NHTSA Complaint #10196930 — 2003 NISSAN MURANO

CONSUMER IS SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT FOR RECALL FAILURE. MC THE CONSUMER STATED UPON CONTACTING THE DEALER TO SEE IF THE WARRANTY COVERED THE MECHANICAL FAILURE, SHE WAS INFORMED THERE WAS A RECALL ISSUED FOR THIS VEHICLE WITH THE SAME PROBLEM SHE WAS ENCOUNTERING WITH THE VEHICLE WHICH WAS THE ALTERNATOR. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED IN JULY 05 BUT THE RECALL WAS ISSUED BACK IN MAY OF 05, SO THAT MIGHT BE WHY THE CONSUMER WAS NOT INFORMED. HOWEVER, THE CONSUMER IS SURPRISED TO KNOW THAT THE DEALER DID NOT REPLACE THE ALTERNATOR DUE TO THE RECALL PRIOR TO THE PURCHASE OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER PROVIDED A COPY OF THE INVOICE AND WOULD LIKE TO BE REIMBURSED FOR THE REPAIRS. *TR