Latest vehicle complaints

and lock functions, tested start stop button functions with no issues. Checked fuses that power is at each supply pin, pin 1 on connector a has 12.2v and pin 18 12.3v. Used the ground from connector pin 51 while testing voltage on previous pins to confirm ground is good. It is suspected that bcm has a internal failure and will need to be checked with known good unit, reprogrammed and retest to confirm vehicle will start. 2. The car in the faulty condition had no noticeable difference from one with a low battery so I tried to jump start the vehicle per the owners manual. This put me at a significant fire risk of over charging the battery. 3. Unknown if the manufacturer, insurance or police inspected it. 4. No warning lamps prior to failure. Dash was entirely blank other than aforementioned instruction about the key fob.

dropping my speed from 60 to 30 mph in less than 3 seconds. My safety was put at extreme risk as an 18-wheel semi-truck directly behind me almost rear-ended my vehicle. With no left shoulder available, I had to turn on my hazard lights and cross 5 lanes of high-speed traffic at only 30 mph to reach the right shoulder, nearly causing multiple accidents. The vehicle completely locked out the throttle until I performed a hard reset by cycling the ignition off and on. There were no symptoms prior to the failure, but during the event, the infotainment screen repeatedly flashed the word "LIMIT." The vehicle has been inspected by the manufacturer's dealership since Sept 10th. Technicians state they cannot reproduce the failure and found no hard error codes on the scan tool. I highly suspect the vehicle's navigation system miscalculated my position and pulled a 30-mph limit from the adjacent River Road on-ramp. This is a severe, life-threatening software communication defect reported by other GV80 owners nationwide. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Static: Total communication dropout to AWD module, disabling traction frameworks under load. 2. Address 0019 (Gateway Interface) Fault B184C00 Active: Cybersecurity firewall locked open in a continuous loop, causing data bus noise. 3. Diagnostic Filtering Block Fault U17A00 Static: Data prioritizing filter disabled, preventing timing signal regulation. 4. Address 0013 (Distance Radar) Fault U112200 Sporadic: Network corruption to Adaptive Cruise and Pre-Sense collision mitigation radar. 5. Address 0009 (Central Electronics) Fault U110B00: Loss of digital contact with primary exterior/interior lighting controls. 6. Address 006C (Peripheral Camera) & 8125 (Video Parking): Concurrent sensor dropouts completely disabling surroundings view and backup cameras. Data congestion is so severe the factory tool returned blank question marks (?) across master verification tests. Local service manager verbally admitted they lack a factory test plan or instructions from corporate to fix these errors, yet both dealership and corporate are applying pressure to force pickup, claiming the car is repaired based on the administrative closure of the software patch. The vehicle is electronically unstable and presents an unpredictable risk of sudden highway limp-mode engine shutdown, collision mitigation failure, and compromised airbag deployment timing. Grounded under an open Repair Order.

immediately turn off the control switch, unplug the seat and put out the fire that caused a pillow to ignite in flames. A localized failure of this nature presents an active electrical and fire risk while driving, which could lead to a crash or severe personal injury. No prior warning lights or error codes were triggered on the dashboard before the thermal event. The seat heater is currently disconnected, unusable and the seat cannot be used, and the vehicle interior has sustained permanent thermal damage. I am filing this complaint to request that NHTSA formally investigate this recurring thermal safety defect in modern Mazda vehicles.

burned oil excessively its entire life (oil changed every 3,000 miles; oil like sludge by approximately 2,000 miles) - the textbook piston-ring symptom. Sputtering began June 2026; a spark-plug replacement bought two to three months before total failure. Diagnostic codes at failure: P0304 (cylinder 4 misfire), P219F (cylinder imbalance), P0014 and P0017 (camshaft/crankshaft timing correlation), P1327 (knock sensor) - internal engine and timing damage consistent with the recalled defect. On [[redacted]], Kia of Daphne inspected the vehicle ([[redacted]]). The technician found low compression and wrote the failure 'does not have to do with recall campaign sc209A' and is 'not covered under Kia warranty or recall,' quoting $5,855.28 for an engine long block. I dispute this: low compression plus lifelong excessive oil consumption is the classic signature of worn piston oil rings - the exact SC209 defect. The one-sentence dismissal does not address the documented symptom history. Kia corporate cases [[redacted]] (opened 09/30/2026) and [[redacted]]; rebuttal submitted 10/07/2026 requesting field-engineer review; no response as of 10/15/2026, cases now closed. Safety: total loss of motive power AFTER the remedy was performed. This post-remedy SC209 failure belongs in NHTSA's investigation of Kia recall remedy effectiveness. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Kevin, said that this is included as part of the diagnostic testing. I figured it would be in the best interest for my vehicle to do an initial check, regardless of cost, to avoid further complications down the line, yet the 9 C2 update was performed without my consent or knowledge beforehand. They performed a multipoint inspection, which shows on record I had it done months prior during my last oil change, free of charge on both occasions, yet it only shows the vehicle, not engine. I have the lifetime warranty as advertised, covered by Zurich, which my service advisor showed me on his computer. However, he said my concern was a mechanical issue, not covered under this warranty. After the diagnostic was performed, I was shown the invoice, including the 9 C2 emissions page at the end, explaining the effects of this update. It does not serve as a systemic improvement, but a worsening change in operation and performance. I was only told about the service after it was performed. It is astounding because the side effects explained on the 9 C2 form are the actual concerns I had before bringing the car in. The update was not a necessary procedure, from my understanding this will only lead to more safety risks down the line. After doing research, given recent complaints about how it has affected many vehicles, I must share that they should have notified me beforehand to be aware about these risks so that I could make the personal decision for my vehicle.

