Gavaldon

O'LEARY, J.

In this case, we hold a service contract, supplementing the factory warranty accompanying a new car, is not an express warranty entitling the consumer to the replacement or restitution remedy contained in section 1793.2, subdivision (d) of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. (Civ.Code, § 1790 et seq., hereafter Song-Beverly.) [1]

DaimlerChrysler Corporation (hereafter Chrysler) appeals a judgment requiring it to repurchase Rosemarie and William Gavaldon's [2] Dodge Caravan minivan because of recurrent transmission problems occurring after the factory 3 year/36,000 mile warranty expired, but while a service contract was still in effect. It contends the trial court erred in concluding the service contract was also an express warranty. In her cross-appeal, Gavaldon contends the trial court should have allowed her to elect coverage under an optional express warranty and improperly calculated damages. We reverse the judgment against Chrysler.

Gavaldon bought her new Dodge Caravan minivan in June 1993. The vehicle came with Chrysler's standard factory warranty under which the owner could choose either a 3-year/36,000 mile basic warranty (the 3/36 warranty) or a…