Opinion ID: 2194347
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: ¶ 2. The question presented is whether Peterson, as a lessee, meets the definition of consumer under the MMWA, such that she can maintain a cause of action under the Act for breach of written warranty against the manufacturer and warrantor of an allegedly defective vehicle. We hold that Peterson has alleged sufficient facts to qualify as a category two consumer under the Act because the facts alleged in her complaint indicate that Volkswagen's warranty satisfies the definition of written warranty and because Peterson has alleged that the vehicle in question was transferred to her during the duration of Volkswagen's warranty. Volkswagen's warranty constitutes a written warranty under the MMWA because Peterson has alleged that it was issued by Volkswagen in connection with the sale of the vehicle by an authorized dealer to a lending institution in order to facilitate the lease, the warranty was part of the basis of the bargain between the dealership and the lending institution, and the lending institution purchased the vehicle for purposes other than resale. ¶ 3. Furthermore, we conclude that Peterson has pled sufficient facts to qualify as a category three consumer because the facts alleged in her complaint indicate that Volkswagen's warranty satisfies the definition of written warranty and because Peterson has alleged that she was entitled by the terms of Volkswagen's warranty to enforce said warranty against Volkswagen. Therefore, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals.