Wisconsin Repair-Attempt Presumption (Wis. Stat. § 218.0171(1)(h))

Wisconsin codifies its “reasonable number of repair attempts” thresholds at Wis. Stat. § 218.0171(1)(h).

The two tests under § 218.0171(1)(h)

Test 1 — Four-attempt rule (same nonconformity)

The consumer meets the standard when:

• The same nonconformity has been the subject of four or more repair attempts; AND
• The defect continues to exist.

Four attempts matches California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Texas, Washington, Arizona, and Colorado.

Test 2 — 30-day cumulative OOS rule

The consumer meets the standard when:

• The vehicle has been out of service for repair for a total of 30 or more calendar days during the 1-year Rights Period.

Wisconsin uses calendar days (not business days like MA, NC, or CO).

No separate serious safety defect category

Unlike Virginia, Georgia, and Washington, Wisconsin does not create a lower repair-attempt threshold for serious safety defects.

The written election

After meeting the thresholds, the consumer must serve written election of refund or replacement to the manufacturer. The written election starts the 30-day clock for manufacturer compliance — and triggers the automatic § 218.0171(7) double damages on Day 31 if not fully delivered.

Notice requirements:

• Written — certified mail with return receipt is best practice (creates verifiable receipt date).
• To the manufacturer, not the dealer.
• Specific election — refund OR replacement, not both.
• Documentation of consumer’s basis: repair attempts, threshold compliance.
• Reference to Wis. Stat. § 218.0171 is standard practice.

What counts as a “repair attempt”

A repair attempt requires:

• The vehicle was presented to an authorized service facility.
• The consumer reported the defect.
• A repair order documents the visit.

Importantly:

• “No problem found” visits count.
• Different symptoms during the same visit can count separately.
• Routine maintenance doesn’t count.
• Independent-mechanic visits don’t count.

The 1-year window

Repair attempts must occur within the 1-year window from first delivery (or during the express warranty period, whichever first).

Cold-weather considerations

Wisconsin winter conditions can accelerate defect manifestation, particularly:

• Cold-start systems — battery, starter, ignition stress.
• HVAC defroster — critical 6 months per year.
• Underbody corrosion — winter road salt accelerates brake and fuel line failures.
• EV battery range — Wisconsin cold significantly reduces EV range.

Document weather conditions for cold-related defects.

Bottom line

Wisconsin’s § 218.0171(1)(h) thresholds — four attempts on the same nonconformity, OR 30 cumulative calendar days OOS — are standard. The distinctive feature isn’t the thresholds themselves but the automatic § 218.0171(7) double damages mechanism that follows the consumer’s written election. Document the thresholds carefully, then start the 30-day clock with a clean written election.

Related

Article

Wisconsin Automatic Double Damages (§ 218.0171(7))

Wisconsin's signature consumer-protection mechanism — automatic double damages plus mandatory attorney fees on manufacturer's 30-day refund/replacement non-compliance. The Marquez v. Mercedes-Benz USA decision tightened this clock dramatically.

Read → Article

The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in Wisconsin Cases

How the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act applies to Wisconsin lemon-law cases — federal-court access via E.D. Wis. (Milwaukee, Green Bay) and W.D. Wis. (Madison).

Read → Article

Wisconsin Lemon Law Statute of Limitations

How long you have to file a Wisconsin lemon-law claim — the 1-year Rights Period, 36-month Lemon Law action filing window, and Wisconsin's unusually long 6-year UCC / Magnuson-Moss runway.

Read → Article

The Wisconsin Lemon Law (Wis. Stat. § 218.0171)

Wisconsin's lemon law in detail — 1-year Rights Period, 4-attempt / 30-day OOS thresholds, automatic double damages, and mandatory § 218.0171(7) attorney fees.

Read →