A new car showing repeated failures, promised but missing functions, electronic anomalies, or issues related to emissions and updates can cause serious difficulties right from the first miles. The question is not only whether the repair will be free of charge: you want to understand if you must accept further attempts, whether you can request replacement, if the price can be reduced, or if there are additional damages to claim.
Compensation is not an automatic remedy. First, it is necessary to distinguish the legal guarantee of conformity from the damages that the defect may have caused you. I explain which rules apply to the purchase of a new car as a consumer, which facts change the answer, and which alternatives are worth considering without confusing the role of the seller with that of the manufacturer.
The legal guarantee concerns the sale to the consumer
The primary point of contact is normally the seller. The rules of the Consumer Code apply when a natural person purchases the car for purposes unrelated to their professional or entrepreneurial activity and the seller acts as a professional. In this relationship, liability for the lack of conformity lies with the seller, even when the problem depends on production, a component, or software supplied by third parties.
This rule does not prevent also using the commercial guarantee offered by the car manufacturer. However, these are distinct plans: the commercial guarantee follows the conditions set by the provider, while the legal guarantee arises from the sales contract and cannot be limited in advance to the consumer's detriment. The reform is contained in Legislative Decree no. 170 of 2021 on Normattiva, which amended articles 128 and following of the Consumer Code.
Not every purchase follows the same regime. If the car is purchased by a company, with a VAT number for business activities, or under a lease, the application of consumer protection cannot be taken for granted. Furthermore, in leasing, the sales contract and the financing or financial leasing contract may have different parties and obligations. The qualification indicated in the contract matters before choosing who to address the request to.
When the car does not correspond to what it should have been
A lack of conformity does not only coincide with a mechanical failure. The car must have the qualities and functions provided for in the contract, be suitable for normal use, comply with the characteristics that the buyer can reasonably expect, and include accessories, instructions, and due updates. Articles 129 and 130 of the Consumer Code therefore consider functionality, compatibility, security, and durability to be relevant as well.
An engine breakdown, a battery that does not maintain its due performance, a driving assistance system signaling recurring errors, or a digital function indicated in the order but not available can fall within the conformity check. The comparison starts from the contract and delivery. It is necessary to compare the car actually received with the model, optional features, configuration, and characteristics declared in the purchase documentation.
Specific promises carry concrete weight
If a particular function was agreed upon before the purchase and accepted by the seller, it is not enough to state that the vehicle is still usable anyway. A charging, navigation, connectivity, or assistance function can be essential precisely because it guided the choice of the car. The order, configuration sheet, and dealer communications help understand whether this is a simple expectation or a contractual characteristic.
Digital elements can also be decisive. A modern car incorporates software and connected services. When a digital function is part of the sold vehicle, a missing or ineffective update can affect conformity; conversely, generic inconvenience linked to an external service not included in the contract, which does not prevent the car from functioning, is not sufficient. The distinction depends on what the seller promised to supply together with the vehicle.
Emissions, technical campaigns, and recalls: what they really prove
News about emissions does not prove a right to compensation on its own. If the car was sold with inaccurate information regarding homologation, environmental characteristics, driving possibilities, or declared performance, that information may be relevant. To obtain a remedy, however, it is necessary to link the event to the purchased vehicle and verify which contractual or normally expected characteristic is not respected.
A recall, a technical campaign, or an invitation to a workshop update are important elements, but they do not automatically equate to the recognition of a serious lack of conformity or economic damage. The effect on the specific car matters. The involved chassis number, the interested component, the proposed remedy, the downtime, and the result of the intervention must be clarified. An update that stably resolves a problem can close the conformity issue; an intervention that does not eliminate the anomaly opens up different evaluations.
Public statements by the seller, manufacturer, or commercial chain can enter into the verification of the characteristics expected from the asset. However, this does not mean that every advertising datum becomes an absolute guarantee under every condition of use: for example, data obtained through standardized tests do not necessarily coincide with daily driving results. The legal point is to understand whether the statement concerned a relevant quality and whether the delivered car actually deviates from it.
Terms and proof: the delivery date is essential
The defect must normally manifest within two years from delivery. For contracts concluded from January 1, 2022, Article 133 of the Consumer Code places the burden on the seller for defects existing at the time of delivery that manifest within two years. Legislative Decree no. 170 of 2021 expressly establishes that the new regime applies to contracts concluded after that date, as also shown in the text of the Consumer Code with the note on the effectiveness of the reform.
The decisive date is therefore, as a rule, the delivery of the vehicle and not merely registration. The defect may show at a later time, but it must have a cause already present upon delivery. During the first year, a favorable presumption operates. Article 135 presumes, unless proven otherwise and unless incompatible with the nature of the asset or the defect, that the problem manifested within one year already existed at the time of delivery.
After the first year, the right does not disappear, but it may become more difficult to prove that the anomaly derives from an original cause. Technical diagnoses, workshop reports, photographs, videos of error messages, and the history of interventions can then assume greater relevance. The Code also provides for a limitation period of twenty-six months from delivery for actions aimed at enforcing defects not fraudulently concealed by the seller: this is a different term from the two-year period within which the defect must manifest.
