Honda Held Liable for Defective HRV in Lemon Law Suit
Table of Contents
The Purchase and the Problems
On December 22, 2019, Noriko Onishi bought a new 2019 Honda HRV in Fresno, California. The vehicle came with a written warranty from American Honda Motor Co., Inc. She used the car primarily for personal and household needs.
But from the beginning, the vehicle showed serious defects. Problems emerged in the engine, electrical systems, emissions, and suspension. These issues continued despite multiple repair visits. American Honda’s warranty obligations became central to what followed.
Repeated Repairs, No Resolution
Over time, Onishi brought the vehicle to authorized service centers. Despite several attempts, the issues remained. She claimed American Honda failed to fix the car within 30 days or a reasonable time. The company did not offer a refund or replacement.
As the problems persisted, Onishi decided to revoke her acceptance of the car. She alleged that the defects substantially impaired its use, safety, and value.
Financial and Functional Consequences
The persistent defects disrupted Onishi’s ability to rely on the vehicle. She no longer trusted it for daily use. The repeated breakdowns affected her peace of mind and daily functioning. She claimed financial losses from repairs, time, and diminished vehicle value.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Noriko Onishi
Counsel for Plaintiff: Kevin Y. Jacobson
Defendant(s): American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Counsel for Defendant: Trang T. Tran | Adjoa M. Anim-Appiah | Linda R. Echegaray
Claims
Onishi asked the court to rescind the sales contract. She sought a full refund, minus any reasonable usage. She also demanded damages for the vehicle’s reduced value and the inconvenience caused. Her request included civil penalties, interest, and legal costs. She alleged Honda’s violations were willful, entitling her to up to twice the actual damages.
Defense
American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (“AHM”) broadly denied all allegations made by plaintiff Noriko Onishi and claimed she suffered no damages due to any act or omission by AHM. In its affirmative defenses, AHM asserted that the complaint failed to state a valid legal claim and that the plaintiff did not give AHM a reasonable opportunity to cure any alleged defects. AHM further contended that the vehicle was not defective when it left its control and that any issues were caused by third parties or the plaintiff’s own conduct, including negligence, improper use, and failure to mitigate damages.
AHM also raised defenses including intervening causes, unclean hands, absence of causation, lack of substantial impairment, and bars to certain damages under warranty terms and statutory limitations. It asserted that if any warranty breach occurred, the vehicle had since been repaired and conformed to warranty terms. Additionally, AHM invoked statutory bars such as the statute of limitations and reserved the right to raise further defenses as discovery progresses.
Jury Verdict
On May 7, 2025, the Court found in favor of Plaintiff Noriko Onishi and awarded her $54,586.67 in damages against Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. The Court determined that the subject vehicle failed to conform to the applicable warranty and that such nonconformity substantially impaired the vehicle’s use, value, or safety. The Plaintiff was found to have given American Honda a reasonable opportunity to cure the defects, which the company failed to do. Accordingly, the Court held American Honda liable under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
Court Documents
Court documents are available for purchase upon request at Jurimatic@exlitem.com