The short answer
AB 1755 (signed September 29, 2024) and its follow-up, SB 26 (signed April 2, 2025), created a new, faster procedure for California lemon law claims. The most important thing to understand: these laws changed the process, not whether your car qualifies as a lemon and the new procedure only applies to vehicle manufacturers that voluntarily “opt in” through the California Department of Consumer Affairs. Whether the new rules apply to your claim depends on your manufacturer.
What AB 1755 and SB 26 are?
For more than a decade, California’s lemon law ran almost entirely on two statutes: the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civil Code §§ 1790–1795.7) and the Tanner Consumer Protection Act (Civil Code § 1793.22). Those laws define what makes a vehicle a “lemon” and what you’re owed if yours is one. They are still the law today.
What changed is how a claim moves through the system. As lemon filings in California climbed from roughly 15,000 in 2022 to more than 25,000 in 2024, according to an analysis by defense firm Bowman and Brooke the courts came under real strain. The Legislature responded with two bills:
- Assembly Bill 1755 (Kalra, Chapter 938) signed by Governor Newsom on September 29, 2024. It introduced a new set of procedural rules: a defined statute of limitations, a pre-suit notice step, early document exchange, mandatory mediation, and firm deadlines for paying out a settlement.
- Senate Bill 26 (Umberg, Chapter 1) signed April 2, 2025, as an urgency statute (effective immediately). SB 26 made AB 1755’s new procedures optional for manufacturers, and it directed the Department of Consumer Affairs to publish a public list of the manufacturers that agree to be bound by them.
Together, these laws live in the California Code of Civil Procedure at sections 871.20 through 871.30.
The one thing most articles get wrong: it’s opt-in
Here is the detail that changes everything, and that a lot of online summaries skip: the new AB 1755 procedures do not automatically apply to every claim. Under SB 26, a manufacturer has to choose to be governed by them.
California now gives manufacturers three paths for resolving lemon disputes:
- Opt in to the new AB 1755 / SB 26 procedures (Code of Civil Procedure §§ 871.20–871.30);
- Stay under the existing framework — the traditional Song-Beverly process; or
- Use a state-certified arbitration program through the DCA’s Arbitration Certification Program.
A manufacturer that opts in is locked in for five calendar years — the election is irrevocable. The Department of Consumer Affairs’ Arbitration Certification Program is required to publish the list of opted-in manufacturers by December 15 each year, and to add a manufacturer within two business days of a verified election.
What this means for you: before you assume the “new law” applies to your case, the first practical step is to check whether your vehicle’s manufacturer is on the current opt-in list. Reporting in 2026 indicates that most major automakers have opted in, but the roster changes, so the authoritative source is the DCA’s own published list (dca.ca.gov/acp/new_lemon_law.shtml). We cover how to read that list in a separate guide.
Change #1: A defined statute of limitations
For opted-in manufacturers, AB 1755 set a clear filing deadline. A lawsuit for a buyback or replacement must be filed:
- within one year after the applicable express warranty expires, and
- in no event more than six years after the vehicle was originally delivered.
Certain tolling provisions can pause the clock for example, time the vehicle is out of service for repairs, or up to 60 days after a pre-suit notice is sent.
A simple example: a car delivered January 1, 2020, with a five-year warranty that expires January 1, 2025, generally has to be sued on January 1, 2026 one year after the warranty ends.
Deadlines are the single easiest way to lose an otherwise strong claim, and the rules differ depending on whether your manufacturer opted in. If you think you may have a lemon, it’s worth taking a moment to confirm your exact deadline early rather than assuming.
Change #2: The 30-day pre-suit notice
This is the change most likely to affect a consumer directly. For opted-in manufacturers, before you can file a lawsuit seeking civil penalties, you (or your attorney) must first send the manufacturer written notice at least 30 days in advance. That notice has to include:
- your name,
- the vehicle’s VIN,
- a summary of the repair history and the problems, and
- a request that the manufacturer repurchase or replace the vehicle.
The manufacturer then has 30 days to respond and offer a repurchase or replacement, and if it agrees, it must complete that buyback or replacement within 60 days of receiving the notice. If it blows those deadlines, the consumer gains additional leverage — including, in some cases, the ability to sell the vehicle and still sue.
The upside for consumers is speed: a genuine claim can now be resolved in a couple of months without a drawn-out court fight. The catch is that the notice has to be done correctly, with the right information and timing, to protect your right to civil penalties. For a step-by-step walkthrough, see our full guide to the 30-day pre-suit notice.