Recent reforms require attention to contract dates. EU Directive 2024/1799 contains new provisions on repair and indicates July 31, 2026, as the application date of national measures; it also provides transitional rules for contracts concluded before that day. The European text must not be turned on its own into an immediate claim against the seller: for a sale concluded around that date, it is necessary to identify the Italian legislation concretely applicable. The European framework can be consulted in EU Directive 2024/1799 in the consolidated version.
Repair, replacement, price reduction, and termination
As a rule, one starts from the restoration of conformity. Article 135-bis allows the consumer to choose between repair and replacement, unless the chosen option is impossible or imposes disproportionate costs on the seller compared to the other. Proportions depend on the value of the car without the defect, the severity of the problem, and the possibility of using the alternative without significant inconvenience.
Repair or replacement must be carried out free of charge, within a reasonable time from the communication of the defect, and without significant inconvenience to the consumer. On a car, vehicle downtime is not always irrelevant: the type of anomaly, duration of unavailability, purpose for which the vehicle was purchased, and actual utility of the intervention all have an impact. There is no fixed number of repairs to accept. The law looks at the result and the methods used to try to eliminate the defect.
Price reduction and termination are subsequent remedies or immediate ones only in the hypotheses provided for by law. They can come into play if the seller does not repair or replace correctly, refuses restoration, the defect reappears after an attempt, the anomaly is serious, or it appears clear that it will not be eliminated within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience. The discipline is described in articles 135-bis, 135-ter, and 135-quater of the Consumer Code.
Termination is not granted for a minor defect. In such cases, repair, replacement, or, when conditions are met, price reduction may remain adequate. If the seller claims that the defect is minor, the burden of proving its minor nature lies with them. When terminating the contract, the intention must be communicated to the seller: simply stopping the use of the car or delivering it to the workshop is not sufficient.
Compensation requires further demonstrable damage
The defect does not automatically generate an additional sum of money. Repair, replacement, price reduction, and termination are direct remedies for the non-conforming car. Compensation instead concerns further prejudice caused by the defect or breach: it is necessary to indicate what damage occurred, prove the connection with the problem, and document its extent.
Based on the facts, necessary and documented expenses, costs incurred to deal with vehicle downtime, or specific economic consequences of the lack of availability of the car may be relevant. A receipt alone is not enough. It must emerge why that expense was necessary and why it derives precisely from the defect or the seller's failure to remedy it. A generic request for the distress suffered, without provable facts and consequences, does not coincide with a well-founded damages claim.
If the malfunction caused personal injury, an accident, or damage to property other than the car, the problem does not end with the warranty of conformity. Further rules may apply, with specific prerequisites, responsible parties, and specific evidence. This is also why it is important not to use the word "compensation" indiscriminately: the right claim depends on the damage actually incurred.
How to avoid errors before choosing the remedy
The dispute must describe the problem precisely. It is useful to communicate the delivery date, found defect, interventions already carried out, and requested remedy to the seller, keeping copies of the communications. The order, contract, invoice, delivery report, commercial guarantee, workshop work sheets, and expense documentation help reconstruct the relationship without relying solely on memories or verbal conversations.
Do not independently suspend financing installments or leasing obligations just because the car has a defect. Linked contracts are not necessarily the same contract. The possibility of refusing a part of the price not yet paid concerns the relationship with the seller within legal limits; an installment toward a financing company may follow different rules. The choice must therefore be linked to the signed documents and the remedy you actually intend to exercise.
Frequently asked questions
Does compensation automatically replace repair?
No, the two requests have different functions. Repair serves first and foremost to make the car conform to the contract; compensation instead requires further damage, a nexus with the defect, and proof of its extent. An expense for alternative mobility or a necessary cost can be evaluated only if they are genuinely caused by the problem and documented.
Can I contact the car manufacturer directly?
For the legal guarantee, the reference remains the seller. The car manufacturer may have obligations deriving from its commercial guarantee, a recall, or a specific commitment, but this does not automatically shift contractual liability toward the person who sold you the car onto the producer. The manufacturer's guarantee and the purchase contract must be read separately.
Am I entitled to a courtesy car during repairs?
There is no automatic right to a courtesy car in every case. The seller must perform the repair or replacement without significant inconvenience, keeping in mind the nature of the asset and the purpose of the purchase. A long or repeated downtime is an important fact, but it is necessary to verify which contractual solution or legal remedy is concretely provided.
How many repair attempts must I accept?
The law does not indicate a rigid number. Necessary time, distress suffered, severity of the problem, and above all the result are what matter. If the defect still manifests after a restoration attempt, the Consumer Code considers it a fact that may allow moving on to price reduction or termination, when the other prerequisites are also met.
Does the longer commercial guarantee replace the legal one?
No, they are different protections. The commercial guarantee can be broader or last longer, but it follows its own conditions and does not eliminate free legal remedies against the seller. Keeping both documents is useful because they indicate responsible parties, duration, assistance methods, and obligations that do not necessarily coincide.
Evaluating the remedy without confusing plans
Delivery date, defect, repair attempts, and provable damages guide the choice. These are the elements distinguishing a restoration request from a demand for replacement, price reduction, termination, or further compensation. If you purchased a new car in Milan and the problem persists, you can contact me to frame the contract and the alternatives that the documented facts allow to consider.