Enid, Okla. — An Oklahoma man is seeking a refund after purchasing a luxury Mercedes-Benz SUV that has caused him more frustration than satisfaction. Kyle Brotherton, who spent over $120,000 on the vehicle, claims it has been in the shop for more than 40 days since his purchase in July 2023, and despite repeated attempts at repair, the car remains problematic.
Brotherton, who had long dreamed of owning a Mercedes, says his experience with the vehicle has been a far cry from the joy he anticipated. “I remember as a kid, I went to see my mom’s family in Germany, and I got to see the Mercedes factory. And I said, one day, I’m going to be able to afford a Mercedes,” Brotherton shared. “And finally, 35 to 40 years later, I was able to do that.”
However, his lifelong aspiration quickly soured after taking delivery of the SUV. According to Brotherton, shortly after receiving the vehicle, he began to experience multiple issues, requiring several visits to the shop. “There were several issues, and the car was in the shop through October, November, and December,” he said. “They weren’t able to fix the car, so I took it back and took possession again. But it went back in the shop in February of 2024. Since then, it’s been in the shop for over 365 days for numerous reasons.”
Frustrated and no longer feeling safe in the vehicle, Brotherton has taken legal action. He has filed a lawsuit demanding that Mercedes-Benz refund his money and take the car back. Brotherton had originally requested a buyback from the company months before, believing Oklahoma’s Lemon Law would protect him, but his request was denied. According to the lawsuit, Mercedes-Benz U.S.A. rejected the claim, stating that the SUV did not qualify for a buyback under the state’s Lemon Law.
The company cited that the informal dispute resolution process was unavailable to Oklahoma residents, as it is only accessible in certain states. Attempts by News 4 to reach Mercedes-Benz U.S.A. for comment were unsuccessful. Local dealerships in Tulsa and Oklahoma City, where the vehicle was purchased and serviced, respectively, also declined to comment due to the ongoing litigation.
Oklahoma’s Lemon Law, passed in 2009, is designed to protect consumers who purchase defective vehicles. However, Brotherton’s case has highlighted gaps in the law’s enforcement. According to the State Attorney General’s Office, they are not responsible for enforcing the Lemon Law, and it turns out that no other state agency is either. Joe Dorman, one of the original authors of the law, explained that enforcement responsibility ultimately lies with the governor’s office.
“It’s up to the chief executive of the state, the governor, to make sure the agencies are following the law and complying with the things passed by the legislature and signed by the governor,” Dorman said. “When an agency is not listed specifically, the governor and his team are charged with making sure an agency has that oversight and follows the law.”
Brotherton’s case has brought attention to the complexities of Oklahoma’s Lemon Law, and whether it is strong enough to protect consumers like him. His experience underscores the importance of clearer enforcement mechanisms and more responsive customer service from automakers, especially when dealing with high-value purchases like luxury vehicles.
As Brotherton continues his legal battle, he hopes his case will lead to greater transparency and accountability for both manufacturers and dealerships, ensuring that consumers are not left stranded with defective products.
