The “Opt-In” Provision and Its Impact on California Lemon Law Claims

California’s Lemon Law has long provided strong protections for consumers who purchase or lease defective vehicles. However, in 2025, legislative changes through Assembly Bill 1755 (AB 1755) introduced new procedures designed to make it harder to sue vehicle manufacturers in court. Although the bill passed, it did so with significant opposition, leading Governor Newsom in his signing message to call for new legislation that would make the AB 1755 process optional. In consequence, Senate Bill 26 (SB 26) established such an opt-in framework, allowing manufacturers to choose whether to participate in the updated process or continue under the traditional procedures.

For California consumers, understanding these opt-in provisions is crucial. Whether the manufacturer of your vehicle has opted in can significantly affect how your claim is processed, how long it takes, and what options are available to resolve your case. If you own or lease a car under warranty with defects that substantially limit its use, value or safety, contact Nita Lemon Law Firm to review your claim with an experienced California lemon law attorney who can advise you of your rights and help you get a refund, replacement, or other legal remedies under California lemon law.

SB 26 and the Opt-In Framework

Under SB 26, manufacturers must submit a written notice to the Department of Consumer Affairs’ Arbitration Certification Program if they elect to participate in the AB 1755 procedures. Once a manufacturer opts in, it is bound by the new rules for a five-year period. The Department maintains and publishes a list of all manufacturers that have opted in, making it easy for consumers to determine which automakers are participating in the new system.

The alleged purpose of the opt-in framework is twofold: to incentivize manufacturers to resolve claims efficiently and to provide consumers with a clearer, faster path for resolving disputes when dealing with defective vehicles. In reality, though, consumers under the new system will find their rights and remedies severely curtailed compared to the older, established procedure for making Lemon Law claims.

Procedural Differences: Opt-In vs. Non-Opt-In Manufacturers

The procedural track your lemon law claim follows depends on whether your vehicle’s manufacturer has opted in. Here’s how the two tracks differ:

1. Manufacturers That Have Opted In

For automakers that opt in, consumers face the following hurdles to getting their claims resolved:

• Notice: Consumers with lemon law claims cannot immediately file their claim in court. First, they must provide the manufacturer with a written complaint detailing the problem or problems. The manufacturer has up to 30 days to acknowledge receipt and another 30 days to repair the vehicle or provide a replacement.

• Mandatory Mediation: To further limit the consumer’s access to the courts, mandatory mediation must take place between 90 and 150 days of the manufacturer’s response.

• Limited Discovery: Parties exchange specific documents outlined in the law, such as purchase or lease agreements, service logs and invoices for repairs, warranty documentation, and correspondence related to the complaint. These documents may not provide a complete picture of what is going on.

• Statute of Limitations: Consumers only have one year from the date the warranty expires to file a lawsuit, provided they went through the above complaint process without resolution

• Statute of Repose: No lawsuits are allowed after six years from the date of vehicle delivery, regardless of the status of the warranty.

2. Manufacturers That Have Not Opted In

For manufacturers that choose not to participate in the AB 1755 procedures, traditional California lemon law processes apply:

• No Mandatory Mediation: Consumers may file a lawsuit without first participating in the AB 1755-style mandatory mediation program.

• Full Litigation Process: Plaintiffs pursuing claims against non-opt-in manufacturers follow standard civil procedures, including depositions, written discovery, and potential trial preparation if the case doesn’t settle. Full use of discovery tools allows consumers to dig deep into information held by the manufacturer, such as internal documentation regarding the defect, and compel them to turn it over.

• Extended Timelines: The previous statute of limitations applies, giving consumers four years to file a lawsuit, starting from the time when they first learned of or should have learned of the unrepairable defect.

• Flexibility for Plaintiff: This path gives the consumer the full spectrum of legal remedies under California’s Lemon Law without being bound by the opt-in procedural rules of AB 1755.

Understanding which track applies is critical for planning your claim. Working with a lemon law attorney can help ensure that all procedural deadlines are met and that the strongest possible case is presented, whether the manufacturer is on the opt-in list or not.

Which Manufacturers Have Opted In

The Department of Consumer Affairs maintains a public list of manufacturers that have opted into the AB 1755 procedures. Consumers can consult this list before filing a claim. The major manufacturers on the current opt-in list include:

• FCA US LLC (Stellantis)
• Ford Motor Company
• General Motors
• Genesis
• Hyundai
• Infiniti
• Isuzu
• Jaguar Land Rover
• Kia
• Lotus
• Maserati
• Mercedes-Benz
• Mitsubishi
• Nissan
• Subaru

Other vehicle manufacturers that opted in to the new provisions include Polaris and Indian Motorcycle Company, Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation, and a host of RV manufacturers, including Airstream and Winnebago. As expected, the automakers that opted in are the ones historically subject to the most complaints and lemon law suits from consumers. Companies like Toyota and Volkswagen that receive relatively few complaints opted to stick with the pre-AB 1755 procedures.

Practical Implications for Consumers

If your vehicle develops a persistent defect, it’s important to check whether the manufacturer has opted in to AB 1755 procedures so you know which steps to take. Regardless of the manufacturer’s status, detailed documentation remains critical. Keep repair orders, invoices, warranty information, and records of all communications with the dealership or manufacturer. This documentation is essential for proving your claim, whether your case proceeds under the AB 1755 track or traditional procedures.

Contact Nita Lemon Law Firm With Your California Lemon Law Claim

SB 26’s opt-in provisions give manufacturers flexibility to resolve claims while keeping consumers out of court, but it’s possible that consumers can get their claims resolved satisfactorily and faster than under the old system. Knowing whether your automaker has opted in—and understanding the differences between the opt-in and traditional tracks—can help you make informed decisions and pursue your rights effectively.

At Nita Lemon Law Firm, we help California consumers navigate both procedural tracks. From verifying whether a manufacturer has opted in to compiling thorough documentation and representing clients in mediation or litigation, our team is dedicated to helping clients get the relief they deserve under California’s Lemon Law.

If you suspect your vehicle is a lemon, don’t wait. Contact Nita Lemon Law Firm today to learn which procedures apply to your case and to receive expert guidance on protecting your rights.