ORS 646A.412¹
Action in court
  • damages if manufacturer does not act in good faith
  • attorney fees
  • expert witness fees
  • costs

(1) If a consumer brings an action in court under ORS 646A.400 (Definitions for ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418) to 646A.418 (Remedies supplementary to existing statutory or common law remedies) against a manufacturer and the consumer is granted one of the remedies specified in ORS 646A.404 (Consumer’s remedies) (1) by the court, the consumer shall also be awarded up to three times the amount of any damages, not to exceed $50,000 over and above the amount due the consumer under ORS 646A.404 (Consumer’s remedies) (1), if the court finds that the manufacturer did not act in good faith.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, the court may award reasonable attorney fees, fees for expert witnesses and costs to a consumer who prevails in an appeal or action under ORS 646A.400 (Definitions for ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418) to 646A.418 (Remedies supplementary to existing statutory or common law remedies). If a court finds that a consumer brought an action under ORS 646A.400 (Definitions for ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418) to 646A.418 (Remedies supplementary to existing statutory or common law remedies) in bad faith or solely for the purposes of harassment, the court may award a prevailing manufacturer reasonable attorney fees.

(3) The court may award reasonable attorney fees, fees for expert witnesses and costs to the prevailing party in an appeal or action under ORS 646A.400 (Definitions for ORS 646A.400 to 646A.418) to 646A.418 (Remedies supplementary to existing statutory or common law remedies) that involves a motor home. [Formerly 646.359; 2009 c.448 §6]

Law Review Cita­tions

52 WLR 451 (2016)

(formerly 646.359)

Notes of Decisions

“Damages” for purposes of awarding triple damages includes refunded purchase price of vehicle. Sweeney v. SMC Corpora­tion, 178 Or App 576, 37 P3d 244 (2002)

(formerly 646.315 to 646.375)

Notes of Decisions

Where purchaser fails to provide notice of condi­tion requiring repair, presump­tion does not arise that repair time exceeding 30 business days demonstrates inability of manufacturer to conform vehicle. Pavel v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., 127 Or App 16, 870 P2d 856 (1994)

Repair time exceeding 30 business days as evidence of inability to conform vehicle applies only to presently existing defect. Pavel v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., 127 Or App 16, 870 P2d 856 (1994)

Law Review Cita­tions

19 WLR 329 (1983)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 646A—Trade Regulation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors646A.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2019, Chapter 646A, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano646A.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent. Currency Information