Bob purchased a vehicle for $75,001 which eventually meets the lemon law presumption of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, and Bob serves a statutory notice upon the manufacturer about its duties to replace.
It is indisputable that manufacturer willfully failed to replace and/or promptly replace Bob’s vehicle. (for e.g., it does not offer neither a replacement or restitution in 30 days and fails or omits to offer a replacement and only offers restitution in an amount insufficient to meet its statutory duties)
These failures and/or omission entitle Bob of upto 2 times of the c-type and/or the e-type civil penalties each.
Eventually and before Bob filed suit with manufacturer, manufacturer, upon direct inquiry by Bob, expresses its willingness to replace the vehicle, and Bob agrees to receive a replacement.
Nevertheless, Bob files suit.
What are the actual damages of Bob? Is it the monies paid or payable for vehicle or $0.00 since a replacement was elected in lieu of restitution before filing suit? (No other incidental or consequential damages are in controversy, but a written agreement states that the replacement is not a settlement of any claims Bob may assert)
If the latter, is $0.00 is the base for up to 2 times civil penalties? In other words: Is the manufacturer shielded from being imposed to pay civil penalties to Bob and Bob barred from collecting a CP award other than $0.00?
Would Bob’s case be different if the replacement is accepted after the suit is filed?
Or else, is there a base for the civil penalties multiplier if restitution is exercised as opposed to the replacement of the vehicle (before or after filing suit)?
