| Components - Details | |
|---|---|
| NHTSA Complaint Number: 005045166 | Incident Date: Nov, 02 2005 |
| Consumer's City: MICHIGAN CITY | Consumer's State: IN |
| Vehicle Transmission Type: AUTO | Manufacturers Name: General Motors, LLC |
| Model Name: SIERRA | Model Year: 2001 |
| Vehicle Involved in a Crash: No | Component's Description: Service brakes, hydraulic:antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip |
| Vehicle Involved in a Fire: No | Persons Injured: 0 |
| Vehicle's VIN#: 1GTEK19T31E | Date added to File: May, 23 2021 |
| Date Complaint Received: Nov, 02 2005 | Complaint Type: IVOQ |
| Incident Reported To Police: No | Purchase Date: - |
| Was Original Owner: Yes | Anti-lock Brakes: Yes |
| Number of Cylinders: 8 | Date of Manufacturer: - |
| Was Vehicle Towed: - | Description of the Complaints: My 2001 gmc sierra 1500 [xxx] was recalled for unwanted abs brake system activation. i paid for the same repair ($363.20) out of my own pocket last oct. 28, 2004. recently they started acting up again and the recall notice came out. (campaign #05v379000). i took my truck nov. 2, 2005 to harbor pontiac buick gmc, 9911 w. 300 north, michigan city, indiana. they confirmed that the sensors were bad and replaced them. they then told me that the problem still existed and that it would cost me $85 just to put it on the computer to check what the problem may be. they then told me that if it was the abs module, it will cost me $1,111.99 to replace it. i am a mechanic and feel that if the module is bad, the defective sensors caused it and i should not have to pay for it. my vehicle is still doing the exact same thing it was recalled for. i feel they should have to do whatever it takes to fix it at no cost to me. in addition, when i took it in yesterday for the repairs they only had (1) sensor in stock and refused to let me take the truck home for "liability" reasons. but today they are telling me that i can take it even though it is still doing the same thing it was recalled for. i can't aford to pay what they want to fix it so i am forced to drive it the way it is. *js information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u.s.c. 552(b)(6) |
