NHTSA Complaint #10421561 — 2005 NISSAN PATHFINDER

THE PROBLEM FIRST BEGAN WITH MY 2005 NISSAN PATHFINDER ON MARCH 27, 2011, WHEN I FIRST NOTICED THERE WAS NO HEAT IN THE CABIN. THEN ON APRIL 29, 2011, WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, I NOTICED MY VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE IN EXCESS OF 45 MPH. IT SEEMED THAT THE TRANSMISSION WAS SLIPPING. AS THE NISSAN WAS PARKED IN OUR GARAGE, WE NOTICED FLUID LEAKING ONTO THE GROUND. THE FLUID HAD A MILKY WHITE SUBSTANCE IN IT. AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH, WE REALIZED THAT WITH THIS PARTICULAR MODEL, THERE WERE KNOWN PROBLEMS WITH COOLANT LEAKING INTO THE TRANSMISSION. WE HAD THE PATHFINDER DIAGNOSED ON JUNE 3, 2011 BY BILLINGS NISSAN. WE HAD INFORMED THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT NISSAN THAT WE WERE SUSPECTING THE TRANSMISSION WAS CONTAMINATED WITH COOLANT. NISSAN INFORMED US THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE COOLANT TO LEAK INTO THE TRANSMISSION BECAUSE THEY ARE SEPARATE UNITS AND THAT THE MILKY WHITE SUBSTANCE IN THE TRANSMISSION WAS A RESULT OF AIR ENTERING THE TRANSMISSION. AFTER MUCH DISPAIR, WE DECIDED TO TRADE IN OUR VEHICLE AND TOOK A HUGE LOSS ON THE TRADE-IN VALUE. WE FELT THAT IF WE DECIDED TO REPLACE THE TRANSMISSION, AND THAT THE RADIATOR WAS IN FACT DAMAGED AND ALSO NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, THAT WE WOULD ONLY BE FACED WITH THE SAME ISSUE DOWN THE ROAD AND WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE TRANSMISSION A 2ND TIME. ON JUNE 28, 2011, WE RECEIVED A REPORT FROM THE DEALERSHIP THAT WE TRADED THE PATHFINDER AT STATING THE TRANSMISSION WAS INDEED CONTAMINATED WITH COOLANT AND THAT THE RADIATOR AND TRANSMISSION BOTH NEEDED REPLACING. IF ONLY WE HAD RECEIVED PROPER DIAGNOSIS FROM NISSAN INITIALLY, OUR COURSE OF ACTION MAY HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT AND WOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT FIXING THE PATHFINDER VERSUS TRADING IT IN. AS A RESULT, WE HAVE LOST MONEY ON THE TRADE IN VALUE, AND HAVE INCURRED AN UNEXPECTED EXPENSE OF A NEW VEHICLE (PAYMENTS, REGISTRATION, INSURANCE). DEALER LIED TO US. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) *TT