Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

[Volusiano]

What the supplemental warranty does is introduce risk sharing by Nissan. They are meeting us halfway/partway. Have they got the balance/formula of the risk sharing right? We can argue that ad infinitum, but they have at least taken on some of the risk with their customers. (They should have done it from the get go, but that's water under the bridge).

I agree that early adopters should share unknown risks, but in the case of the very hot areas (primarily Arizona and Texas, a few parts of California--so far) I think we are talking about something quite different. In those hot climates, there is every indication that we are not talking about unknown risks, but about a near certainty that was known by Nissan, but not by the buyers. Where do you think the graph that TickTock drew from his discussion with the Nissan engineer came from? Clearly Nissan knew (roughly) what would happen to the battery packs in Arizona. The issue here is not risk, but lack of disclosure of a material fact that would be very likely to affect a purchase decision. That's also the reason many of the Arizona purchasers are still pissed off--because this problem wasn't something unforeseen, it was something ignored.

+1!!!

Not only did Nissan hide material fact that would be very likely to affect a purchase decision like Stoaty said, Nissan out right told people the opposite, that AZ heat will not be an issue.

1. When asked if TMS is necessary or not, Mark Perry said "Not for AZ, maybe for Dubai".
2. Nissan said they have thoroughly tested the battery in AZ.
3. Nissan said they know their battery chemistry inside out and have had decade(s) of experience with it.
4. They chose to pick AZ as the Tier 1 state to sell a production vehicle.

It would be about risk sharing if and only if Nissan had not said any of the things above and simply told AZ buyers that they don't know the answer to those questions and buyers beware and buy at your own risk.

Once Nissan opened their mouth and said those things, they've basically assured AZ owners THAT THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO RISK TO BUY A LEAF IN AZ AS IT IS TO BUY ONE IN SEATTLE when it comes to the issue of heat on capacity.

So the heat capacity issue is FOR SURE not about risk sharing. It's about Nissan having the integrity to stand up and fix the problem caused by their false claims.

 

[leafkabob]

What the supplemental warranty does is introduce risk sharing by Nissan. They are meeting us halfway/partway. Have they got the balance/formula of the risk sharing right? We can argue that ad infinitum, but they have at least taken on some of the risk with their customers. (They should have done it from the get go, but that's water under the bridge).

I agree that early adopters should share unknown risks, but in the case of the very hot areas (primarily Arizona and Texas, a few parts of California--so far) I think we are talking about something quite different. In those hot climates, there is every indication that we are not talking about unknown risks, but about a near certainty that was known by Nissan, but not by the buyers. Where do you think the graph that TickTock drew from his discussion with the Nissan engineer came from? Clearly Nissan knew (roughly) what would happen to the battery packs in Arizona. The issue here is not risk, but lack of disclosure of a material fact that would be very likely to affect a purchase decision. That's also the reason many of the Arizona purchasers are still pissed off--because this problem wasn't something unforeseen, it was something ignored.

+1!!!

Not only did Nissan hide material fact that would be very likely to affect a purchase decision like Stoaty said, Nissan out right told people the opposite, that AZ heat will not be an issue.

1. When asked if TMS is necessary or not, Mark Perry said "Not for AZ, maybe for Dubai".
2. Nissan said they have thoroughly tested the battery in AZ.
3. Nissan said they know their battery chemistry inside out and have had decade(s) of experience with it.
4. They chose to pick AZ as the Tier 1 state to sell a production vehicle.

It would be about risk sharing if and only if Nissan had not said any of the things above and simply told AZ buyers that they don't know the answer to those questions and buyers beware and buy at your own risk.

Once Nissan opened their mouth and said those things, they've basically assured AZ owners THAT THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO RISK TO BUY A LEAF IN AZ AS IT IS TO BUY ONE IN SEATTLE when it comes to the issue of heat on capacity.

So the heat capacity issue is FOR SURE not about risk sharing. It's about Nissan having the integrity to stand up and fix the problem caused by their false claims.

I agree with Stoaty and Volusiano 100%!

I think the frustration that remains with the Phoenix drivers is that Nissan thinks they have solved the battery problem with the new warranty. And maybe they have - for new purchasers today who know about the battery degradation and the warranty. But as a 2011 purchaser, I don't feel like the "70%" warranty solves the problem because I had every expectation at the time of purchase that their leaf would perform like any leaf anywhere. For Nissan to now ignore all of the "80% at 10 years" or even "80% at 5 years" statements by its employees and give us a "70% at 5 year" warranty just seems wrong.

 

[Stoaty]

I think the frustration that remains with the Phoenix drivers is that Nissan thinks they have solved the battery problem with the new warranty. And maybe they have - for new purchasers today who know about the battery degradation and the warranty.

