New Hampshire's Repair-Attempt Presumption (3 Attempts / 30 Business Days)
How New Hampshire presumes a reasonable number of attempts — 3 same-defect repairs or 30 cumulative business days out of service — the same-dealer rule, and the final repair opportunity.
New Hampshire presumes a “reasonable number of attempts” under RSA 357-D:3, VII when one of two thresholds is met within the protected period (the express-warranty term plus one year).
The two thresholds
| Test | Threshold |
|---|---|
| Same defect, repair attempts | 3 or more (and the defect persists) |
| Cumulative business days out of service | 30 or more |
Either threshold, met within the protected period, raises the presumption that the manufacturer has had a reasonable opportunity to repair.
No one-attempt safety rule
Unlike Maine and Idaho (one attempt for a serious braking/steering failure) or Hawaii and Georgia (one attempt for any serious safety defect), New Hampshire has no reduced threshold for serious defects. Even a dangerous brake or steering failure must reach 3 attempts or 30 business days. A serious safety defect still strengthens the overall case (and supports a CPA theory) — but the presumption math is the same.
The same-dealer rule
Section 357-D:3, VIII expects the repair attempts to be documented by repair orders from the same authorized dealer, unless the consumer shows good cause to use a different dealer (e.g., relocation, dealership closure, or refusal to service). Keep every repair order, and document any reason for switching dealers.
The final repair opportunity
After the consumer files with the Arbitration Board, the manufacturer is generally entitled to one final repair attempt within 40 days (RSA 357-D:4, V). A successful final repair can terminate the proceeding — but without prejudice to a future claim if the defect recurs.
What counts as a repair attempt
- Vehicle was at the manufacturer’s authorized dealer, documented by a repair order.
- The same defect persists.
- “No problem found” visits count if the defect was reported.
- Independent-mechanic visits and routine maintenance don’t count.
The defect must substantially impair the vehicle
Meeting a threshold isn’t enough on its own — the defect must substantially impair the use, market value, or safety of the vehicle (RSA 357-D:2). The manufacturer can rebut by showing the problem doesn’t rise to that level, or resulted from abuse, neglect, or unauthorized modification. Clean documentation defeats these.
Bottom line
Three same-defect repairs or 30 cumulative business days out of service — within the warranty-plus-one-year period, with same-dealer repair orders — raises New Hampshire’s presumption. There’s no one-attempt safety shortcut, so track attempts and out-of-service days carefully and preserve every repair order.
Related
The New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act (RSA 358-A)
How the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act (RSA 358-A, private action § 358-A:10) overlays the lemon law — actual damages or $1,000, double-to-treble damages, mandatory fees, and the per se Board-noncompliance violation.
Read → ArticleThe Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in New Hampshire
How the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. § 2301) supplements New Hampshire's lemon law — federal-court access in D.N.H., § 2310(d)(2) attorney fees, and a 4-year runway.
Read → ArticleThe New Hampshire Lemon Law (RSA 357-D)
New Hampshire's lemon law in detail — the warranty-plus-one-year period, the 3-attempt / 30-business-day presumption, the consumer-elected remedy, the 100,000-mile offset, and the New Motor Vehicle Arbitration Board.
Read → ArticleStatute of Limitations for New Hampshire Lemon Law Claims
Timing rules for New Hampshire vehicle claims — the one-year filing deadline (RSA 357-D:11), the 40-day hearing and 30-day decision, the narrow 30-day appeal, and the CPA and Magnuson-Moss clocks.
Read →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.