for a timing chain replacement. After the fire, I found that the coolant reservoir hose had come off its fitting, and the hose barb appears to have been broken and the hose pushed back on. Several under-hood trim fasteners were also missing. My best assessment is that coolant sprayed onto the hot turbo/exhaust components and ignited. The vehicle has not been altered since the fire and is available for inspection at Watson's in Ludington, MI. I reported the fire to the manufacturer. They directed me to take it to the local dealer, then instructed the dealer not to inspect or work on it. The case was escalated internally, but as of 10/15/2026 no manufacturer inspection has occurred and no one has contacted me. The cause has not been confirmed by a dealer or independent shop. The fire occurred within the vehicle's Certified Pre-Owned warranty period. As of this filing, the manufacturer has not provided towing, rental, or any other assistance. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

running. I pushed the start engine button and the engine started (I didn't realize until now that the engine had shut off). At this point the truck would shift into drive. Another point of note is that I had turned off the Auto Stop feature. I do this every time I start my trip. The truck will be looked at on 10/16/2026 by the dealership. I did report the problem to the service department of the dealership. This incident was the first time it ever happened and there was no warning.

this issue that applied to my specific vehicle. However I was not having this safety issue at the time and did not receive notification so I was unaware of the warranty extension. [[redacted]] I am reporting this as a safety complaint because it is the exact issue for which a recall was issued, yet Acura did not include my vehicle based on its VIN. Therefore it is possible they did not include all vehicles for which this problem may occur. Because the failure of the taillight due to a defect is a safety issue increasing crash risk, this should have been included in the recall rather than just a 6 month warranty extension. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

engine. It can sometimes takes a couple of tries. THIS IS INTERMITTENT, there are no warning lights or codes. It is almost impossible to understand what is happening as a consumer. It took me hours of research to connect it to wipers. This condition presents a significant safety concern because it can leave a vehicle unexpectedly immobilized at an intersection or in active traffic, increasing the risk of a rear-end collision or other accident. Toyota had already identified the exact condition in Technical Service Bulletin T-SB-0020-23, originally issued April 27, 2023, and subsequently revised. The bulletin specifically addresses an intermittent failure of the engine to restart during windshield-wiper operation in 2022-2023 Corolla Cross vehicles. They charged me $385 to fix it. Toyota developed a software correction for the engine control system, demonstrating that this was a known manufacturer-identified condition rather than normal vehicle wear or maintenance. My primary concern is that Toyota has identified a defect that can prevent a vehicle from restarting in traffic, yet affected owners may not receive the correction unless they experience the malfunction and pay for the repair themselves. I am requesting that NHTSA evaluate whether this condition represents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and whether a safety recall or broader manufacturer corrective action is warranted, given that the failure can occur unexpectedly.

struck the vehicle's glass, causing it to shatter. The vehicle was taken to a dealer, where the hinges were replaced for a second time; however, the failure reoccurred. The failure mileage was 19,500.

the vehicle felt physically restrained, as though something was preventing the wheel from rotating. The vehicle would not drive forward normally, and the AutoPark system engaged under certain conditions. After exiting the vehicle, I discovered a large bolt marked with an "M" lying in the roadway. I initially did not realize it belonged to my vehicle. The responding tow truck operator later identified the bolt as associated with the right-rear brake assembly. During his inspection, the tow truck operator discovered that the right-rear brake caliper was displaced and movable near the wheel. He repositioned the assembly sufficiently to facilitate towing the vehicle to Cutter Jeep in Pearl City, Hawaii. The vehicle's front and rear brake pads and rotors had previously been replaced on [[redacted]], at Wolfchase Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram in Tennessee using genuine Mopar parts. The vehicle had approximately 50,006 miles at that service. The dealership confirmed a two-year parts warranty in writing. The vehicle also underwent routine maintenance at Cutter Jeep on June 26, 2026. I am extremely concerned that this mechanical failure caused my vehicle to stop abruptly at very low speed. Had the same failure occurred while traveling at highway speed, it could potentially have resulted in a serious loss-of-control collision. I am requesting that NHTSA evaluate this incident as a potential vehicle safety defect involving the right-rear brake caliper mounti INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)