Quebec introduced a lemon law in 2023 that supposedly allows consumers to apply to court to have their vehicle declared a “seriously defective automobile”. Some of the usual suspects think Ontario needs lemon laws too. Would lemon laws really leave consumers better off?
The CBC recently published an article outlining one such call to action. The article tells the story of Carl Cameron, a consumer who purchased a new Nissan Altima in July 2024. Shortly after his purchase, Cameron experienced a number of issues with his vehicle such as his cellphone not being able to properly pair with the vehicle, the tire pressure sensor going haywire, and the radio randomly turning off and on.
Cameron took the vehicle back to the dealership. Although the dealership initially had some problems diagnosing the issue, it seems they have since put in an order for a replacement navigation unit and have put him into a loaner at their own cost.
The article then goes onto criticize the current Canadian Motor Vehicle Arbitration Plan (CAMVAP) system for being manufacturer-funded and voluntary in nature; however, these criticisms are reductionist at best.
Ironically, the concerns the consumer raises in the article would likely not qualify as “serious defects” in any event, so it’s just as well the dealer is actively helping him even though they did not build the unit!
Not All Lemon Laws are Created Equal
A creature of U.S. law, lemon laws can differ greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but most are intended to cover serious defects with vehicles. The CBC’s article heralds Cameron as the ‘poster child’ for lemon law reform in Ontario; however, it is not clear that Cameron’s issues relate to serious defects with the vehicle that leave it unfit for use or substantially diminish its usefulness.
Manufacturers and Dealers Already Have a Market Incentive to Keep Customers Happy
The article also downplays the fact that both the dealership and the manufacturer are working closely with Cameron to fix his vehicle and allow him to drive around, at their own expense, in the interim—they have an incentive to keep their customers happy if they want to stay in business.
CAMVAP is Quick and Efficient – A Court or Tribunal System May Not Be
The article is quick to criticize CAMVAP and calls for the introduction of lemon laws, but fails to consider what that should look like.
Are proponents of lemon laws asking for the ability to apply to courts to have their vehicle declared as “seriously defective”, as in Quebec? Are they looking to introduce a tribunal system for vehicle purchases, similar to the Landlord and Tenant Board for residential rentals?
Any approach comes with its pros and cons. For example, the court system in Ontario has faced severe backlog since the COVID-19 pandemic. The Landlord and Tenant Board tribunal has faced similar criticism with some applicants having to wait months, and in some cases years, to have their matter heard. By contrast, the CAMVAP process takes about 70 to 90 calendar days.
It’s early days yet, but we have yet to see if the Quebec system fares any better.
“If it Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix it”
The current system is working. Manufacturers and dealerships already have reason to make their customers happy—otherwise someone else will. Dealers and manufacturers who want to stay competitive will continue to work with customers to resolve their issues, accommodate their needs, and participate in voluntary programs such as CAMVAP. In other words, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Unnecessary changes may lead to a worse system overall.
Members interested in reading the full CBC article can do so by following this link: Ontario man calling for provincial lemon law, after new car starts having issues after 4 days | CBC News: https://tinyurl.com/8h4yj6ph