Nissan Leaf Plus Electrical problems by year

created a serious rear-end collision risk. This is my [[redacted]] daughter's daily driver, and I am concerned about a novice driver experiencing the same failure. An immediate independent diagnostic scan showed P33ED-00 (HV Battery Parallel Diagnosis), P3180-97 and P317E-97. Battery telemetry showed SOH 88.51% and Hx 57.24%. I request investigation into whether a battery defect and/or the recall software caused this highway propulsion loss. These readings have not yet been evaluated by a Nissan dealer. On [redacted], Nissan Consumer Affairs/Roadside Assistance agents and supervisors refused complimentary towing from our residence, stating they would not accept third-party diagnostics and required dealer evaluation first. We were told to pay for towing or arrange transport ourselves. The vehicle remains at home with unresolved battery safety concerns. My daughter has lost her transportation; rental/loaner age restrictions prevent her from using a replacement. We still owe $12,158.09 on a vehicle that can not be driven because of a safety recall. I request NHTSA investigate the propulsion failure, adequacy of the R24B2 remedy and Nissan's refusal of towing assistance. I request Nissan provide safe flatbed transport, a permanent remedy and a vehicle buyback resolving the outstanding financing. Diagnostic records and recall service documentation are available. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

service consultant dismissed the warning as a scare tactic from that specific location, said they couldn't consider taking the car back unless we tried the recall repairs, and sent us to a different "partnered" Nissan dealer. On 10/21/2026, that dealership location recommended the LBC/VCM recall reprogramming, kept the vehicle eight hours, and released it as repaired and drivable. Less than 24 hours later, on 10/22/2026, while driving on the highway in heavy rain in moving traffic, the battery failed with [Warning, Service EV System, Power Reduced]. The vehicle was towed to the dealership on 10/23/2026, where the dealer confirmed the EV battery failed, the vehicle cannot be operated without a battery replacement, and batteries are unavailable nationwide. The vehicle has remained at Nissan since. Safety risk: sudden, complete loss of propulsion on a highway in rain creates an immediate crash and injury risk to occupants and surrounding drivers. The failure occurred one day after the recall remedy was completed and the vehicle was released as repaired, indicating the remedy process can leave affected vehicles in an unsafe state on the road. The recall at issue concerns battery cells prone to rapid heating and fire during Level 3 charging, so this vehicle carried an active fire risk as well. The manufacturer has since initiated a vehicle repurchase. The recall bulletin promises a complimentary rental during the remedy process. No rental was ever provided.

then as I had been napping in my vehicle with my dog. At the dealership, service dept said my battery failed the post update test; sent me home in (ice) loaner car; said Nissan will reach out within a few days. Finally receive call [redacted] from [[redacted]] on behalf of Nissan North America; received 1st buyback email "offer" Sept 4, 2026 nearly a month after my car was deemed inoperable (this was a Friday at 4:59pm at the start of a major holiday weekend). They requested I pay them $9,411.11 so they can recover title from lender; same unchanged offer [redacted] after "escalation" review. A down payment + over 4 yrs of never missed consecutive payments - $33,000 later - and they are requesting I pay them because of a manufacturing defect which I didn't cause and had no control over. I was planning to drive it another 115K miles +. I want a FAIR resolution - on an inflated asset with Extreme depreciation due to a manufacturing defect and mandated recall. Nissan has not provided a warranty covered battery replacement to get my car running in a 'timely manor'. This [[redacted]]/old consumer is being treated UNfairly. ALL supporting documentation is organized, verifiable and securely filed. Any attorneys out there want to help ? INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

replace the defective battery. A few weeks after this safety incident, a national safety recall was officially issued regarding Nissan Leaf high-voltage battery defects and fire risks during fast charging. Approximately two years later, I received an official letter from Nissan offering a vehicle buyback due to the recall and lack of replacement parts. I spent three months actively working with a Nissan corporate representative to finalize the buyback paperwork. However, with the claim nearly complete, Nissan abruptly closed the case without resolution and transferred it to a third-party administrator, [[redacted]], forcing me to restart the entire process from the beginning. [[redacted]] has completely ignored all communications and has failed to respond or advance the claim for over a month. Safety Risk & Request for Action: The vehicle experienced a severe thermal event (overheating and physical expansion) during normal operation at an authorized charging station, presenting an immediate fire and explosion hazard. To date, the vehicle has been disabled and unrepairable for over two years. Nissan has failed to provide a timely remedy under the federal safety recall, and their administrative handling has unreasonably delayed removing this hazardous vehicle/component from circulation. I am requesting NHTSA intervention to hold Nissan accountable for executing their recall remedy and resolving this safety claim immediately. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