From what I have seen reported on the forum, the new purchasers in Arizona would only find out about battery degradation by reading the forum or the Wiki or articles on the internet. I haven't seen anything to suggest proper disclosure for prospective Arizona buyers, which must be particularly galling for Arizona Leaf owners.

 

[leafkabob]

I think the frustration that remains with the Phoenix drivers is that Nissan thinks they have solved the battery problem with the new warranty. And maybe they have - for new purchasers today who know about the battery degradation and the warranty.

From what I have seen reported on the forum, the new purchasers in Arizona would only find out about battery degradation by reading the forum or the Wiki or articles on the internet. I haven't seen anything to suggest proper disclosure for prospective Arizona buyers, which must be particularly galling for Arizona Leaf owners.

Agreed, and in my opinion not providing a clear disclaimer (as opposed to the vague disclaimer previously used) to anyone in AZ who purchased a leaf after June or July, 2012 is a material omission and a violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act. I am astounded that Nissan continues to behave (with regard to disclosures to new buyers) as if nothing has happened.

 

[Stoaty]

Agreed, and in my opinion not providing a clear disclaimer (as opposed to the vague disclaimer previously used) to anyone in AZ who purchased a leaf after June or July, 2012 is a material omission and a violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act. I am astounded that Nissan continues to behave (with regard to disclosures to new buyers) as if nothing has happened.

Probably they are going by the old adage "It is easier to apologize than to get permission." They figure damage control down the road will still net them more dollars than proper disclosure. Still, throwing a whole state under the bus is certainly not ethical business practice.

 

[jspearman]

Agreed, and in my opinion not providing a clear disclaimer (as opposed to the vague disclaimer previously used) to anyone in AZ who purchased a leaf after June or July, 2012 is a material omission and a violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act. I am astounded that Nissan continues to behave (with regard to disclosures to new buyers) as if nothing has happened.

Probably they are going by the old adage "It is easier to apologize than to get permission." They figure damage control down the road will still net them more dollars than proper disclosure. Still, throwing a whole state under the bus is certainly not ethical business practice.

At least some salespeople are encouraging leases. I contacted a local Nissan dealer about a 2-year lease, and asked the salesperson how much it would cost to prepay the lease. He thought I meant buy out at lease end and said I probably wouldn't want to do that until they solve the battery issues. I'm curious about dealer attitudes toward the car here in Phoenix, and I heard one of the Nissan folks mention there were dealers at our meeting. I would imagine, at this point, that local dealers are very cautious about selling or leasing past the two-year mark, even with the warranty.

I'm really exhausted at this point and glad to be at the end of the road, but I'm sorry that everyone in Phoenix is not there with me. I really want to see Nissan voluntarily convert all the remaining Phoenix cars to two-year leases until they come up with a material solution, unless the owners want to stay put.

 

[KJD]

I'm really exhausted at this point and glad to be at the end of the road, but I'm sorry that everyone in Phoenix is not there with me. I really want to see Nissan voluntarily convert all the remaining Phoenix cars to two-year leases until they come up with a material solution, unless the owners want to stay put.

Did anyone ask Nissan to do this at the recent town hall meeting ?

 

[Volusiano]

I'm really exhausted at this point and glad to be at the end of the road, but I'm sorry that everyone in Phoenix is not there with me. I really want to see Nissan voluntarily convert all the remaining Phoenix cars to two-year leases until they come up with a material solution, unless the owners want to stay put.

Did anyone ask Nissan to do this at the recent town hall meeting ?

That was the elephant in the room that wasn't addressed at all, neither by Nissan nor the audience ("What is a reasonable remedy that Nissan can offer that would be acceptable to Phoenix owners?").

The owners spent all the times at the town hall telling Nissan about their the range losses (an already obvious fact that didn't need to be repeated by several different owners several times because Nissan already knew), asked Nissan questions about the QC issue, TMS, using solar for cooling, plan for new battery chemistry, GOM inaccuracy, capacity bar inaccuracy, power to the home, on and on, everything under the sun BUT "What is a reasonable remedy that Nissan can offer Phoenix owners that would be acceptable for them?".

Nearing the end when it became obvious to me that nobody was going to ask that question, I raised my hands SEVERAL times trying to raise that question, but nobody gave me the mic. And Nissan didn't want to take any more questions on stage when time was up. They only offered to hang around and answer more questions offline. I didn't care to bother asking the question offline because it's just going to be a 1 on 1 situation that can be blown off easily with a wishy washy answer that nobody else but me would hear.

 

[myleaf]

I'm really exhausted at this point and glad to be at the end of the road, but I'm sorry that everyone in Phoenix is not there with me. I really want to see Nissan voluntarily convert all the remaining Phoenix cars to two-year leases until they come up with a material solution, unless the owners want to stay put.

Did anyone ask Nissan to do this at the recent town hall meeting ?

