Well, now I've heard it all.
In a recent final pretrial in a case, the manufacturer's attorney didn't argue about whether or not the car was a lemon, he didn't even argue about whether or not it had been in the shop too many times or the defects weren't really there.
No, he came up with a new argument entirely: "We need the money more than your client does." Never mind the fact that the Lemon Law says they have to buy it back and make a total refund. Never mind the fact that the courts say the same thing, too. "We need the money" is not a defense to the Lemon Law. Never has been; not likely it ever will be.
"Needing money" so to speak, should have nothing to do with lawsuits or lemon cars and it shouldn't have anything to do with any manufacturer's attitude about them either. Matter of fact, taking care of their customers is what manufacturers should be thinking about. If they did that, then maybe they'd build the cars right in the first place and, when they didn't, maybe they'd just do what the law says they are supposed to do: just buy it back.
Until then, when a client says they've got a lemon, we'll keep doing what we have been doing since 1978 . . . helping people get a fair result.