FL findlemonlaw.com
Massachusetts · Article Updated May 24, 2026

Attorney Fees in Massachusetts Lemon Law Cases

Massachusetts's Lemon Law has no standalone fee provision — but Chapter 93A § 9(4) mandatory fees are the load-bearing fee engine. Plus Magnuson-Moss for federal-court fees.

Massachusetts is unusual: the Lemon Law itself has no standalone attorney-fee provision — unlike CA, VA, NJ, NC, OH, PA, NY, and MI. Instead, fee recovery flows through Chapter 93A § 9(4) mandatory fees — one of the strongest UDAP fee provisions in the country.

Three statutes, three approaches to fees

StatuteAttorney feesWhere pursued
Massachusetts Lemon Law (§ 7N½)No standalone provisionOCABR arbitration OR court
Chapter 93A § 9(4)Mandatory on prevailingCourt only (with § 9(3) demand letter)
Magnuson-Moss (§ 2310(d)(2))Federal; strongly presumedFederal or state court

OCABR arbitration does not include attorney-fee recovery.

c. 93A § 9(4) — mandatory fees on prevailing

The c. 93A fee provision under M.G.L. c. 93A § 9(4) provides:

Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs shall be awarded to the petitioner…

Mandatory fees attach to any prevailing § 9 claim — no separate willfulness or knowing-violation requirement (unlike the doubling/trebling, which does require willfulness or inadequate § 9(3) tender).

Awards typically range:

  • Settlement cases: $25,000-$55,000.
  • Tried cases: $55,000-$150,000+.

This is the load-bearing fee engine in Massachusetts lemon-law cases — and among the strongest UDAP fee provisions in the country.

Magnuson-Moss federal fee provision

15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(2) provides federal-court attorney-fee recovery in Magnuson-Moss actions. Available in both federal court (concurrent jurisdiction over $50K cases) and state court.

How fee-shifting changes Massachusetts case dynamics

Because § 7N½ itself has no fee provision but Chapter 93A § 9(4) is mandatory, attorney representation in Massachusetts cases is structured around c. 93A:

  • Pure OCABR arbitration cases — no fee recovery; consumers typically self-represent or pay flat fee.
  • Court action with c. 93A — mandatory fees recovered from manufacturer; attorney representation essentially free for consumer.
  • § 9(3) demand letter triggers manufacturer settlement pressure — tender adequacy analysis includes fee component.

A typical award stack

  • Refund: $41,000.
  • c. 93A actual damages: $5,000-$10,000.
  • Doubling/trebling (if willful/knowing or inadequate § 9(3) tender): $10,000-$30,000.
  • c. 93A § 9(4) mandatory fees: $25,000-$60,000.
  • Magnuson-Moss fees (overlapping coverage): $0-$15,000.
  • Consumer net: substantial.

Contingency representation in Massachusetts

Most experienced Massachusetts lemon-law attorneys work on modified contingency:

  • No fee upfront.
  • Costs advanced by the attorney.
  • Fees recovered from the manufacturer through c. 93A § 9(4) (mandatory on prevailing) or Magnuson-Moss.

What about OCABR arbitration?

OCABR arbitration doesn’t include attorney-fee recovery.

This is why consumers with substantial c. 93A exposure pursue court action instead of OCABR arbitration, or pursue OCABR arbitration first then court action with c. 93A.

The settlement breakdown

A typical settled Massachusetts lemon-law + c. 93A case might distribute:

  • Refund value (including sales tax): 50-60%.
  • c. 93A damages (potentially doubled/trebled): 10-20%.
  • Attorney fees and costs: 25-35%.

Bottom line

Massachusetts’s fee framework is unique — no standalone Lemon Law fees but mandatory c. 93A § 9(4) fees on prevailing. The c. 93A mechanism is among the strongest UDAP fee provisions in the country, making court action with c. 93A claims the strategically dominant path for any case with meaningful misrepresentation, willfulness, or inadequate § 9(3) tender exposure.

Related

Think you've got a lemon?

Compare your situation to your state's requirements — and connect with a vetted lemon-law attorney for a free case review.