Which statutes cover a customer’s rights to not upgrade software in an automobile?
<p>Here’s a hypothetical scenario:
A customer drops off a vehicle at the vehicle manufacturer’s service center for  some repair to the body of the car (let’s say a broken bumper). While dropping off the car for repairs, the customer tells the service advisor not to update software on the car (and has informed them in writing as well). The service center performs the body work but also upgrades the software. The customer then points out the upgraded software and asks to revert it back to the version it had when dropping off. The service center refuses and says it doesn’t have a way to do so.</p>
<p>The customer doesn’t want the newer version of the software because it significantly alters functionality of the vehicle (let’s say it deactivates the air suspension functionality - when purchased, the car was offered as having an air suspension and the air suspension worked until the software was updated. There is documentation to prove that a specific software version deactivates said functionality). The software upgrade was not part of/does not contain any remedies required by law (such as a safety recall campaign registered with the NHTSA). The functionality that was deactivated is not in violation of any law.</p>
<p>The repair work done did not require a software update. The service center did not inform the customer that a software was needed nor sought consent before doing so.</p>
<p>In this instance, are the actions of the service center in violation of any statutes?</p>
<p>** Clarification **: This question is about laws in the United States and the state of Washington in particular. The software update was not mandated by law or by any federal or state agency - I mentioned NHTSA as an example but meant to say any agency/government body that has oversight and legal basis to enforce updates to automobiles.</p>

<p>As far as I know, no state in the US has enacted a &quot;must ask first&quot; requirement on vehicle servicing. There are numerous requirements where a repair must be authorized if it costs more than... about $100, but no absolute requirement that all repairs and modifications must be spelled out in detail and approved. (Changing a flat tire could take a week, if every action had to be pre-approved). You two main protections are (1) that if a mechanic damages your car when working on it, you may be able to sue them for those damages and (2) if they breech their contract with you, you can sue them for the damage done.</p>
<p>If it is foreseeable that the software change will cause a loss in value of the car, it would be negligent of the mechanic to make the change. Also, if it is part of the contract that no software is to me modified, then modifying the software is a breech of contract. As you describe it, this is a breech of contract. Your right to sue for breech of contract is probably somehow encoded in the statutes of your state, but I can't find a statute in Washington that says &quot;You can file an action for breech of contract&quot;, since this is part of common law and Washington basically said years ago &quot;we hereby adopt the common law&quot;.</p>

automotive