Oregon
Oregon Lemon Law (2026): How to Qualify and 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. · 3 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Oregon's lemon law (ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418) protects buyers and lessees of new motor vehicles when a warranty defect cannot be fixed after 3 repair attempts, 1 attempt for a safety defect, or 30 cumulative days out of service within the first 2 years or 24,000 miles of delivery. If the vehicle qualifies, the manufacturer must either replace it or issue a full refund minus a mileage-based use allowance.
What Is the Oregon Lemon Law?
Oregon's Lemon Law is found in ORS 646A.400 through 646A.418. It protects consumers who purchase or lease new motor vehicles that turn out to have substantial defects the manufacturer cannot fix.

The law gives consumers the right to demand a remedy when a new car, truck, SUV, van, motorcycle, or motorhome has a warranty defect that substantially reduces its use, market value, or safety. Oregon's Department of Justice oversees consumer complaints related to the statute.
Unlike some states, Oregon's lemon law does not require the consumer to go through arbitration before filing a lawsuit, unless the manufacturer has set up a qualifying informal dispute settlement procedure and properly notified the consumer about it.
What Vehicles Are Covered
Oregon's Lemon Law applies to new motor vehicles purchased or leased in the state for personal, family, or household purposes.
Under ORS 646A.400, a "consumer" is the purchaser or lessee of a new motor vehicle (not for resale purposes), as well as any person to whom the vehicle is transferred during the warranty period for the same personal-use purposes.
Covered Vehicle Types
- New passenger cars, including sedans, coupes, and hatchbacks
- Pickup trucks and light-duty trucks
- Vans, including minivans and passenger vans
- Sport utility vehicles (SUVs)
- Motorcycles (with a separate mileage-offset divisor of 25,000)
- Motorhomes (with extended out-of-service thresholds and a 90,000-mile offset divisor)
- New vehicles acquired through a lease for personal use
Vehicles Not Covered
- Used vehicles (separate protections may apply)
- Commercial vehicles used primarily for business purposes
- Off-road vehicles not designed for highway use
- Vehicles purchased outside Oregon and not registered here
Oregon's Lemon Law Presumption
Under ORS 646A.406, a vehicle is presumed to be a lemon when certain conditions are met within the coverage period. The coverage period runs for two years or 24,000 miles from the date of original delivery, whichever comes first.
Qualifying Conditions
| Condition | Requirement | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Repair Attempts (Same Defect) | 3 or more attempts | The same nonconformity that substantially reduces use, value, or safety |
| Safety Defect Repair | 1 or more attempts | For defects likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, if the problem persists |
| Days Out of Service (Standard Vehicles) | 30+ cumulative calendar days | Vehicle unavailable due to repair of covered defects |
| Days Out of Service (Motorhomes) | 60+ cumulative calendar days | Extended threshold for motorhome repairs |
| Coverage Period | 2 years or 24,000 miles | Whichever comes first from date of original delivery |
Oregon requires only 3 repair attempts, compared to 4 in many other states. For safety defects likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, only 1 repair attempt is needed. These lower thresholds make it easier for Oregon consumers to qualify for protection.
Extension of Time Periods
The two-year period, 24,000-mile limit, and 30-day out-of-service period are all extended by any time during which repair services are unavailable to the consumer because of war, invasion, strike, fire, flood, or other natural disaster.
What Qualifies as a Substantial Nonconformity?
A nonconformity must substantially impair the vehicle's use, market value, or safety. The problem must be covered by the manufacturer's express warranty and must be significant enough to affect your ability to use the vehicle as intended. Common examples include:
- Engine or transmission failures
- Brake system defects
- Steering malfunctions
- Electrical system failures
- Safety system malfunctions (airbags, stability control)
- Persistent stalling, hesitation, or surging
- Significant fluid leaks
- Heating or cooling system failures
Minor cosmetic issues or problems that do not affect the vehicle's operation, safety, or value typically do not qualify.
Written Notice Requirement
Before a consumer can obtain a remedy under Oregon's Lemon Law, ORS 646A.402 requires two important steps.
First, the consumer must report each nonconformity to the manufacturer, the manufacturer's agent, or an authorized dealer during the coverage period. This gives the manufacturer the opportunity to attempt repairs.
