2024 Mazda CX-90 Lemon Law Case Study: Cash and Keep Settlement in Massachusetts
A Brand-New 2024 Mazda CX-90 Lease That Required Six Warranty Visits in About 17 Months: Including a Low-Pressure Fuel Pump, a Failed Water Pump and Leaking Radiator, an EVAP Purge Valve Leak, the Manufacturer-Issued Recall 7825I Stalling-Risk Campaign, and a Recurring Front Right Wheel Speed Sensor Defect
Our client leased a brand-new 2024 Mazda CX-90 in Massachusetts on July 20, 2024 with just 7 miles on the odometer. Within roughly three months of delivery, by 3,129 miles, the vehicle was already at the dealer for the first of six warranty repair attempts, and over the course of the next eighteen months it would return repeatedly for chronic fuel-system, cooling, electrical, and emissions-control nonconformities, including a manufacturer-acknowledged stalling-risk recall.
The defects spanned the powertrain and electrical systems on a fully new vehicle: a low-pressure fuel pump failure (DTC P0087, Fuel Pressure Low) at Visit 1; a failing water pump with a simultaneously leaking radiator producing severe drivability issues, sudden deceleration during acceleration, inconsistent throttle response, and unexpected braking warnings at Visit 2; an EVAP system small-leak (DTC P0442) caused by a purge valve leaking into the intake at Visit 3, performed alongside Mazda Recall Campaign 7825I, the manufacturer’s own stalling-risk recall on the CX-90; recurring drivability concerns at Visit 4 (loud clicking when shifting from reverse to drive, fan-like noise with metal rattling at idle, and shaking at highway speed); and finally a recurring front right wheel speed sensor defect (DTC C0039:15 and C0034) producing ABS, TCS, and check-engine warnings at Visits 5 and 6, only reproducible under wet weather conditions, with the front right wheel speed sensor ultimately replaced. With six documented warranty repair events in about 20 months, plus a manufacturer-issued recall performed on the same vehicle, a federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claim was the cleanest path to compensation.
What Went Wrong
- Low-pressure fuel pump failure (DTC P0087, Fuel Pressure Low): Within roughly three months of delivery, at 3,129 miles, the customer reported the vehicle would not move and ran roughly upon shifting into drive. Technicians retrieved DTC P0087 confirming low fuel pressure; the entire low-pressure fuel pump, plate, and O-ring were replaced, a major fuel-system component failure on a brand-new vehicle
- Failed water pump with leaking radiator, severe drivability symptoms: The customer reported severe drivability issues including sudden deceleration during acceleration, inconsistent throttle response, and unexpected braking warnings. Diagnosis confirmed both the radiator was leaking and the water pump was failing. Both were replaced, two separate cooling-system component failures on the same visit
- EVAP purge valve leaking into intake (DTC P0442): Stored DTC P0442 (EVAP small leak) traced to a purge valve leaking into the intake. The purge valve, gaskets, and coolant were replaced. A separate emissions-control nonconformity beyond the cooling and fuel issues
- Mazda Recall Campaign 7825I, stalling-risk recall performed: At Visit 3, Mazda performed Recall Campaign 7825I, the manufacturer’s own stalling-risk recall on the CX-90 platform, on this client’s vehicle. A factory recall is itself an admission by the manufacturer that the vehicle has a known nonconformity
- Multiple drivability concerns at Visit 4: A loud clicking noise when shifting from reverse to drive, a loud constant fan-like noise with metal rattling at idle, and excessive shaking at highway speed, all reported in the same visit, all on a vehicle with under 18 months in service
- Recurring front right wheel speed sensor defect (DTC C0039:15, C0034): ABS, TCS, and check-engine warnings; stored wheel-speed-sensor codes that returned only under wet conditions; the front right wheel speed sensor was eventually replaced after being diagnosed across two visits, a chronic safety-related electrical defect
- Six warranty repair events documented within about 20 months of lease delivery: The first nonconformity arose at 3,129 miles, inside the one-year / 15,000-mile term of protection, and a manufacturer-issued recall was performed on the vehicle
Six Warranty Visits, One Manufacturer Recall, One Brand-New Mazda CX-90 Lease
Visit 1: October 7 to October 10, 2024
- Customer reported that upon starting the vehicle and shifting into drive, the vehicle would not move and ran roughly
- Technicians retrieved DTC P0087 (Fuel Pressure Low) and confirmed the vehicle had low fuel pressure
- The low-pressure fuel pump, plate, and O-ring were replaced
- Proper operation was confirmed after repair
Visit 2: March 8 to March 26, 2025
