act claims once the state warranty claims failed.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- John F. "Jack" Walsh v. Ford Motor Company (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1986, 807 F.2d 1000)✓Ford owners sought nationwide classes over transmissions that slipped from park into reverse; reading Section 2301(7) and (6), the D.C. Circuit held Magnuson-Moss applies state warranty law except where the Act expressly prescribes a rule, and vacated class certification.
- Birdsong v. Apple, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2009, 590 F.3d 955)✓iPod buyers alleged the player risked hearing loss; because Section 2301(7) ties implied warranty to state law, the Ninth Circuit treated the Magnuson-Moss claim as standing or falling with the California warranty claims and affirmed dismissal once those failed.
- Robert E. Kelly Virginia L. Kelly v. Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2004, 377 F.3d 1034)“…gnizable under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (the “Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. This consumer dis…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Arkansas Lemon Law (2026): How to Qualify & Get a Refund, Washington Lemon Law (2026): How to Qualify & Get a Refund, Florida Lemon Law (2026): How to Qualify & Get a Refund
Explore the law
The laws cited above reference these related sections in their own text:
- New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 55 § 55-2-602 — Manner and effect of rightful rejection view in our statute record · read at the official source
- New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 55 § 55-2-608 — Revocation of acceptance in whole or in part view in our statute record · read at the official source
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMOneSource)(nmonesource.com)
- New Mexico Attorney General Consumer Affairs Division(nmag.gov).gov
- New Mexico Attorney General Complaint Submission(nmag.gov).gov
- New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division(mvd.newmexico.gov).gov
- New Mexico Administrative Code 12.2.4 NMAC (Motor Vehicle Quality Assurance)(srca.nm.gov).gov
- New Mexico Legislature Bill Tracking(nmlegis.gov).gov