Second, the manufacturer must receive direct written notification from the consumer (or someone acting on the consumer's behalf). This written notice does not need to come before filing a lawsuit, but it must be sent before a court can determine that the remedy is available.
Keeping detailed records of all communications with the dealer and manufacturer is essential. Save copies of repair orders, written complaints, emails, and certified mail receipts.
Manufacturer's Remedy Obligation: Replace or Refund
When a vehicle qualifies as a lemon under ORS 646A.404, the manufacturer must do one of two things: replace the vehicle with a comparable new one, or accept return of the vehicle and issue a full refund. The statute frames this as the manufacturer's obligation to satisfy the consumer, and in practice consumers can indicate their preference, but the law assigns the ultimate choice of remedy to the manufacturer.
Option 1: Replacement Vehicle
The manufacturer may provide a comparable new replacement vehicle. The replacement must be of similar value and specifications, must be acceptable to the consumer, and must carry the manufacturer's full warranty.
Option 2: Full Refund
If the manufacturer opts for a refund, it must pay back the following:
- Full purchase or lease price, including taxes
- Collateral charges (license fees, registration fees, and similar costs related to the sale or lease)
- Finance charges (excluding certain interest)
Mileage-Based Use Allowance: The manufacturer may deduct a use allowance calculated by a statutory formula. For standard motor vehicles, multiply the mileage driven by the combined cash price (or lease price) plus collateral charges, then divide by 120,000. For motorhomes, divide by 90,000. For motorcycles, divide by 25,000. Mileage is measured from delivery to the date the consumer first reported the nonconformity.
The mileage calculation excludes miles during any period when the consumer did not have use of the vehicle because the manufacturer or dealer was repairing it.
Aftermarket Items: For aftermarket items purchased within 20 days of delivery, the manufacturer may either refund the cost or remove the item without damage and return it to the consumer.
Lemon Law Buyback Title Branding
When a manufacturer repurchases a vehicle under Oregon's Lemon Law, the vehicle receives a permanent title brand. Under ORS 646A.405, the manufacturer must notify the Oregon DMV that the vehicle must be branded "Lemon Law Buyback."
Manufacturers and dealers acting as the manufacturer's agent must note "Lemon Law Buyback" in the remarks section of the title application. Anyone who later sells a lemon law buyback vehicle must provide the buyer with written notice that the vehicle was repurchased by the manufacturer because of a defect. Failing to disclose this information is an unlawful trade practice under Oregon law.
This branding requirement protects future buyers from unknowingly purchasing a vehicle with a history of substantial defects.
How to File a Lemon Law Claim in Oregon
Filing a lemon law claim requires proper documentation and following the correct procedures.
Step 1: Document Everything
- Keep copies of all repair orders, invoices, and service records
- Record the dates the vehicle was dropped off and picked up for each repair
- Document the specific problems reported at each visit
- Track the cumulative calendar days the vehicle was out of service
- Save all correspondence with the dealer and manufacturer
Step 2: Report Each Problem During the Coverage Period
Each nonconformity must be reported to the manufacturer, manufacturer's agent, or authorized dealer. Without proper reporting during the coverage period, you may not meet the statutory requirements.
Step 3: Allow Required Repair Attempts
Give the manufacturer or dealer the opportunity to repair the vehicle:
- At least 3 failed repair attempts for the same nonconformity, OR
- At least 1 failed attempt for a safety defect likely to cause death or serious injury, OR
- 30 or more cumulative calendar days out of service (60 or more for motorhomes)
Step 4: Send Written Notice to the Manufacturer
Send direct written notification to the manufacturer describing the defect and stating that you are seeking a remedy under Oregon's Lemon Law. Use certified mail with return receipt requested so you have proof of delivery.
Step 5: Consult an Attorney
The Oregon Department of Justice recommends contacting a private attorney if you believe you have been sold a lemon. The Oregon State Bar lawyer referral service can help you find legal representation at 503-684-3763 or toll-free in Oregon at 1-800-452-7636.
You can also contact the Oregon DOJ Consumer Protection division at (503) 378-4320 from Salem, (503) 299-5576 from Portland, or (877) 877-9392 elsewhere in Oregon (toll free).
Step 6: Consider Arbitration or Litigation
Depending on the manufacturer, you may need to go through an informal dispute settlement procedure before filing a lawsuit.
