Forcing a buyback of defective equipment does not preclude the purchase of a new, non-defective unit. Without the lemon law, the buyer would toss the old unit out without compensation and buy a new one. This way, the buyer will get money back from the defective unit and be able to get a new unit with it.
Sounds like Taylor will be set up to loose a lot of money if they don't fix the lemon. Even if it's just swapping out a lemon for a new lemon, Taylor will have an incentive to fix this.
There's a lot of miscommunication on this topic. These "broken" machines aren't actually "broken".
They require extensive cleaning cycles and some operations require manufacturer servicing. It's just they way they work, it's documented, and there are service contracts in place to do the servicing.
When the kid at the drive through says the ice cream machine is "broken", what is actually meant is that it is currently not producing ice cream, and they don't want to argue with the person who wants ice cream. But the reason isn't that it is malfunctioning.
Taylor isn't losing money "fixing" these machines, the maintenance they do on them is on contract, and is quite lucrative.
