Skip to main content
Home  >  Recent Settlements  >  Toyota  >  2025 Toyota Grand Highlander — New Jersey
✦ Case Study: Resolved
$71,697 Vehicle Buyback
Results may vary. Prior outcomes do not guarantee a similar result. Each case is unique and depends on its specific facts and applicable law.

2025 Toyota Grand Highlander Lemon Law Case Study: Buyback in New Jersey

Purchased New in New Jersey
$71,697
Recovered
10 Visits
Repair Attempts
53 Days
Out of Service
531 Mi
At First Repair
Case Overview

2025 Toyota Grand Highlander: 10 Repair Visits and 53 Days Out of Service

2025 Toyota Grand Highlander lemon law buyback in New Jersey: Easy Lemon recovered $71,697 for this client after 10 repair visits and 53 days out of service. The claim was brought under New Jersey Lemon Law (N.J. Stat. §56:12-29 to §56:12-49). When the same defect keeps coming back and the manufacturer cannot fix it, the owner may be entitled to a buyback, a replacement or a cash settlement, at no cost†.

Our client bought a new 2025 Toyota Grand Highlander in New Jersey. The first visit for repairs happened at 531 miles. The repair records show 10 visits and 53 days out of service.

Easy Lemon brought this matter to Toyota and settled it through a vehicle buyback totaling $71,697. The total combines the payment to our client, the payoff to the lender and the attorney fees.

Systems Involved

  • Electrical
  • Engine
  • Body/Trim
🔧
10
Repair Attempts
📅
53
Days Out of Service
🚗
531
Miles at First Repair
✓
$71,697
Recovered
Repair History

2025 Toyota Grand Highlander Repair History: What the Repair Orders Show

Visit 1: August 15, 2025

  • The owner reported that the rearview mirror was making a buzzing or humming noise, as if something was loose.
  • No diagnosis or repair work is documented for this visit.

Visit 2: September 9, 2025

  • During this visit, multiple overlapping concerns were addressed.
  • Regarding the rearview mirror buzzing noise, the technician found a plastic trim cover directly above the mirror that was loose and not fully seated in its grooves.
  • The trim was removed, inspected for damage (none found), and reinstalled, eliminating the noise.
  • Regarding a separate complaint of multiple warning lights on the dashboard and the car struggling to accelerate, the technician found DTC P30111E (HV battery block 1 circuit resistance out of range).
  • The HV battery cooling vent points were checked and found clear, but both HV battery fan filters were found very dirty with hair debris.
  • The filters were cleaned and the concern was noted for continued monitoring.
  • Separately, the owner reported warning lights including an airbag malfunction light, a driver monitor warning, and a headlight warning appearing on startup that would persist unless the vehicle was restarted multiple times.
  • There was also an internal short in the millimeter wave radar sensor assembly that caused it to operate improperly; the assembly was replaced and the vehicle was road tested for 14 miles.
  • A malfunction inside the airbag ECU was found to be keeping the airbag warning light on and interfering with other driver-assist systems. The airbag ECU was replaced and the system was recalibrated, followed by a successful road test.
  • After a road test of over five miles, a final check for the driver monitor malfunction message showed no active, pending, or stored fault codes, and the vehicle was working normally at that point.
  • Safety Recall (rear view camera image may freeze or not display) was also performed, with the parking assist ECU software updated.
  • All documented concerns were addressed, and the vehicle was returned to the owner.

Visit 3: November 18-19, 2025

  • The owner reported a recurring system error message on the dashboard.
  • The technician scanned for DTCs and road tested the vehicle.
  • The technician noted that an EZPass transponder mounted close to the windshield camera may be contributing to the problem and suggested that the owner try driving the vehicle without the EZPass on the windshield to see if the message repeats.

Visit 4: December 8-9, 2025

  • The owner reported that a driver monitor malfunction message was intermittently appearing.
  • The vehicle was driven on the road for more than five miles and did not display any warning messages. A check for active, pending, or stored fault codes related to the malfunction found none. At that time the vehicle was functioning normally.
  • Safety Recall (rear view camera image may freeze or not display) was also completed during this visit.

Visit 5: December 16-18, 2025

  • The owner reported that headlight system malfunction and system malfunction messages were appearing on the dashboard.
  • The technician diagnosed an internal failure in the airbag ECU, which was causing the airbag warning light to remain on and interfering with other vehicle drive systems.
  • The airbag ECU was replaced, the system was recalibrated, and a road test confirmed the repair was successful.

Visit 6: January 7-9, 2026

  • The owner reported that upon starting the vehicle in the morning, airbag malfunction, driver monitor, and headlight warning messages appeared on the dashboard, and that the lights would remain on unless the vehicle was restarted several times.
  • The technician found an internal short in the millimeter wave radar sensor assembly causing it to operate incorrectly.
  • The millimeter wave radar sensor assembly was replaced, and the vehicle was road tested for 14 miles.

Visit 7: January 21-28, 2026

  • The owner returned with the same condition as the prior visit: airbag warning and headlight warning lights illuminating on the dashboard at startup.
  • Wiring at connector K19 (CAN high and CAN low) tested in specification.
  • Using a Pico scope, the technician noticed that the forward recognition camera would sometimes drop out of the CAN network after a number of key cycles.
  • The forward recognition camera was replaced, and the vehicle was road tested for 50 miles with no recurrence.
  • Repair completed.

