Maryland Lemon Law State Ranking


November 7, 2002

Honorable J. Joseph Curran, Jr.
Attorney General of Maryland
200 Saint Paul Place
Baltimore, MD 21202

Dear Attorney General Curran:

The Center for Auto Safety has just completed a study of the lemon law in every state and the District of Columbia and has ranked each state based on the results. Maryland finished 16th out of 51. With over 100,000 lemons bought back each year, a strong lemon law is vital to consumer protection. States with strong lemon laws force the auto companies to take back their lemons. States with weak lemon laws force consumers to eat their lemons.

The ranking was based on 10 different categories corresponding to fundamental elements of a strong lemon law, with each category worth a maximum of 10 points for a total of 100 points. The categories are:
1. number of repair attempts or days out of service before an automobile was considered a lemon,
2. whether law had a safety lemon provision and how protective it was,
3. the length of the presumption period or coverage of the lemon law,
4. whether law had a garden variety lemon provision to cover multiple different problems,
5. the offset for use of the car when determining a refund price,
6. if the consumer is eligible for a civil penalty or double or treble damages,
7. types of vehicles covered,
8. is there a state run arbitration program,
9. is the consumer compensated for their attorney fees, and
10. whether refund reimburses consumer for all costs of purchasing and owning lemon
Points were deducted for provisions that negated major rights under the lemon law including whether consumer (1) was liable for manufacturer's attorney fees, (2) lost rights under other laws, (3) had to file lemon lawsuit within short time, and (4) had to resort to manufacturer's unfair arbitration program before filing lemon lawsuit.

The biggest weaknesses in Maryland's lemon law are that it (1) lacks a garden variety provision covering repairs for multiple different problems, (2) does not have a state-run arbitration program, (3) limits the refund to purchase price and governmental fees and fails to include other lemon costs such as interest, incidental and consequential damages, alternate transportation and finance charges, (4) has a shorter presumption period than many other states, (5) lacks a strong civil penalty such as California and Wisconsin have, and (6) provides for the award of attorney fee's to auto makers. Even though this is limited to bad faith actions, the threat of having to pay an expensive corporate law firm may deter some consumers from exercising their legal rights. More information on the provisions and examples of stronger provisions from other states are contained in the attached “Best State Lemon Law Provisions.”

We urge you to review this survey and use your authority to help improve Maryland's lemon law


Clarence M. Ditlow
Executive Director

Ian Hill
Research Assistant