NHTSA Complaint #10056912 — 2003 NISSAN 350Z

I HAVE A FEATHERING PROBLEM WITH MY FRONT TIRES DUE TO A FRONT END SUSPENSION DEFECT. MY EFFORTS WITH NISSAN CORPORATION AND THE DEALER (ED NAPLETON NISSAN IN NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA) HAVE BEEN FRUITLESS. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT THREATENED TO NOT SERVICE MY CAR WHEN I BROUGHT UP THE LEMON LAW. THE DEALER THEN ADMITTED TO THE PROBLEM (ONCE I PROVIDED INFORMATION THAT OTHERS REPORTED THIS PROBLEM) AND SAID THEY WOULD TRY TO GET REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TIRES. THEN THE DEALER THEN ONLY OFFERED TIRES AT DEALER COST (WHICH WAS HIGHER THAN A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP WHO DID INSTALL REPLACEMENTS). NISSAN CORPORATION (YANIQUE, CUSTOMER SERVICE PERSON) IN CALIFORNIA WAS BOTH CONDESCENDING AND ARGUMENTATIVE WITH ME. THE NISSAN REPRESENTATIVE ADVISED THAT TIRE REIMBURSEMENT IS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. WHEN I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE THE DEALER WAS ADVISED THAT I WOULD DRIVE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF MILES COMMUTING TO WORK. THUS, MY VEHICLE FIRST EXPERIENCED THIS PROBLEM IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING MY 15K MILES SERVICE. THE DEALER SWITCHED THE FRONT END TIRES AND IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARD, I COULD HEAR THE NOISE RELATING TO THE ALIGNMENT PROBLEM. ALTHOUGH I WAS ADVISED BY ANOTHER NISSAN 350Z OWNER THAT HE EXPERIENCED UNEVEN TIRE WEAR, IT DIDN'T REGISTER WITH ME UNTIL THE TIRES WERE SWITCHED AT 15K THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM. I BELIEVE THE DEALER WAS BUYING TIME KNOWING THAT I WILL CONTINUE TO PLACE SIGNIFICANT MILES ON THIS CAR AND DIDN'T REIMBURSE ME FOR THESE TIRES BASED ON THE SAME REASONING. THE DEALER STATES THAT THEY DIDN'T MANUFACTURE THE CAR OR THE TIRES AND THUS, THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE. NISSAN IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND HAVE TRIED TO KEEP THE ISSUE SECRET FROM THE PUBLIC. APPARENTLY THERE IS NOT FIX AND A RECENT AUTO MAGAZINE ARTICLE HAS IDENTIFIED 39,000 VEHICLES WITH THIS PROBLEM. I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS COMPLAINT RECEIVES SUFFICIENT ATTENTION, SINCE THIS PROBLEM IS BOTH COSTLY TO THE CONSUMER AND COULD POSE A SAFETY PROBLEM DUE TO POOR TRACTION OF THE FRONT END TIRES. *AK