Latest vehicle complaints

of lubrication may have caused internal damage to the differential, potentially requiring an expensive replacement. I discovered that Stellantis issued Customer Satisfaction Notification 26A specifically addressing right rear axle oil leaks in certain 2021-2022 Jeep Gladiators. The failure described in this campaign appears nearly identical to what happened to my vehicle. I contacted Jeep Customer Care and was informed that my VIN was not included in campaign 26A, despite experiencing what appears to be the same defect. Jeep declined to provide coverage and advised me to file a complaint with NHTSA. I am concerned that this known axle issue may affect additional Gladiators excluded from the original campaign. Losing differential fluid while driving creates a potential safety hazard, including differential failure, possible drivetrain lockup, and reduced braking performance if oil contaminates the brake components. I am requesting that NHTSA investigate whether the affected vehicle population should be expanded to include other 2021 Jeep Gladiators experiencing this same failure.

driver side wiper blade, and then up the driver side windshield, where I originally saw the crack. I did not see the crack happen, it was just there. When I parked the car four days prior, it was fine. The only climate control used the last time I drove it was the air conditioning out the dashboard vents.

could not replace the thermostat under warranty. Instead, they reported finding a radiator leak and charged me 50% of the cost to replace the radiator. The vehicle operated normally for a little over a week. However, on Monday, November 9, during a similar drive home, the exact same symptoms returned: the temperature gauge dropped to cold, steering assist was affected, and the cooling fan remained on. Again, there was no check-engine light and no stored fault code. After another trip to the dealership, the thermostat still has not been replaced because I have been told that GM will not authorize the warranty repair without a fault code. This is particularly concerning because multiple owners have reported similar thermostat failures and symptoms with this engine. At this point, the original problem remains unresolved despite multiple dealership visits and the replacement of the radiator

used PTU. I had to remove the broken car from their lot before a storage feel kicked in and was told that all I could do was rent a car at my own expense until the repair was developed. They also said I would eventually be reimbursed for that after the recall was developed. Considering the recall came out in May and no updates on the timeline to remedy it have been forwarded I am skeptical that these reimbursements will actually come to fruition.

particularly when making left turns or changing lanes in traffic. I took the vehicle to Rich's, an independent repair facility, believing the problem was simply a burned-out turn signal bulb. However, the repair required extensive disassembly of the rear of the vehicle and resulted in an $834 bill. The technician expressed concern about the nature of the failure and stated that this type of issue should be addressed through a manufacturer recall. I subsequently learned that General Motors has issued technical service bulletins PIT6238C and 25-NA-074 addressing rear lighting and turn signal malfunctions on certain 2024-2025 GMC Acadias. Although I cannot confirm that my vehicle experienced the exact failure described in these bulletins, I believe the similarity warrants investigation. The malfunction was diagnosed and repaired by an independent service facility. To my knowledge, General Motors has not physically inspected the failed component. I have contacted GM regarding this issue under Case #117082313. I am concerned that an essential safety component failed prematurely on a relatively new vehicle. I am requesting that NHTSA investigate whether this represents a recurring safety-related defect affecting rear turn signals on 2024 GMC Acadias. The availability of the failed component for inspection has not yet been confirmed.

unrecoverable loss of motive power at any speed or allow the vehicle to roll away while in PARK, posing an extreme safety hazard to occupants and bystanders. As of November 11, 2026 - more than six (6) months after the recall was announced - the status remains "Recall Incomplete, remedy not yet available." FCA US has failed to provide any parts, repair timeline, or interim safety solution. Due to this severe, unresolved safety defect, I was forced to park and place the vehicle into paid storage on September 13, 2026, as it cannot be safely operated or flat-towed behind my motorhome. The vehicle remains intact and available for inspection upon request. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (49 U.S.C. § 30120), a manufacturer is required to remedy a safety defect within a reasonable time, or replace/repurchase the vehicle. Leaving a vehicle inoperable and hazardous for over half a year violates federal safety standards. I am filing this formal complaint to document FCA US's failure to provide a timely remedy and to support my formal demand for a manufacturer repurchase (buyback) of this defective vehicle.

software update at San Leandro Nissan on [redacted], at 58,426 miles. The dealership told me the vehicle was OK to drive. The failure occurred five weeks and 1,259 miles after that recall service. A [[redacted]] driver in our household regularly drives this vehicle. On [redacted], I had the vehicle towed to the dealership at 59,685 miles. Nissan has since determined that the vehicle cannot be safely driven and that a replacement battery is unavailable. There was no crash, fire, or injury. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

one red light due to this issue. I had to pull over each time just to catch my breath and to calm my nerves. A please have someone check into this issue with the brakes not fully applying when you apply pressure to the pedal. I know I can not be the only one that has complained regarding any issues with the brakes.

VIN, PLEASE ADD. I am concerned about the potential risk to myself, my daughter and my passengers and believe these issues warrant further investigation to help prevent possible accident or injury.

the impact, and the vehicle came to a stop. No one was injured, and the vehicle remains drivable. The collision damaged the front end and driver side of the vehicle - including the hood, front driver-side door, headlight, front light bar and wheel-arch trim - and broke a section of the concrete block wall. My insurer's approved repair estimate is approximately $12,500. I have preserved photos and a walk-around video of the damage. The dashcam clips from around the time of the collision exist in two encrypted folders on the vehicle's USB drive. I have backed up both folders but cannot open or play them, and Tesla's official online viewer tool did not decrypt them. I sent Tesla a written request for investigation and data preservation on October 10, 2026, with follow-ups on October 30, 2026 and through the Tesla app on November 6, 2026. As of November 10, 2026, Tesla has provided no case number and no substantive response, and has not provided a playable copy of the collision video. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

the right but the his Mazda was not in close proximity to them. The car was evaluated at the dealership where the vehicle was purchased. According to the Service Manager, the SBS was working as it should and the technician found the Smart Break System in the MCVV and found no DTCs stored. When asked if the front radar sensor could be replaced, the Service Manager said it was working as it should. The Service Manager also said that he had experienced a similar unprovoked stop while driving over the bridge due to the bright sun. Was also told that the SBS can be set to early, normal or late setting to lessen or heighten the sensitivity of the SBS or it can be toggled to "off" each time the engine is started but it resets to "on" the next time the car is started again. Their is no choice for the driver to shut off the SBS completely. This is definitely a safety issue, one that other car manufacturers have acknowledged by allowing the driver to dismantle the SBM system. The lives of Mazda drivers who experience "ghost objects" resulting in abrupt braking without warning, as well as surrounding drivers, are in jeopardy.

traveling for work. I did not make it. I exited [[redacted]] where i attempted to turn left but had to stop for a yellow light. When the light turned green the engine completely failed. Steam poured out. The vehicle was dead. I called [[redacted]] given the vehicle location on the highway exit ramp and the holiday weekend. They arrived timely. They offered a tow service which i took to the nearest dodge dealer. On this holiday weekend, I received no direct support from dodge for a replacement or rides to get a replacement vehicle or rental. My vehicle was repaired under warranty. They were not forward sharing the details of the cause or full repairs until I pressed. The only stated it was a cracked thermostat and hoses and it was good to go. I was out of pocket over a thousand dollars for travel, mileage, rental, and towing. They have me a sorry a hundred dollars and minimal communication. It's an embarrassment to the American automotive industry and customer care in general that this is the experience you receive as a consumer when you invest tens of thousands with a manufacturer in a vehicle. I remain beyond disappointed in Dodge Chrysler Stellantis. I have lost trust in them and in my vehicle. Sincerely, [[redacted]] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)