Latest vehicle complaints

Safety Risk: My safety was put at extreme risk. At 7:30 PM in pitch-black conditions, I was traveling at 60 mph on the interstate when the engine suddenly died. Because the dashboard gauge falsely indicated a half-tank of fuel, I had zero warning. I had to desperately coast a dying vehicle across dark, active highway lanes toward an exit. I could not make the exit and was forced onto the shoulder, stopping dangerously close to active traffic. Stranding a powerless vehicle on a dark, high-speed interstate shoulder leaves occupants highly vulnerable to a catastrophic rear-end collision. Warning Signs & Symptoms: There were absolutely no advanced warning lamps, low fuel lights, or check engine messages prior to the failure. The dashboard gauge actively misled me by showing a half tank of gas. The vehicle gave zero indication of an issue until it suddenly sputtered and lost acceleration at high speed. The car then shut itself off completely on the roadside. No dash indicators illuminated until after the vehicle had died and a restart was attempted, at which point the check engine light came on.

faulty transmission) and only gave me a rental for 5 days. I am now forced to pay out of pocket for however long they will have my Rav4. I have called the Brand Engagement department and they have not been very helpful. The guys in the service department at Krause are extremely rude and bothered by the fact that I had questions. I did ask about the lawsuit regarding my 2019 Rav4 faulty transmissions and they said they didn't know anything about it. Any help regarding this very frustrating matter would be helpful.

SERVICE HISTORY: Presented for service on 8 repair opportunities: a) at ~1,600 & ~2,100 miles: Reported seat track wobble; service denied as operating per design. b) at ~2,500 miles: Technician verified the defect, confirmed a mechanical malfunction in the seat bottom frame, and replaced the lower frame structure under warranty. c) at ~8,729 miles: Reported re-occurring play; service denied as normal operation. d) at ~9,637 miles: Tested with a replacement seat frame to compare, confirmed play, and reinstalled original frame; deemed operating per design. e) at ~19,000, ~21,000, & ~22,000 miles: Seat rocking reoccurred and was re-demonstrated to technicians, but further repairs were denied as normal flex or operating per design. MANUFACTURER ACTION: Escalated to corporate customer care, which acknowledged the rocking motion in writing but closed the case without repair. Corporate required a dealer fault diagnosis before dispatching a Field Technical Engineer. Concurrently, the servicing dealer, under technical support advisement, declined to declare a fault or call a field engineer for inspection. This administrative loop leaves an uncorrected structural seat issue. SYMPTOMS & WARNINGS: First appeared at ~1,600 miles and persists past 26,000 miles. No warning lights or diagnostic trouble codes. The only symptom is the seat assembly physically shifting during momentum changes.

or take a jump without warning is a safety risk, especially in remote areas or bad weather. I'm asking NHTSA to look into the auxiliary battery and electrical system on these vehicles.

Enterprise Rental was notified of this brake failure incidence, report taken by [[redacted]]. (4) Police report filed with officer [[redacted]] (#[[redacted]]), and officer took all information. Also shared he will be reporting the firebox damage to the BH fire department. His contact info: [[redacted]]. (5) I picked up the car at 12:09pm and the accident occurred after 12:47pm while attempting to park. There were never any warning lamps, nor messages of brake failure present while driving this rental vehicle. I had the vehicle in my possession less than one hour. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

other times it must be towed. Note: The battery and electrical systems checks indicate no failures even though the battery/low voltage warning lights come on during the incidents. I have taken the vehicle to four different repair facilities including authorized Jeep dealer service centers. The first three times parts were replaced. The fourth time it was towed to Santa Monica Jeep. They verified the same error codes as reported previously then cleared the error codes. One they cleared the error codes, they were unable to get the check engine light to come back on during their short test drives. And none of the components were testing as bad. So I requested a Stellantis field technician inspect the vehicle. They were also unable to diagnose the problem even though it keeps recurring. Because they were unable to diagnose the problem, they refused to take any further action, even though the service manager told me that the vehicle is unsafe to drive. I informed my insurance company of the situation and they told me that they may not cover any claims unless the dealer provides a "Certified Mechanics Statement" or "proof of repairs showing that the vehicle is in good physical condition and safe to operate." The dealer refuses to provide this. So now I have a Jeep that is unsafe to drive, may no longer e covered by my insurance, and neither a Jeep dealer nor Stellantis themselves are willing to resolve a dangerous stalling problem.

episode of vehicle locking up while going down interstate at 70 MPH with loaded trailer attached. This places the driver and passengers at risk for injury and/or death. Per the dealership, they have not been able to reproduce the issues but stated that it is unrepairable. No manufacturer inspection has been completed. Warning lights and warning messages have been present since before first return to dealership on 4/9/26, 6 days after purchase of vehicle, for TPMS issues, inaccurate speed odometer, and incorrect lift kit installation.

address a known thermostat issue affecting certain vehicles. The program provides extended coverage for the engine coolant thermostat and its housing for up to 15 years or 150,000 miles from the vehicle's original in-service date, subject to the program's eligibility requirements. The issue I experienced is consistent with the condition addressed by this program. The P0128 diagnostic trouble code indicates that the engine coolant temperature is not reaching the expected operating temperature within the specified time, which can be caused by a malfunctioning thermostat. This is the type of failure that the special coverage program was established to address. Unfortunately, I incurred the expense of repairing this condition out of pocket. Had I been aware of the applicable special coverage at the time of the repair, I would have sought assistance through an authorized Chevrolet/GMC dealership before paying for the repair myself. I respectfully request that General Motors review my repair documentation and consider reimbursing me for the costs incurred. The existence of Special Coverage Program Bulletin #N242484760 demonstrates that GM has recognized this thermostat issue and established extended coverage for eligible vehicles experiencing the condition. I believe it is reasonable and fair for GM to review my claim in light of the nature of the defect, the diagnostic code involved, and the purpose of the special coverage program.

resulted from pre-delivery repair or failed inspection; the records do not identify who omitted the bolts. The dealer also confirmed hood shaking/flutter above 60 mph, cited TSB 26-42A-002 and a reinforced replacement hood. Its narrative says parts ordered, panel to be painted and customer to return for installation; replacement completion is not established. On Oct 30 the next servicing dealership said Mitsubishi's hood was still awaited. On Oct 31 I reported apparent bending near the windshield and water pooling; no photo or professional causation finding for that new observation is supplied. No federal hood recall has been established. The brake-fastener and hood conditions raised safety concerns for our family. No crash, fire or injury is reported. The car is retained and available for inspection; availability of replaced fasteners is UNKNOWN. Prior warning lamps are UNKNOWN; rattling and hood flutter were symptoms. On Oct 30 I reported just under 62,000 miles and continued driving with restricted family travel. Odd wear on the other rear brake is an owner observation without a second-side diagnosis. Sept 22 in the incident field is the service-intake date; exact earlier symptom-onset date is UNKNOWN. Mileage field is intake mileage. Please review a possible safety defect, noncompliance, improper repair and the hood remedy delay.