Consumer Mr. T. purchases a brand new (0 km) car from an authorized dealer for 2,500,000 TL. Just two months after receiving the vehicle, while driving, the car gives a warning “Transmission Failure: Go to Service” and starts to shake seriously during gear shifts.

Mr. T. takes the vehicle to the authorized service under warranty. The service performs a “software update” and returns the vehicle 3 days later. However, just a month after this event, the malfunction repeats in the same way. This time, the service changes the “transmission control unit (brain)” and returns the vehicle 1 week later.

The vehicle gives the same transmission failure two more times within 6 months. At the fourth failure, Mr. T.’s patience runs out; he leaves the vehicle at the service and applies to the authorized dealer (seller) and the distributor company. Stating that he no longer wants repairs and that the vehicle is “defective,” he demands that the vehicle be replaced with a defect-free equivalent (i.e., a 0 km, same model, faultless vehicle).

The dealer and the distributor reject this request. Their justification is: “The vehicle’s warranty is ongoing, our legal responsibility is to repair the malfunction free of charge. Replacement or refund is out of the question.”

Legal Evaluation This case demonstrates how the responsibilities imposed on sellers by “warranty” under the Law on the Protection of the Consumer No. 6502 (TKHK) cannot eliminate the consumer’s “optional rights.”

1. “Defective Good” and “Latent Defect” The fact that a zero-kilometer vehicle gives a repetitive transmission failure within a short time, not arising from usage, clearly shows that the good is “defective” (specifically a “latent defect”). The good cannot provide the benefit expected from it.

2. Consumer’s Four Optional Rights (TKHK Article 11) The law offers four fundamental rights to a consumer facing a defective good, and the authority to choose which of these rights to use belongs entirely to the consumer:

  1. Rescission of contract (Refund).

  2. Demanding replacement with a defect-free equivalent.

  3. Price reduction in proportion to the defect.

  4. Free repair.

3. Seller’s Invalid Justification The seller’s defense that “our responsibility is repair” is legally invalid. Free repair is only one of the four rights the consumer can choose. The seller cannot force the consumer to choose this right.

4. Recurrence of Malfunction and Birth of the Right The fact that the vehicle malfunctioned 4 times (same or similar issue) within 6 months and the service could not produce a permanent solution proves that the “free repair” right is no longer a solution. At this point, the consumer’s most legal right is to demand a refund or replacement.

Legal Result and Solution Methods Since Mr. T.’s request was rejected by the seller and the distributor, the legal process must be initiated.

  • 1. Jurisdiction: Consumer Arbitration Committee or Court? The value of the car is 2,500,000 TL. Consumer Arbitration Committees handle disputes below the monetary limit determined annually (for 2025 this limit will be different, but a car’s value is always far above this limit). Therefore, Mr. T. must file a lawsuit directly in the Consumer Court.

  • 2. Lawsuit Process: In the lawsuit filed through his lawyer, Mr. T. submits all malfunction processes, service records, and invoices experienced since the purchase of the 0 km vehicle to the court. He demands “replacement with a defect-free equivalent,” or if this is not possible, “rescission of the contract and refund of money.”

  • 3. Expert Report: The court sends the file to an expert committee consisting of a mechanical engineer and an automotive expert. The expert examines the service records and determines that the vehicle has a “latent defect,” the malfunction has become chronic, and the seller failed to fulfill the repair obligation.

Probable Result: Based on the expert report, the court will find the consumer’s replacement request justified. It will rule that the defendant seller (dealer) and distributor must deliver a 0 km, same model, defect-free new vehicle to Mr. T. (or refund the money according to his choice) and pay all court costs.

Conclusion and Advice “Being under warranty” does not give the seller an infinite right to repair. The consumer is the owner of the optional rights granted by the law. Especially when you encounter recurring and unsolvable malfunctions in a newly purchased product (especially a high-value product like a car), you do not have to accept repairs. In such a case, sending a notice to use your other rights (replacement or refund) and then filing a lawsuit in the Consumer Court is the only and most certain way to get your rights.