- Customer reported severe drivability issues, including sudden deceleration during acceleration, inconsistent throttle response, and unexpected braking warnings
- Diagnosis confirmed the radiator was leaking and the water pump was failing
- Both the radiator and the water pump were replaced
- After repairs, the vehicle was test-driven with no further overheating or drivability issues
Visit 3: September 15 to September 30, 2025
- Customer reported a check engine light, hesitation during acceleration, and slowing before speeding up
- Technicians retrieved DTC P0442 (EVAP small leak) and found the purge valve leaking into the intake
- The purge valve, gaskets, and coolant were replaced
- The vehicle was road-tested with no codes returning
- Additional concerns regarding the washer fluid light were documented but not repaired
- Mazda Recall Campaign 7825I (stalling risk) was performed during this visit
Visit 4: November 11 to November 29, 2025
- Customer reported multiple drivability concerns:
- A loud clicking noise when shifting from reverse to drive
- A loud constant fan-like noise with metal rattling at idle
- Excessive shaking at highway speeds
Visit 5: February 26 to February 27, 2026
- Customer reported ABS, TCS, and check engine warnings
- Technicians found stored but inactive codes related to ABS and traction control, which had self-reset and did not reappear during testing
- Later, the customer reported a check engine light immediately after the vehicle was returned
- Wheel speed sensor codes C0039:15 and C0034 were retrieved, returning only under wet conditions
- The front right wheel speed sensor was replaced
- After road testing in rain, the codes did not return
Visit 6: February 26 to March 10, 2026
- Customer reported several malfunction warnings, including ABS, TCS, and a check engine light
- Initial inspection found no active warnings, but diagnostic history showed codes related to the right front wheel speed sensor
- The issue was confirmed during wet weather conditions
- The front right wheel speed sensor was replaced
- After replacement and road testing, the codes did not return, a recurring same-defect failure pattern across consecutive visits
The Legal Basis for This 2024 Mazda CX-90 Claim
Massachusetts’ New Vehicle Lemon Law, codified at M.G.L. c. 90 § 7N½, protects new-vehicle buyers and lessees in Massachusetts. Under § 7N½, a presumption arises that a reasonable number of repair attempts have been made if either: (a) the same nonconformity has been subject to repair three or more times by the manufacturer or its agents and the nonconformity continues; or (b) the vehicle has been out of service by reason of repair for a cumulative total of fifteen or more business days. Massachusetts’ statute applies during a one-year / 15,000-mile term of protection that runs from the date of original delivery, and the first nonconformity must arise within that term, subsequent repair attempts on the same defect can extend beyond.
This case presented several compelling legal factors:
- First nonconformity inside the one-year / 15,000-mile term of protection: Visit 1 occurred at 3,129 miles, roughly 11 weeks after the July 20, 2024 lease delivery. Both the time component and the mileage component of the M.G.L. c. 90 § 7N½ term of protection were comfortably satisfied at the moment the first warranty defect arose
- Manufacturer admission via Recall Campaign 7825I: Mazda performed Recall 7825I (stalling risk) on this client’s vehicle during Visit 3. A factory-issued recall is itself a manufacturer admission of a known safety nonconformity.
- Substantial impairment of use, value, or safety: A failed low-pressure fuel pump (DTC P0087), a failed water pump and leaking radiator producing sudden deceleration and unexpected braking warnings, an EVAP system leak (DTC P0442), Mazda’s own stalling-risk recall, and a recurring wheel-speed-sensor electrical defect collectively impair the use, value, or safety of the vehicle
- Federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, fee-shifting against Mazda Motor of America, Inc.: Repeated unsuccessful warranty repairs on a written-warranty nonconformity also triggered a federal claim against Mazda Motor of America, Inc. under 15 U.S.C. § 2310, which independently provides a remedy for breach of express warranty regardless of the state-law presumption period and lets a court award attorney fees to a consumer who prevails
How Easy Lemon Secured the $10,000 Cash and Keep Settlement
Free Case Evaluation
We reviewed the complete repair history across all six Mazda dealer visits and confirmed the first nonconformity (low-pressure fuel pump, DTC P0087) arose at 3,129 miles, well within the M.G.L. c. 90 § 7N½ one-year / 15,000-mile term of protection, and that the front right wheel speed sensor had been diagnosed and replaced across consecutive visits.