Visit 8: February 9, 2026

  • The owner reported that upon starting the vehicle in the morning, airbag malfunction, driver monitor, and headlight warning messages appeared and would remain on unless the vehicle was restarted multiple times.
  • The airbag warning light was confirmed on.
  • No repair work is documented for this visit.

Visit 9: May 29, 2026 – June 5, 2026

  • The owner reported multiple warning lights on the dashboard and that the vehicle was struggling to accelerate, and the vehicle was towed in.
  • The technician found DTC P30111E (HV battery block 1 circuit resistance out of range).
  • The HV battery cooling vent points were confirmed unobstructed, but both HV battery fan filters were found heavily soiled with hair and debris.
  • Both filters were cleaned and the DTC was cleared.
  • Then the technician carried out the DTC P30111E confirmation drive and drove the vehicle for more than 55 miles. The DTC did not come back, and system performance was confirmed to be normal.

Visit 10: June 9, 2026 – Present

  • The owner reported multiple warning lights on the dashboard, that the vehicle was struggling to accelerate and would not move, and the vehicle was towed in.
  • The diagnosis is listed as ongoing.
  • No repair work is documented for this visit at this time.
Legal Analysis

Can a 2025 Toyota Grand Highlander Be a Lemon in New Jersey?

New Jersey Lemon Law (N.J. Stat. §56:12-29 to §56:12-49) covers new motor vehicles purchased or leased in New Jersey for personal, family, or household use, and certain used vehicles.

  • Repair attempts: 3 repair attempts for the same defect (or 1 for serious safety defects)
  • Days out of service: 20 cumulative calendar days
  • Remedies: Replacement vehicle, full refund, or cash settlement
  • Attorney fees: Yes - manufacturer pays consumer's attorney fees if consumer prevails
This case: This Toyota Grand Highlander went to the dealer 10 times and was out of service for 53 days. The federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act also applies to written warranties nationwide.
Our Approach

How Was This Toyota Grand Highlander Lemon Law Claim Resolved?

1

Free Case Review

We read the repair orders and counted the visits and the days the Grand Highlander spent at the dealer.

2

Building the File

We sorted all repair orders by date and noted what was reported, what was diagnosed and what was done. That way the record showed the problems coming back.

3

Demand to Toyota

We sent Toyota a written demand that set out the repair history and asked for a buyback.

4

Vehicle Buyback

Toyota agreed to a vehicle buyback totaling $71,697.

Case Status

$71,697 Vehicle Buyback Secured

$71,697
Vehicle Buyback: Manufacturer Repurchase

Key Case Facts

  • Vehicle: 2025 Toyota Grand Highlander
  • Purchased in: New Jersey
  • Status at purchase: New
  • Mileage at first repair: 531 miles
  • Systems involved: Electrical, Engine, Body/Trim
  • Repair attempts: 10 visits
  • Days out of service: 53 days
  • Manufacturer: Toyota
  • Settlement type: Vehicle Buyback
  • Settlement amount: $71,697 (Buyback)
Client Reviews

What Our Clients Are Saying

Legal Team

Attorney on Record

Steven Nassi, Esq. - Managing Partner

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 Audi, Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and more.

Having Problems With Your Toyota Grand Highlander?

If your Toyota Grand Highlander repeatedly goes back to the dealer for the same issue, you may have grounds for a claim under New Jersey lemon law. Free case evaluation, 30 seconds.

Qualify in 30 Seconds →
Common Questions

2025 Toyota Grand Highlander Lemon Law Questions in New Jersey

What does New Jersey lemon law require for a vehicle like this Toyota Grand Highlander?
Under New Jersey Lemon Law (N.J. Stat. §56:12-29 to §56:12-49), the repair standard is 3 repair attempts for the same defect (or 1 for serious safety defects), or 20 cumulative calendar days out of service. Remedies: Replacement vehicle, full refund, or cash settlement. The federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act also applies to written warranties nationwide.
How much did Easy Lemon recover in this 2025 Toyota Grand Highlander case?
The case settled through a vehicle buyback totaling $71,697. The total is the payment to our client, the payoff to the lender and the attorney fees. Results may vary. Prior outcomes do not guarantee a similar result.
What is the difference between a buyback and a cash-and-keep settlement?
Under a buyback deal, the manufacturer takes back the vehicle, pays off the loan or lease and then refunds the owner, after subtracting any use allowance the state permits. In a cash-and-keep settlement, the owner keeps the vehicle and receives a cash payment.
Do I pay anything to hire Easy Lemon for a Toyota lemon law claim?
No upfront fee. In lemon law cases the manufacturer generally pays the attorney fees under fee-shifting statutes. In this case part of the attorney fees came out of the settlement.
Toyota Owner?

Your Toyota May Have a Lemon Law Claim Too

If your Toyota 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 Toyota cases like this one regularly.

See Our Toyota Lemon Law Page →
Check If I Qualify → (855) 435-3666
INSTANT QUALIFICATION
100% Free & Confidential · Takes 30 Seconds
Vehicle Situation Contact

What's your vehicle? 🚗

Let's see if your car qualifies for a lemon law claim.

🔒 Lemon law claims have strict filing deadlines, don't wait.
$50M+**
Recovered
97%*
Resolution Rate
No Attorney’s Fees†
Unless We Recover
★★★★★§
Client Rating