**Main Question:** Most likely not under [Magnuson-Moss][1] or U.C.C..

**Question 1:** Probably -- maybe could be found unconscionable, but I can't formulate an educated guess on.

**Question 2:** If a charge payable before hand was not set forth in any [written warranty][3], most likely not.

**Question 3:** Most likely same as Question 2.

According to 15 U.S.C., subsection (a) of [Section 2302][2] entitled "Full and conspicuous disclosure of terms and conditions; additional requirements for contents:

>"In order to improve the adequacy of information available to consumers, prevent deception, and improve competition in the marketing of consumer products, any warrantor warranting a consumer product to a consumer by means of a written warranty shall, to the extent required by rules of the Commission, fully and conspicuously disclose in simple and readily understood language the terms and conditions of such warranty.
>
>(4) A statement of what the warrantor will do in the event of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with such written warranty—at whose expense—and for what period of time."
>
> (5) A statement of what the consumer must do and expenses he must bear.
>
> (6) Exceptions and exclusions from the terms of the warranty.
>
> (7) The step-by-step procedure which the consumer should take in order to obtain performance of any obligation under the warranty, including the identification of any person or class of persons authorized to perform the obligations set forth in the warranty.
>
> (12) The characteristics or properties of the products, or parts thereof, that are not covered by the warranty.
>
> (13) The elements of the warranty in words or phrases which would not mislead a reasonable, average consumer as to the nature or scope of the warranty.

It may, in addition to any or all of the above, be a violation of paragraph (8), (9), (10) and/or (11) based on specific fact patterns.

This does not mean that it is likely worth pursuing the matter in court other than maybe in small claims (See: [ohwilleke's reply to this question for a general explanation][4]). Moreover, most auto manufacturers put arbitration provisions in their sale contracts and/or their warranties and generally it may be required of one to opt out of it within 30 days of entering into the agreement. If that took place, first the dispute would likely need to be disputed through a qualified dispute resolution mechanism of the manufacturer, dealer, distributor and/or sellers choice depending on who gave the warranty.

The specific State's lemon laws may provide for civil penalties for willful violations which may or may not be a very high bar to meet depending on the State's case law, and which is more likely to make it worth for "lemon" lawyers to take the case, but generally they are not a great deal more like hyenas of this segment of the law. It may still be worth considering for one depending on the specific facts, including State jurisdiction and the impeding nature of the nonconformity.

(Please specify a State for the State's lemon laws applicable in this hypo)


  [1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-50
  [2]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2302
  [3]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=15-USC-1855261157-826470510&term_occur=999&term_src=title:15:chapter:50:section:2301
  [4]: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/67241/what-are-the-legal-protections-to-buy-if-seller-refunds-instead-of-delivering-wh/67242#67242