| Components - Details | |
|---|---|
| NHTSA Complaint Number: 000055672 | Incident Date: May, 15 2000 |
| Consumer's City: SAN ANTONIO | Consumer's State: TX |
| Vehicle Transmission Type: | Manufacturers Name: Volvo Car USA, LLC |
| Model Name: 740 | Model Year: 1991 |
| Vehicle Involved in a Crash: No | Component's Description: Fuel system, gasoline:fuel injection system |
| Vehicle Involved in a Fire: No | Persons Injured: 0 |
| Vehicle's VIN#: YV1FA8849M2 | Date added to File: May, 16 2021 |
| Date Complaint Received: Oct, 11 2000 | Complaint Type: IVOQ |
| Incident Reported To Police: No | Purchase Date: Feb, 28 1994 |
| Was Original Owner: No | Anti-lock Brakes: No |
| Number of Cylinders: 0 | Date of Manufacturer: - |
| Was Vehicle Towed: - | Description of the Complaints: In may 2000, i had a problem with my car either not starting, and if it did start it would stall at any time. this seems simular to the incident with the recent court ordered recall of the ford vehicle with the faulty ignition unit which causes the cars to stall at any time. in my situation, i was told that the part that was actually causing the problem could not be isolated down to a single item. the problem that i was having was never duplicated by the volvo dealer that looked at it. they knew from experience that the problem was one of three components, the fuel pump relay - p/n 3523608, injector relay - p/n 1323592-1, and the engine speed sensor - p/n 2719949. changing these parts was a normal procedure for this situation, i was told by the volvo service adviser. at the time he also told me that they get 3 to 4 of these problems in a month, and he didn't seem concerned for the potential danger with the car cutting off while driving, or the fact that he was changing two parts that didn't need to be changed. later i wrote the manager of the volvo dealership requesting a refund for the two good parts that were changed and got a reply from the same service adviser. at this time the number of times they get this problem per month according to him dropped to 1 instead of the3 to 4 per month that he had claimed before. i pointed out to him that the fact that the part never fails permenately is cause to consider it a defective part. he said there's nothing in the book that states that a part has to fail permenately. i recognized the potential for danger that this situation has from the moment i started having problems, but due to the apathy of the service adviser and the manager at the volvo center here i was hesitant to contact nhtsa. since the judge in california seems to think like i do, i'm now bringing this potential problem to your attention. this is the basics of my complaint. please send me any other information on this subject that you may have.. |