Informal Dispute Settlement Procedures
Under ORS 646A.408, if a manufacturer has established or participates in an informal dispute settlement procedure that substantially complies with the federal requirements in 16 C.F.R. Part 703, and the manufacturer has properly notified the consumer about the procedure, the consumer must first use that procedure before seeking remedies in court.
A key consumer protection: arbitration decisions are binding on the manufacturer but not on the consumer. If you are unsatisfied with the arbitration outcome, you retain the right to reject the decision and file a lawsuit.
The BBB AUTO LINE program is one of the largest dispute resolution programs for vehicle warranty complaints in the United States. It provides mediation and, if necessary, arbitration hearings as a free option for consumers.
Under ORS 646A.410, manufacturers that participate in informal dispute settlement procedures must keep records of all cases submitted. The Oregon Department of Justice may review these records to verify that arbitrators are complying with the law.
Manufacturer Defenses
Manufacturers may raise several defenses to avoid lemon law liability.
Common Manufacturer Defenses
| Defense | Manufacturer's Argument | Consumer's Counter |
|---|---|---|
| Consumer abuse or neglect | Defect caused by owner misuse | Provide maintenance records showing proper care |
| Unauthorized modifications | Aftermarket parts caused the problem | Show defect existed before modifications |
| Nonconformity not substantial | Problem does not substantially impair use, value, or safety | Document specific impacts on daily vehicle use |
| Insufficient repair attempts | Consumer did not allow required number of attempts | Show repair history meets statutory thresholds |
| Outside coverage period | Defect reported after 2 years or 24,000 miles | Show first report was within coverage period |
| No written notice | Manufacturer did not receive direct written notification | Provide certified mail receipts and correspondence records |
Court Actions and Penalties
Under ORS 646A.412, consumers who prevail in court may recover several categories of damages.
Attorney Fees and Costs
The court may award reasonable attorney fees, expert witness fees, and costs to a prevailing consumer. This provision makes it more practical for consumers to pursue lemon law claims, since attorney fees do not come out of the consumer's recovery.
Treble Damages for Bad Faith
If a court finds that the manufacturer did not act in good faith, the consumer may be awarded up to three times the amount of damages. This penalty is capped at $50,000 over and above the amount already owed to the consumer under ORS 646A.404.
For the purpose of calculating treble damages, "damages" includes the refunded purchase price of the vehicle. This provision discourages manufacturers from stonewalling legitimate claims.
Manufacturer's Right to Attorney Fees
If a court finds that a consumer brought a lemon law action in bad faith or solely for harassment purposes, the court may award the prevailing manufacturer reasonable attorney fees.
Federal Overlay: Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Oregon'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 including vehicles. Under Magnuson-Moss, a manufacturer that provides a written warranty cannot disclaim implied warranties, and consumers may sue for breach of warranty in federal court. Magnuson-Moss allows recovery of attorney fees, which makes it a useful companion to state lemon law claims especially when a vehicle is no longer within the state coverage period but a warranty defect remains unresolved.
Used Vehicle Protections
Oregon's Lemon Law applies only to new vehicles. However, used vehicle buyers have other legal protections available.
Alternative Protections for Used Vehicle Buyers
- Remaining manufacturer warranty: If the original warranty has not expired, the new owner may have coverage
- Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act (ORS 646.605-646.656): Prohibits deceptive and unfair business practices in vehicle sales
- Dealer warranties: Written warranties provided by the selling dealer
- Federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2301-2312): Federal warranty protections that may apply to used vehicles with remaining warranties
Oregon Used Vehicle Disclosure Requirements
Oregon law requires dealers to disclose certain information about used vehicles:
- Known material defects affecting the vehicle's safety or operability
- Salvage or rebuilt title status
- Flood damage history
- Odometer discrepancies
- Lemon Law Buyback title branding
Failure to make required disclosures may constitute an unlawful trade practice, giving the buyer grounds for a separate legal claim.
