NHTSA Complaint #10051470 — 2001 OLDSMOBILE ALERO

THIS COMPLAINT IS IN REGARDS TO PROBLEMS MY WIFE AND I ARE HAVING WITH OUR OLDSMOBILE ALERO. WE INITIALLY USED THE BETTER BUSINESS BUREAUS'S AUTOLINE ARBITRATION PROCESS AND ALTHOUGH THE ARBITRATOR SAID THAT THE CAR QUALIFIED FOR THE OHIO LEMON LAW, HE THOUGHT THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A MISUNDERSTANDING BETWEEN US AND THE DEALER. WHAT A JOKE. IF YOU LISTEN TO THE AUDIO TAPE OF THE HEARING IT IS OBVIOUS THAT GENERAL MOTORS WAS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE FOLLOWING IS PART OF THE INITIAL LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO THE BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU SINCE YOU HAVE A RESTRICTION SET ON HOW MUCH INFO CAN BE SUPPLIED HERE. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CAR IS PAID FOR. DATE: 08/18/2003 RE: WILLIAM G. MARSH 2001 OLDSMOBILE ALERO  ODOMETER READING = 9198 POSSIBLE VIOLATION OF THE OHIO LEMON LAW BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU (B.B.B.) ARBITRATION OUR 2001 ALERO HAS BEEN IN FOR REPEATED REPAIRS OF SHAKING (LIKE DIESELING) AND STALLING PROBLEMS WHEN THE AIR CONDITIONING IS BEING TURNED OFF, AS IT WAS DESIGNED. AUGUST (2002) OF LAST YEAR WHEN WE WERE ON VACATION IN SHIPSHEWANA, INDIANA, THIS PROBLEM BECAME VERY SEVERE. ALONG WITH AN OIL CHANGE LIGHT THAT CAME ON (WITHOUT REASON) AT 5,454 MILES, BILL RESET THIS. THE FOLLOWING DAY OUR LOW TIRE PRESSURE LIGHT CAME ON AT 5,580 (WITHOUT REASON). *AK