Change #3: Faster, more structured litigation
If a case does go to court under the new procedures, AB 1755 puts it on a tighter track:
- Early document exchange: Both sides hand over key records (repair orders, warranties, pre-suit communications) within 60 days of the answer, without waiting for formal requests.
- Mandatory mediation: The parties must schedule mediation within 90 days and hold it within 150 days of the manufacturer’s answer, with most discovery paused until it’s done.
- Firm payout deadlines: Once a release is signed, the manufacturer generally has 30 days to pay, with daily penalties for delay.
For a consumer, the practical effect is a system designed to reach a resolution in months rather than years.
What did NOT change
Just as important as what changed is what stayed the same:
- The definition of a lemon didn’t change. Whether your vehicle qualifies still comes down to the Song-Beverly Act and the Tanner Act — a substantial defect covered by the warranty that the manufacturer or its dealers couldn’t fix in a reasonable number of repair attempts.
- Your core remedies didn’t change. A qualifying lemon can still entitle you to a refund (buyback), a replacement vehicle, or other compensation, depending on the facts.
- The fee-shifting structure didn’t change. California’s lemon law still provides that, in many successful cases, the manufacturer can be required to pay the consumer’s attorney’s fees — which is why qualified drivers often pay nothing out of pocket to pursue a claim.
AB 1755 and SB 26 are, at their core, a re-plumbing of the pipes, not a change to whether you have a case.
Does your situation qualify? Start here
Because the procedural rules now depend partly on your manufacturer, it helps to know the basic building blocks of a strong California claim before you do anything else:
- You’re a California consumer with a vehicle bought or leased for personal, family, or household use.
- The vehicle came from an authorized dealership. This is a real and often-overlooked point: vehicles purchased from used-car retailers like CarMax, Carvana, or AutoNation generally do not fit the standard California lemon law path the way a vehicle from a franchised, authorized dealer does.
- There’s a qualifying defect and repair history a warranty-covered problem the dealer has tried and failed to fix a reasonable number of times, or that has kept the vehicle out of service for an extended period.
If those describe your situation, the next step is simply to find out where you stand.
How Lemon Law Assist helps
Lemon Law Assist connects qualified California drivers with experienced California lemon law attorneys who handle the case from there. We’re not asking you to guess whether the new AB 1755 rules apply to your manufacturer or whether your repair history clears the bar; that’s exactly what the eligibility review is for.
- There’s no cost to find out if you qualify.
- In many successful cases, California’s fee-shifting law means the manufacturer, not you, pays the legal fees.
- You don’t need to go to court to get started; the first step is a short, free eligibility review.
See if you qualify. Start your free eligibility review
Frequently asked questions
Did AB 1755 change whether my car is a lemon?
No. AB 1755 and SB 26 changed the procedure for resolving claims, not the underlying standard. Whether your vehicle qualifies is still governed by the Song-Beverly and Tanner Acts — a warranty-covered defect the manufacturer couldn’t repair in a reasonable number of attempts.
Do the new rules apply to my claim?
Only if your vehicle’s manufacturer has opted in to the AB 1755 / SB 26 procedures. The Department of Consumer Affairs publishes the list of opted-in manufacturers and updates it by December 15 each year. If your manufacturer hasn’t opted in, the traditional California lemon law process applies.
What is the deadline to file a California lemon law claim now?
For opted-in manufacturers, a buyback or replacement suit must generally be filed within one year after the applicable express warranty expires, and never more than six years after the vehicle’s original delivery subject to certain tolling. Because deadlines depend on your specific facts and manufacturer, confirm yours early.
What is the 30-day pre-suit notice?
For opted-in manufacturers, before filing a lawsuit seeking civil penalties, the consumer must give the manufacturer at least 30 days’ written notice — including the VIN, repair history, and a request to repurchase or replace the vehicle. The manufacturer then has 30 days to respond.
Does it cost me anything to pursue a claim?
There’s no cost to find out if you qualify. And in many successful lemon law cases, California’s fee-shifting rules require the manufacturer to pay the consumer’s attorney’s fees, so qualified drivers often pay nothing out of pocket. Outcomes vary by case.
I bought my car from CarMax or Carvana do I still have a claim?
Vehicles bought from used-car retailers like CarMax, Carvana, or AutoNation generally don’t fit the standard California lemon law path the way a vehicle from an authorized franchised dealer does. Your options may be different, and it’s worth having your specific situation reviewed.
Attorney Advertising. This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Lemon Law Assist is a California-focused service that connects qualified consumers with experienced California lemon law attorneys; it does not itself litigate claims. Laws change and outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney.
