| Components - Details | |
|---|---|
| NHTSA Complaint Number: 006079024 | Incident Date: May, 31 2006 |
| Consumer's City: SCOTTSDALE | Consumer's State: AZ |
| Vehicle Transmission Type: AUTO | Manufacturers Name: Mazda Motor Corp. |
| Model Name: TRIBUTE | Model Year: 2004 |
| Vehicle Involved in a Crash: No | Component's Description: Service brakes, hydraulic:foundation components:disc:rotor |
| Vehicle Involved in a Fire: No | Persons Injured: 0 |
| Vehicle's VIN#: 4F2YZ94124K | Date added to File: May, 23 2021 |
| Date Complaint Received: Sep, 15 2006 | Complaint Type: IVOQ |
| Incident Reported To Police: No | Purchase Date: Dec, 19 2003 |
| Was Original Owner: Yes | Anti-lock Brakes: No |
| Number of Cylinders: 6 | Date of Manufacturer: - |
| Was Vehicle Towed: - | Description of the Complaints: At 35,000 miles i brought my 2004 mazda tribute into firestone for a brake inspection. at this time, i was told that the rotors had worn below minimum specification, could not be resurfaced and would have to be replaced. i authorized this work to be completed and paid for the repairs. subsequently i went to showcase mazda dealership to request a refund for the amount i paid for new rotors. they informed me that rotors were a "wear" item, even though rotors are not listed in the warranty exclusions. i was told that because of the soft material these rotors are made from, they wear more easily. in my opinion this is "defective material" not a "routine wear item". the warranty states "worn brake and clutch linings" are excluded. a rotor is not a brake lining. i believe mazda should pay for replacement of all worn rotors during the warranty period, including mine. brakes are certainly a safety issue and rotors wearing out in 35,000 miles and even less as i've read at some autobytel.com postings is not acceptable and should be fixed by mazda at no charge to the owner. *nm |