Key Deadlines and Statute of Limitations
Understanding the timing requirements for Oregon lemon law claims is essential.
| Deadline | Timeframe | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage Period | 2 years or 24,000 miles | From date of original delivery, whichever comes first |
| Defect Reporting | During coverage period | Each nonconformity must be reported within the coverage window |
| Written Notice | Before court determination | Must be sent before a court can grant the remedy |
| Lawsuit Filing | Within applicable statute of limitations | Generally governed by Oregon's contract statute of limitations |
Oregon does not have a 3-day right to cancel vehicle purchases. You cannot return a vehicle simply because you changed your mind, unless that right is specifically written into your sales contract.
More Oregon Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How many repair attempts are required under Oregon's Lemon Law?
Oregon requires 3 or more repair attempts for the same nonconformity under ORS 646A.406. For safety-related defects likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, only 1 repair attempt is required. Alternatively, if the vehicle has been out of service for 30 or more cumulative calendar days (60 days for motorhomes), it may qualify as a lemon.
Does Oregon have a 3-day right to cancel a vehicle purchase?
No. Oregon does not have a general 3-day right to cancel vehicle purchases. Unless a cancellation right is specifically written into your sales contract, you cannot return a vehicle without a legal reason such as a defect covered by the Lemon Law.
Does Oregon's Lemon Law cover leased vehicles?
Yes. New vehicles leased in Oregon for personal, family, or household purposes are covered under the Lemon Law. The lessee qualifies as a consumer under ORS 646A.400.
Is arbitration binding on the consumer in Oregon?
No. Under ORS 646A.408, arbitration decisions from an informal dispute settlement procedure are binding on the manufacturer but not on the consumer. If you are unhappy with the arbitration result, you may reject it and file a lawsuit in court.
What is the coverage period under Oregon's Lemon Law?
Oregon's Lemon Law provides protection for 2 years or 24,000 miles from the date of original delivery, whichever comes first. These periods may be extended if repair services are unavailable due to events like natural disasters, strikes, or war.
Can I recover attorney fees under Oregon's Lemon Law?
Yes. Under ORS 646A.412, a court may award reasonable attorney fees, expert witness fees, and costs to a consumer who prevails in a lemon law case. If the manufacturer acted in bad faith, the court may also award up to 3 times damages, capped at $50,000 above the base remedy amount.
Are motorhomes covered under Oregon's Lemon Law?
Yes. Motorhomes are covered, but the out-of-service threshold is 60 cumulative calendar days instead of 30 days for standard vehicles. The mileage use allowance for motorhomes uses a divisor of 90,000 in the formula, compared to 120,000 for standard vehicles.
How is the mileage use allowance calculated in Oregon?
For standard motor vehicles, multiply the mileage driven from delivery to the date of first reported nonconformity by the combined purchase price plus collateral charges, then divide by 120,000. For motorhomes the divisor is 90,000, and for motorcycles it is 25,000. Mileage while the vehicle was in for repairs is excluded.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Removed a fabricated 'incidental damages' refund category (towing/rental reimbursement) that does not appear in ORS 646A.404's refund formula or ORS 646A.400's definition of collateral charge; that provision exists in Rhode Island's lemon law, not Oregon's.
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.
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 646A: Trade Regulation
§ 646A.400Definitions for ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418In force
As used in ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418: (1) “Collateral charge” means a charge, fee or cost to the consumer related to the sale or lease of a motor vehicle, such as: (a) A sales, property or use tax; (b) A license, registration or title fee; (c) A finance charge; (d) A prepayment penalty; (e) A charge for undercoating, rust-proofing or factory or dealer installed options; and (f) The cost of an aftermarket item purchased within 20 days after delivery of the motor vehicle. (2) “Consumer” means: (a) The purchaser or lessee, other than for purposes of resale, of a new motor vehicle normally used for personal, family or household purposes; (b) Any person to whom a new motor vehicle used for personal, family or household purposes is transferred for the same purposes during the duration of an express warranty applicable to such motor vehicle; and (c) Any other person entitled by the terms of such warranty to enforce the obligations of the warranty.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Liles v. Damon Corp. (Oregon Supreme Court 2008, 345 Or. 420)“…DURHAM, J. Plaintiffs brought this action under ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418, commonly known as Oregon’s…”
- TruNorth Warranty Plans of North America v. DCBS (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2023, 327 Or. App. 603)“…ontext of automatic renewal and continuous service offers); ORS 646A.400(2) (so defining “consumer” in the conte…”
