| Components - Details | |
|---|---|
| NHTSA Complaint Number: 003277270 | Incident Date: Feb, 14 2003 |
| Consumer's City: PETALUMA | Consumer's State: CA |
| Vehicle Transmission Type: AUTO | Manufacturers Name: Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) |
| Model Name: CIVIC | Model Year: 1997 |
| Vehicle Involved in a Crash: No | Component's Description: Visibility:power window devices and controls |
| Vehicle Involved in a Fire: No | Persons Injured: 0 |
| Vehicle's VIN#: 1HGEJ7221VL | Date added to File: May, 25 2021 |
| Date Complaint Received: Jan, 14 2004 | Complaint Type: CAG |
| Incident Reported To Police: No | Purchase Date: - |
| Was Original Owner: No | Anti-lock Brakes: No |
| Number of Cylinders: 0 | Date of Manufacturer: - |
| Was Vehicle Towed: - | Description of the Complaints: This vehicle is a lemon -- defective throughout. major problem is a transmission that has failed twice -- once being replaced by the manufacturer only after two years of complaining about the problem, being unable to drive any distances, and after numerous times i paid to have the problem unresolved. since it was replaced in july 2001, i began complaining again about problems in may of 2002, only to get the same run around again. costing me money out of my pocket for their defective cvt transmission for which they refuse to acknowledge their defect. finally got it fixed and the warranty extended for the second time, but in the meantime, check out the vin numbers on the nhtsa website and you'll many other honda owners with transmission problems and very similar vin numbers. late fall 2002 to winter 2003 driver side door lock failed and almost immediately after that was fixed the driver side window failed. i had to drive down the freeway in the rain to get home with a window i could only pull up half way. but to top things off, i have to replace the alternator this month. worse of all, my car was experience symptoms that were apparently attributed to the alternator back in march 31, 1999 service bulletin 98-029. however, honda never notified the vehicle owners. they just played the odds that the majority would fail outside of warranty and they wouldn't have to pay a dime. it amazes me that our government allows auto manufacturers to get away with this type of business practice. just because a part failure may not cause an accident doesn't mean it's not dangerous. if i'm commuting 100 miles a day, as i have been for the past several months, and my car broke down who knows where, i could very well be in danger as a single women traveling a lone. i need to be able to count on my vehicle, which i have gone out of my way to insure was always properly serviced. i can not trust honda and will never buy another one. |
