2024 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Lemon Law Case Study — Utah

Why This Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Diesel Qualified For A Cash And Keep Settlement Under Federal Magnuson-Moss And Utah Warranty Law

The 2024 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Diesel is the Duramax 3.0L LM2 turbo-diesel inline-six configuration of General Motors’s flagship full-size light-duty pickup — the diesel Silverado 1500 sits at a price premium specifically because of the diesel powertrain’s tow-rating and fuel-economy advantage on a half-ton chassis. When three separate leaf-spring replacements are required across four warranty visits — with a GM-issued Preliminary Information bulletin cited in writing on the repair order — and when the powertrain throws a coolant flow control valve fault (DTC P1098) and the electrical/emissions system throws a battery-anchored DEF / CEL limp-mode warning, the nonconformity strikes at multiple substantial elements of the work-truck purpose the vehicle was sold to perform.

This case presented several compelling legal factors:

• Utah New Motor Vehicle Warranties Act (Utah Code Ann. § 13-32a): Utah protects new-vehicle buyers and lessees within a one-year-from-delivery / 12,000-mile term of protection. The statute creates a presumption that a reasonable number of repair attempts have been made if the same nonconformity has been the subject of four or more repair attempts, or if the vehicle has been out of service for a cumulative total of more than 30 business days by reason of repair. The Silverado 1500’s 131 cumulative calendar days out of service clears the Utah 30-day prong by more than 4.3x on the cumulative-day measure alone.
• Two separate visits each clear the Utah prong on their own: Visit 2 (39 days, January 8 – February 15, 2025) and Visit 4 (74 days, August 19 – October 31, 2025) each individually exceed the Utah 30-business-day cumulative-out-of-service threshold before adding the two other visits.
• Same-defect prong satisfied on the rear suspension: The same rear-suspension nonconformity was the subject of three separate leaf-spring replacements (the left rear leaf spring at Visit 2, the passenger-side rear leaf spring at Visit 4, and the left rear leaf spring a second time at Visit 4 after excessive play was documented at the same position) — plus the four leaf-spring inserts and the U-bolt anchor torque procedure under PI 19-NA-129 at Visit 2 that failed to resolve the underlying defect. Three replacement attempts on the same suspension defect is a manufacturer-level admission of a recurring nonconformity GM’s own authorized dealership could not put right.
• Federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. § 2310): Even where the Utah 1-year / 12,000-mile presumption window has expired, federal Magnuson-Moss provides a parallel breach-of-express-written-warranty remedy that operates against the manufacturer for as long as the original new-vehicle warranty is in effect. General Motors’s 3-year / 36,000-mile bumper-to-bumper limited warranty and the 5-year / 60,000-mile powertrain warranty covered the rear suspension, the filler neck assembly, the engine coolant flow control valve (DTC P1098), and the battery / DEF / CEL limp-mode event across the entire repair history — triggering Magnuson-Moss fee-shifting against General Motors LLC.
• GM Preliminary Information bulletin 19-NA-129 — manufacturer admission: The single most consequential manufacturer-level finding in this file is that GM’s own authorized dealership cited Preliminary Information bulletin 19-NA-129 in writing on the warranty repair order to anchor the diagnosis of the rear-suspension U-bolt geometry, and then went on to replace the left rear leaf spring — and then a second leaf spring — and then the left rear leaf spring again after the prior repairs did not hold. A GM-issued Preliminary Information bulletin cited on a warranty repair order is a manufacturer-level admission of a known nonconformity that leaves General Motors no defensible breach-of-warranty position on the rear-suspension defect.
• DTC P1098 — powertrain finding inside the GM powertrain warranty: DTC P1098 (engine coolant flow control valve) is a closed-loop emissions / thermal-management drivability fault. The dealer’s diagnostic finding that the valve was bound up internally and the documented replacement of the engine coolant flow control valve at Visit 4 is itself a manufacturer-level admission of a powertrain nonconformity inside GM’s 5-year / 60,000-mile powertrain warranty.
• Lane change alert system fault — substantial impairment of safety: An active lane change alert system warning indicator left untreated with no cause or correction documented at Visit 3 is an unresolved federally-relevant ADAS warning — a substantial-impairment-of-safety finding on a federally-regulated driver-assistance system.
• Substantial impairment of use and market value: A full-size diesel pickup out of service for 131 cumulative days in its first full year, with three documented leaf-spring replacements, a filler neck and housing replacement, and a coolant flow control valve replacement on its history, is by any measure substantially impaired in both use and market value. A recorded leaf-spring repair pattern and DTC P1098 valve replacement on a Carfax for a 2024 Silverado 1500 Diesel materially depresses resale value relative to any clean-history example of the same configuration.
• Federal Magnuson-Moss fee-shifting: Repeated unsuccessful or major warranty repairs on a written-warranty nonconformity trigger 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(2) fee-shifting, requiring the manufacturer to pay the consumer’s reasonable attorney fees on a successful claim. Our client paid $0 out of pocket.