- Diemert (District Court, D. Oregon 2026)“…ngs his claim under the Oregon Lemon Law (“OLL,”), ORS 646A.400, et seq. In relevant part, the OLL pro…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 646A.402Availability of remedyIn force
The remedy under the provisions of ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418 is available to a consumer if: (1) A new motor vehicle does not conform to applicable manufacturer’s express warranties; (2) The consumer reports each nonconformity to the manufacturer, the manufacturer’s agent or the manufacturer’s authorized dealer, for the purpose of repair or correction, during the two-year period following the date of original delivery of the motor vehicle to the consumer or during the period ending on the date on which the mileage on the motor vehicle reaches 24,000 miles, whichever period ends first; and (3) The manufacturer has received direct written notification from or on behalf of the consumer and has had an opportunity to correct the alleged defect. “Notification” under this subsection includes, but is not limited to, a request by the consumer for an informal dispute settlement procedure under ORS 646A.408. [Formerly 646.325; 2009 c.448 §2]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2019
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Liles v. Damon Corp. (Oregon Supreme Court 2008, 345 Or. 420)“…The issue on review concerns the proper interpretation of ORS 646A.402, which we quote below in full. Under th…”
- Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (District Court, D. Oregon 2019)“…date on which the RV’s mileage reached 24,000, satisfying Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.402(2). Roblin Decl. ¶ 30, ECF No. 61. Plai…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 646A.404Consumer’s remedies; manufacturer’s affirmative defensesIn force
(1) If the manufacturer or agents or authorized dealers of the manufacturer are unable to conform the motor vehicle to an applicable manufacturer’s express warranty by repairing or correcting a defect or condition that substantially impairs the use, market value or safety of the motor vehicle to the consumer after a reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer shall: (a) Replace the motor vehicle with a new motor vehicle; or (b) Accept return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund to the consumer the full purchase or lease price and collateral charges paid, less a reasonable allowance for the consumer’s use of the motor vehicle. In lieu of refunding, as part of the collateral charges paid, the cost of an aftermarket item purchased within 20 days after delivery of the motor vehicle, the manufacturer may remove the aftermarket item from the motor vehicle, if the aftermarket item can be removed from the motor vehicle without damage, and return the aftermarket item to the consumer. (2) Refunds must be made to the consumer and lienholder, if any, as the interests of the consumer and lienholder may appear.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Liles v. Damon Corp. (Oregon Supreme Court 2008, 345 Or. 420)“…etter requested the replacement remedy under the Lemon Law, ORS 646A.404(l)(a), which we quote below. The letter…”
- Robert Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2021)“…owance for the consumer’s use of the motor vehicle . . . . Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.404(1). The district court correctly…”
- Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (District Court, D. Oregon 2019)“…available under the statute, but neither applies here. See Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.404(4)(a) (invalidating a lemon law claim i…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 646A.405Manufacturer action under ORS 646A.404; request to Department of Transportation; notice to buyer; unlawful practice; rulesIn force
(1) A manufacturer that takes an action with respect to a motor vehicle under ORS 646A.404 (1)(a) or (b) shall request the Department of Transportation to: (a) Title the motor vehicle in the manufacturer’s name; and (b) Inscribe on the certificate of title for the motor vehicle and in the department’s records concerning the motor vehicle the notation “Lemon Law Buyback.” (2) A person that acquires a motor vehicle in order to sell, lease or otherwise transfer the motor vehicle and that knows or should have known that the manufacturer took an action with respect to the motor vehicle under ORS 646A.404 (1)(a) or (b) or that the certificate of title for the motor vehicle is inscribed with the notation specified in subsection (1) of this section, before selling, leasing or otherwise transferring the motor vehicle shall: (a) Provide the buyer, lessee or transferee with a notice that states: ______________________________________________________________________________ This vehicle was repurchased by its manufacturer in accordance with Oregon’s consumer warranty law because of a defect in the vehicle.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Robert Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2021)“…e manufacturer’s obligation to retitle a returned vehicle, Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.405(1), explicitly applies to “an action wi…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 646A.406Presumption of reasonable attempt to conform; extension of time for repairs; notice to manufacturerIn force
