NHTSA Complaint #10405540 — 1997 HONDA PRELUDE

WELL BASICALLY I BOUGHT MY 97AUTOMATIC PRELUDE, AND NOT MORE THAN A MONTH LATER OF HAVING THE CAR THE TRANSMISSION STARTED TO MALFUNCTION. BASICALLY IT WOULD SOUND LIKE A SCREW DRIVER WAS BEING FORCED INTO THE GEARS OR SOMETHING. ON TOP OF THAT IT WAS REVVING RIDICULOUSLY HIGH AND NOT MOVING ANYWHERE. MY FOURTH GEAR WAS GONE THEY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON. NOT TO MENTION WHEN THE PROBLEM WAS ADDRESSED TO THE DEALER THEY SAID BRING IT IN AND THEY WILL ERASE THE CODE "GOOD AS NEW" TO BE EXACT. BUT HONESTLY AS A CONSUMER A LOYAL ONE, I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD BE COMPENSATED BY HAVING MY TRANSMISSION REPLACED OR FULLY REBUILT. CAUSE EVERYONE KNOWS AS WELL AS HONDA MECHANICS WHO HAVE FILLED ME IN WITH THE SS TRANSMISSION PROBLEMS BEING THE CAUSE OF BAD BEARINGS AND BAD INTERNALS AND BAD TORQUE CONVERTERS. SEEING AS ME BEING THE CONSUMER AND BEING CONSTANTLY PUT IN A SITUATION BEEN AM I GONNA BREAK DOWN ON THE FREEWAY ON THE WAY TO WORK OR YET EVEN WORSE AT NIGHT PAST MIDNIGHT WHEN I'M OFF. NOW LET ME REMIND U IT'S STILL A LEASE AND THERE ARE SOME FACTS I KNOW AD RESEARCHED ON LIKE "THE MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT (15 U.S.C. 2302)" WHICH STATES: THIS FEDERAL LAW REGULATES WARRANTIES FOR THE PROTECTION OF CONSUMERS. THE ESSENCE OF THE LAW CONCERNING AFTERMARKET AUTO PARTS IS THAT A VEHICLE MANUFACTURER MAY NOT CONDITION A WRITTEN OR IMPLIED WARRANTY ON THE CONSUMERS USING PARTS OR SERVICES WHICH ARE IDENTIFIED BY BRAND, TRADE, OR CORPORATE NAME (SUCH AS THE VEHICLE MAKER'S BRAND) UNLESS THE PARTS OR SERVICE ARE PROVIDED FREE OF CHARGE. THE LAW MEANS THAT THE USE OF AN AFTERMARKET PART ALONE IS NOT CAUSE FOR DENYING THE WARRANTY. HOWEVER, THE LAW'S PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO AFTERMARKET PARTS IN SITUATIONS WHERE SUCH PARTS ACTUALLY CAUSED THE DAMAGE BEING CLAIMED UNDER THE WARRANTY. FURTHER, CONSUMERS ARE ADVISED TO BE AWARE OF ANY SPECIFIC TERMS OR CONDITIONS STATED IN THE WARRANTY WHICH MAY RESULT IN ITS BEING VOIDED. THE LAW STATES IN RELEVANT PART: ??NO WARRANTOR OF. *TR