rental coverage while the vehicle is grounded for this safety recall. Nissan verbally denied the request on [redacted] and refused to put the denial in writing. I have no transportation. Nissan provided rental cars to owners in its [redacted] Leaf battery recall until repairs were complete, but refuses the same here. I ask NHTSA to intervene: (1) compel completion of the recall remedy, and (2) require Nissan to provide alternate transportation while the vehicle is grounded for a safety recall its own procedure failed to remedy. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

diagnostic tool. On [redacted] (63,702 miles), LeafSpy telemetry confirmed Cell #31 is severely degraded, exhibiting a 191-307 mV voltage collapse. This causes sudden dashboard state-of-charge drops from 70% down to 42-45% on active highways, forcing emergency power limits ("limp mode"). Refusal of Post-Remedy Service: Despite active Corporate Case #[redacted] with Nissan Consumer Affairs, authorized dealers (Kings Nissan, Nissan of Queens and Nissan of Staten Island) refuse to intake, scan, or ground the vehicle, leaving a severe hardware hazard active on public roads. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

revoked prematurely forcing 850 in out of pocket rental costs. Inadequate buyback offer via Morley Companies was rejected. Factory recall update rendered vehicle useless and unsafe to operate.

successfully being applied does not guarantee the car will not stop abruptly after that visit. Without the recall appointment, Nissan has limited my ability to safely fast-charge, preventing me from using the full functionality of the vehicle. Nissan is conditioning buyback eligibility on my willingness to undergo the recall inspection, even though the recall remedy has repeatedly resulted in battery failure and sudden loss of power for other Leaf owners. This effectively forces me to expose myself to a known safety hazard in order to qualify for a remedy Nissan itself acknowledges may be required. I am being denied both safe vehicle operation and access to the promised buyback unless I accept a repair that may leave me stranded or without a functioning battery. Nissan recognizes the potential risk of the recall remedy by issuing a second notice dated 6/17/2026 that if the vehicle experiences this battery specific condition within 12 months after the date the software reprogram remedy was completed on the vehicle. Nissan will replace the battery or offer to re-purchase the car. Nissan has also recognized that batteries are rare at this time. I thought that a manufacturer must offer a remedy that was deemed Safe and this does not seem like it's guaranteeing safety.

that was unsafe to drive. They weren't able to look at it again til 6/22/2026, but they refused to provide us with a rental or loaner car for the weekend, despite this being our only car, and the recall specifically having a stop-drive order on affected vehicles. On 6/22/2026, we took the car in again, and they confirmed the battery was actually degraded due to the recall. Again, they refused to get us a rental or loaner car. Since Monday, the car has been sitting at the dealer, and as of 6/25/2026, we still have no information about when we will get the car back, if we can get a battery replacement, or what our options are. They have provided us with no information and no alternative vehicle, despite our car being undriveable. They said we could rent a car but refused to confirm if this would be reimbursed as part of the recall. We called Nissan Customer Affairs, and they have also been unhelpful and not provided any further information on a battery replacement or loaner vehicle. We have been calling multiple times this week to no avail. We want to have the battery fixed, but we have heard from other Leaf owners that this can take many months, and this was our only vehicle. We would not be able to have the battery replaced at no cost to us without a provided loaner vehicle. Since this comes as a result of a stop drive order recall, I think that should be provided from Nissan through direct payment rather than reimbursement.

safety confidence. The vehicle's Level 3/DC fast charging capability was effectively removed or severely restricted due to the recall. Nissan dealerships confirmed the recall status and lack of available repair remedy. The issue was documented during service visits and remains unresolved. The battery system and charging system are available for inspection upon request.