(1) It is presumed that a reasonable number of attempts have been undertaken to conform a motor vehicle to the applicable manufacturer’s express warranties if, during the two-year period following the date of original delivery of the motor vehicle to a consumer or during the period ending on the date on which the mileage on the motor vehicle reaches 24,000 miles, whichever period ends first: (a) The manufacturer or an agent or authorized dealer of the manufacturer has subjected the nonconformity to repair or correction three or more times and has had an opportunity to cure the defect alleged, but the nonconformity continues to exist; (b) The motor vehicle is out of service by reason of repair or correction for a cumulative total of 30 or more calendar days or 60 or more calendar days if the vehicle is a motor home; or (c) The manufacturer or an agent or authorized dealer of the manufacturer has subjected a nonconformity that is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury to repair or correction at least one time and has made a final attempt to repair or correct the nonconformity, but the nonconformity continues to exist.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2019
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Liles v. Damon Corp. (Oregon Supreme Court 2008, 345 Or. 420)“…le allowance for the consumer’s use of the vehicle.” ORS 646A.406 creates a presumption, potentially usab…”
- Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (District Court, D. Oregon 2019)“…e vehicle is a motor home. Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.406(1)(a), (b) (emphasis added).…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 646A.410Informal dispute settlement procedure; recordkeeping; review by Department of JusticeIn force
A manufacturer which has established or participates in an informal dispute settlement procedure shall keep records of all cases submitted to the procedure under ORS 646A.408 and shall make the records available to the Department of Justice if the department requests them. The department may review all case records kept under this section to determine whether or not the arbitrators are complying with the provisions of ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418 in reaching their decisions. [Formerly 646.357]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
§ 646A.412Action in court; damages if manufacturer does not act in good faith; attorney fees; expert witness fees; costsIn force
(1) If a consumer brings an action in court under ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418 against a manufacturer and the consumer is granted one of the remedies specified in ORS 646A.404 (1) by the court, the consumer shall also be awarded up to three times the amount of any damages, not to exceed $50,000 over and above the amount due the consumer under ORS 646A.404 (1), if the court finds that the manufacturer did not act in good faith. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, the court may award reasonable attorney fees, fees for expert witnesses and costs to a consumer who prevails in an appeal or action under ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418. If a court finds that a consumer brought an action under ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418 in bad faith or solely for the purposes of harassment, the court may award a prevailing manufacturer reasonable attorney fees. (3) The court may award reasonable attorney fees, fees for expert witnesses and costs to the prevailing party in an appeal or action under ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418 that involves a motor home. [Formerly 646.359; 2009 c.448 §6]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Liles v. Damon Corp. (Oregon Supreme Court 2008, 345 Or. 420)“…has had an opportunity to cure the defect alleged.” ORS 646A.412(1) describes additional remedies availa…”
- Robert Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2021)“…action under [the Lemon Law] that involves a motor home.” Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.412(3). Because we affirm the…”
- Roblin v. Newmar Corporation (District Court, D. Oregon 2020)“…582,349.83 in attorney fees and $57,018.53 in costs under Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.412(3). Mot. for Attorney Fees, ECF No. 107…”
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
This article also draws on these acts and chapters (opening at their first section): Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 646A: Trade Regulation § 646A.005 (Definitions)
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
- ORS Chapter 646A: Trade Regulation (Full Text)(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- Oregon DOJ: Lemon Law Consumer Protection(doj.state.or.us).gov
- Oregon DMV: Lemon Law Buyback(oregon.gov).gov
- ORS 646A.400: Definitions(oregon.public.law)
- ORS 646A.402: Availability of Remedy(oregon.public.law)
- ORS 646A.404: Consumer's Remedies(oregon.public.law)
- ORS 646A.405: Manufacturer Action and DMV Notification(oregon.public.law)
- ORS 646A.408: Informal Dispute Settlement Procedures(oregon.public.law)
- ORS 646A.410: Arbitration Record-Keeping and Review(oregon.public.law)
- ORS 646A.412: Court Actions and Penalties(oregon.public.law)
- Oregon State Bar Lawyer Referral Service(osbar.org)
- BBB AUTO LINE Dispute Resolution Program(bbbprograms.org)
- 16 C.F.R. Part 703: Informal Dispute Settlement Procedures(law.cornell.edu)
- Federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2301-2312)(law.cornell.edu)
- ORS 646A.406: Presumption of Reasonable Number of Attempts(oregon.public.law)