Latest vehicle complaints

emergency. After purchasing the vehicle, I discovered through CARFAX that its computer module had been replaced twice before the sale, on February 25 and August 28, 2026. A RAM service department subsequently informed me that both replacements involved the Body Control Module (BCM). On October 28, 2026, an authorized RAM dealership diagnosed multiple exterior lighting circuit faults and electrical communication-related codes. The dealership recommended another BCM replacement, which would reportedly be the fourth BCM installed in this vehicle. The replacement has not been performed. The dealership advised that the part could take 40 days or longer to arrive. The underlying cause of the repeated failures remains unknown. The lighting failures left the motorhome stranded for weeks. I purchased temporary exterior lights and attached them to the vehicle to travel during daylight hours to a repair facility. The motorhome also experienced interior flooding near electrical wiring due to a loose fitting. Whether this contributed to the electrical failures is unknown. The motorhome remains parked, unrepaired, and unsafe to drive. I request that NHTSA investigate these recurring electrical and exterior lighting failures as a potential vehicle safety defect.

steering component separated while the vehicle was in motion, the wheel flopped completely sideways. Ripping of the underbody plastic splash shields and structural shearing of the steering rack tube occurred as a direct secondary consequence of having to clear the vehicle 40 feet out of the driving lane to safely load it onto a flatbed tow truck. A sudden steering separation of a primary control component like a tie rod during normal operation constitutes a catastrophic safety hazard that could cause a severe collision or injury at higher speeds.

(DCT) electric oil pump circuit board causes pump failure and sudden loss of motive power. Although my vehicle was built with the exact same 2.5L Turbo engine and 8-speed DCT assembly, my vehicle was excluded from the original recall scope. Because a sudden loss of drive power in traffic creates a severe crash hazard, I am requesting that NHTSA investigate expanding Recall 22V-760 to include affected VINs experiencing this identical electric oil pump failure.

bracket. Replaced both. Issue returned - Picked up the truck, noticed a vibration immediately, and the same shudder came back over the following weekend while towing. Visit 4 - Dealer installed a full replacement transmission. Issue returned again - Same shudder, but this time with a check engine light and reduced power. Codes pulled showed: Fuel system faults: P0087 (fuel rail low pressure), P228C (fuel pressure regulator performance - low pressure), P0336 (crankshaft position sensor performance) A large cluster of network/communication faults across the TCM, ECM, brake control module, power steering module, and central gateway module Visit 5 - The engine actually shut down while driving, at the same moment the vehicle was shuddering. New codes included P228A and P228B "Forced Engine Shutdown" faults tied to the fuel pressure regulator. The car was completely inoperable in a lane of traffic. Issue was reproduced by the dealer and assumed to be a TCM. After replacing the issue was still present and GMC has not been able to diagnose.

down that's on that can bus system. That's why all the parts dont make sense to each other. It all boils down to the ABS improperly working causing communication issues. The recall fix did fix the fires. It won't catch fire now but the ABS is still malfunctioning. There's a lawsuit. All vehicles involved in the recall are required a free ABS inspection and a replacement if they are malfunctioning but the dealership refuses to diagnose the ABS. That is the loophole Hyundai has found to not uphold the law. They are not standing by the settlement. They are skirting around from checking the ABS module so they won't find the malfunction. They want us to replace parts that are brand new that my husband just replaced. They want to charge us $700 for some other part and refuse to check the ABS system per the lawsuit. My husband needs that vehicle to work. So he's been out of work for 4 weeks. It's ridiculous! I can't hire a lawyer at this time and it's ridiculous that I may have to. This corporation should uphold their part of a lawsuit! There was already a settlement. My vehicle is included without even submitting a claim. It's ABS warranty is also extended per the lawsuit. I've read it backwards and forwards. I'm so at a loss! I need help. They also refuse to help us with a loaner and that will force us to drive an unsafe car in limp mode off the property when they are responsible for fixing this faulty part per the settlement INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

still would not start and the wheels remained locked. The dealership then replaced the brake control module per TAC guidance. The dealership told me the vehicle started after the module was replaced and the locked wheel issue was resolved. The vehicle was at the dealership for more than 30 days. In a separate earlier incident, while I was driving on the freeway at approximately 75mph with my young child in the vehicle, the Equinox downshifted extremely hard and lost all electronic functions. This incident happened twice in one trip. I am including this incident as a prior safety history. I am asking NHTSA to review the no-start and locked wheel incident and the dealership's repair findings for a possible safety defect.

aunt resides in a nursing home. On a return trip to [[redacted]]. The vehicle experienced catastrophic shut down power windows failed , air conditioner quit functioning and a mile of home the car lost power steering. Because recall inspection was done one month after the recall roll out [redacted] and then recall inspection was done [redacted] was a visual inspection that did not replace the known to be ,a future failure point part. After the catastrophic shut down, we took the vehicle to Thompson Buick [[redacted]]. To have a diagnostic service done which showed Parts noted in the original recall had failed the dealership was unable to do anything because the recall showed no further action completed . Service manager contacted GM representative who stated GM declined the request because the vehicle is outside the age and mileage guidelines for repair assistance GM does not allow for assistance Beyond 7 years or 50,000 miles Beyond warranty and service date. I believe this is taken out of context and the recall should be reviewed because the inspection was not adequate to solve the initial problem noted in the recall. There have been several changes to this recall to facilitate a review. But they have refused to have any other statement. All check engine lights activated. This misinterpreted recall failure has put an elderly patient and her caregiver in possible fatal conditions as well as innocent drivers. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

ended. Ultimately a tow truck showed up and towed the car to a dealship. The dealship found that the body control panel had failed. The car was 4 years old and ahd less than 30,000 miles. The dealship so far has not been able to make a repair.

been off for an extended period. Most recent occurrence: November 9, 2026, about 7:38 a.m., on the first drive of the day, while using phone navigation (Google Maps). The screen went to the 'Welcome to Volkswagen' startup screen and rebooted while the vehicle was moving. Reported to the dealer the same morning. Repair history (all no-charge warranty/recall work): - Jul 2024, 11,165 mi: recall 91US (infotainment software / rearview image). - Jun 2025, 23,899 mi: recall 91QE (infotainment display software). - Jul 2026, RO 469224: random shutdown complaint; could not duplicate; software configuration redone. - Aug 2026, RO 471473: dealer diagnosed a faulty 5F infotainment module - Sep 10, 2026, RO 472041: 5F module replaced. - Sep 2026, RO 472568: shutdowns continued; dealer found the post-replacement software update had not been completed and performed it. - Oct 8 - Nov 6, 2026, RO 473331: vehicle held 30 days for testing with VW field involvement; dealer could not duplicate; no repair performed. The failure recurred 3 days after the vehicle was returned. VW Customer Care case 07-653718. Safety concern: unpredictable loss of the rearview camera image while backing up, with pedestrians including children around the vehicle, and sudden loss of the display and its controls while driving.

also had to purchase a new battery sleeve, tray, and clamp for about $400. I will be filing a formal complaint with Subaru of America tomorrow as they have placed me and my family in danger yet again.

circuit in the HECU (hydraulic electronic control unit). A VIN check showed no open recalls on my vehicle, so I do not know whether the recall repair was ever performed or whether the defect caused this fire. I am reporting the fire so it is on the record.