Documentation & Case Building
Our team compiled every Mazda repair order, every diagnostic finding (including stored DTCs P0087, P0442, C0039:15, and C0034), every replaced part (low-pressure fuel pump, water pump, radiator, EVAP purge valve and gaskets, front right wheel speed sensor), and every dealership write-up, plus the documented performance of Mazda Recall Campaign 7825I on the same vehicle, into an airtight timeline showing Mazda’s inability to permanently repair the same nonconformities.
Demand to Mazda Motor of America, Inc.
We filed a formal demand against Mazda Motor of America, Inc. (the U.S. distributor of all Mazda-branded vehicles) citing the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. § 2310), documenting six warranty repair events, a recurring front-right-wheel-speed-sensor failure pattern, an active manufacturer-issued stalling-risk recall (7825I), and major early-life powertrain and cooling-system component failures on a brand-new lease.
$10,000 Cash and Keep Settlement
Easy Lemon successfully negotiated a $10,000 Cash and Keep settlement, Mazda Motor of America, Inc. paid our client a lump-sum settlement as compensation for the warranty defects. The $10,000 total combines the payment to our client and the attorney fees.
$10,000 Cash and Keep Settlement Recovered
Key Case Facts
- Vehicle: 2024 Mazda CX-90
- Leased in: Massachusetts (July 20, 2024)
- Status at delivery: Brand new (leased new), 7 miles at delivery
- Mileage reported at intake: about 23,000
- Mileage at first repair: 3,129 (well within M.G.L. c. 90 § 7N½ term of protection)
- Repair attempts: 6 documented warranty repair events at authorized Mazda dealerships
- Manufacturer recall performed: Mazda Recall Campaign 7825I (stalling-risk recall)
- Primary defects: Low-pressure fuel pump failure (DTC P0087); failed water pump with leaking radiator producing sudden deceleration and unexpected braking warnings; EVAP small-leak with purge valve leaking into intake (DTC P0442); manufacturer-issued Mazda Recall 7825I performed at Visit 3; recurring multiple-symptom drivability complaint (clicking on shift, fan-like rattle, highway-speed shaking); recurring front right wheel speed sensor defect (DTC C0039:15 and C0034) producing ABS, TCS, and check-engine warnings under wet conditions, ultimately replaced
- Manufacturer: Mazda Motor of America, Inc.
- Settlement type: Cash and Keep ($10,000), manufacturer pays compensation under the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. § 2310)
What Our Clients Are Saying
Attorney on Record
Steven Nassi, Esq.
Managing Partner, Easy Lemon by RockPoint Law P.C.
Licensed attorney whose practice is limited to lemon law. Steven leads the Easy Lemon legal team and has overseen thousands of successful lemon law claims against major manufacturers including Mazda Motor of America, Toyota, Honda, Subaru, General Motors (Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Buick), Ford, Stellantis, Tesla, Audi, Volkswagen Group of America, Porsche, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Kia, and more.
Recurring Fuel, Cooling, or Wheel Speed Sensor Problems With Your Mazda CX-90?
A low-pressure fuel pump failure, a failed water pump or leaking radiator, recurring ABS or TCS warnings traced to a wheel speed sensor, an EVAP small-leak code, or any chronic warranty defect on a 2024 or 2025 Mazda CX-90 in Massachusetts that has already been to the dealer multiple times is unacceptable, and you may already qualify for compensation under M.G.L. c. 90 § 7N½ plus federal Magnuson-Moss. Free case evaluation, 30 seconds.
Qualify in 30 Seconds →2024 Mazda CX-90 Lemon Law Questions in Massachusetts
Your Mazda May Have a Lemon Law Claim Too
If your Mazda keeps going back to the shop for the same problem, you may qualify under your state's lemon law, the manufacturer pays our fees, not you. We handle Mazda cases like this one regularly.
See Our Mazda Lemon Law Page →Learn More
- Massachusetts Lemon Law Attorneys
- All Settlements & Case Studies
- Lemon Law By Manufacturer
- Mazda Lemon Law
- Car Lemon Law Guide
- Free Case Evaluation
Related Case Results
- 2025 Mazda 3 buyback in Connecticut ($34,759)
- 2025 Mazda CX-70 cash-and-keep settlement in Georgia ($13,000)
- 2024 Mazda CX-90 cash-and-keep settlement in Florida ($12,500)