That was the elephant in the room that wasn't addressed at all, neither by Nissan nor the audience ("What is a reasonable remedy that Nissan can offer that would be acceptable to Phoenix owners?").

The owners spent all the times at the town hall telling Nissan about their the range losses (an already obvious fact that didn't need to be repeated by several different owners several times because Nissan already knew), asked Nissan questions about the QC issue, TMS, using solar for cooling, plan for new battery chemistry, GOM inaccuracy, capacity bar inaccuracy, power to the home, on and on, everything under the sun BUT "What is a reasonable remedy that Nissan can offer Phoenix owners that would be acceptable for them?".

Nearing the end when it became obvious to me that nobody was going to ask that question, I raised my hands SEVERAL times trying to raise that question, but nobody gave me the mic. And Nissan didn't want to take any more questions on stage when time was up. They only offered to hang around and answer more questions offline. I didn't care to bother asking the question offline because it's just going to be a 1 on 1 situation that can be blown off easily with a wishy washy answer that nobody else but me would hear.

I spoke to Andy Palmer after the meeting and he metioned two possible options for me would be a buy back or lease conversion.

 

[Volusiano]

I'm really exhausted at this point and glad to be at the end of the road, but I'm sorry that everyone in Phoenix is not there with me. I really want to see Nissan voluntarily convert all the remaining Phoenix cars to two-year leases until they come up with a material solution, unless the owners want to stay put.

Did anyone ask Nissan to do this at the recent town hall meeting ?

I spoke to Andy Palmer after the meeting and he metioned two possible options for me would be a buy back or lease conversion.

I believe we're discussing about a different thing here: a UNIVERSAL and acceptable remedy that will apply to anybody who fits a certain set of criteria that's public and known to everyone.

What you're talking about is a personal remedy, which can be either a buyback or a lease conversion has already happened to a handful of people. I'm in the process of requesting a buyback myself. But not everybody requesting a personal remedy will be guaranteed to get it. It's up to Nissan to make the decision and we have no idea what Nissan's criteria is for deciding to grant the remedy to some and not others. So far, the personal remedy of buyback or lease conversion has not been straightforward and easy. Many had to go on TV, some had to file BBB cases, most had to make a lot of noises one way or another. A few cases might be more straightforward, but that's far and few in between from what I can tell.

For me personally, I opened up a case to let Nissan know about my first bar loss in June 2012, then called again to update my case for the second bar loss in July 2012. I made it clear that I'm not happy and I'm looking for a remedy, not just reporting the losses. When I called back in December for a status, they closed my first case already without my consent. So I had to open up a new case with them, explicitly requested a buyback. They called me back a week later and asked me to wait for the warranty announcement to see if I like it or not. I agreed to wait. Then I waited some more to go to the Phoenix town hall to see if it might bear better results. Then a week after that I called them to let them know that I still want a buyback. That was 2 days ago. I called and left another message again today, and still no response. That's my personal ordeal so far asking for a buyback.

 

[leafwing]

UNIVERSAL and acceptable remedy that will apply to anybody who fits a certain set of criteria that's public and known to everyone.

I add my voice to yours. Nissan should have a universal solution. If I had known in 2011 what I know now about early capacity loss, I would not have purchased the car.

 

[RickS]

Well I gave up and started jumping through the hoops this week. I called and inquired about my old case and apparently the person who was working it had quit or been fired many months ago and my case had apparently been lost in the void. They automatically started a new case number for me and forwarded the case to an area rep. That person called me today and is supposed to follow up on Monday to schedule a higher area service tech to look at the car.

I am still only down one bar, but I suspect number two is coming shortly behind as soon as it warms up again in a few months based on what everyone else is seeing.

 

[surfingslovak]

am still only down one bar, but I suspect number two is coming shortly behind as soon as it warms up again in a few months based on what everyone else is seeing.

Rick, are you still averaging about 800 miles per month? It would appear that your car is doing somewhat better than others. Is it cooler in your part of the town? How is the LEAF parked overnight? Thanks in advance, and good luck with the buyback process.

 

[RickS]

Yes I guess I'm about 850-ish miles a month average. My work just moved from North Phoenix (where I was 4 miles away) to Tempe which is not a 50 mile round trip commute so this will be going up. I'm now doing a full charge overnight and charging to 80% on 120V at work.

The car is parked in a fairly well insulated garage at night. Up until recently I rarely ever charged to 100%. I'm in the middle of Glendale though, not exactly a cooler location. The neighborhood is larger houses with more green space and flood irrigation, it is a few degrees cooler when all the yards are wet and it's dry out, but not by much. The garage never cools off at night either. I had been running a window fan overnight just to get some air flow.

 

[opossum]

[...] a "70% at 5 year" warranty just seems wrong.

It's probably worthwhile for us to stop calling this a 70% warranty. No matter what specifications have been quoted on the value of each bar, it's clear that the real world range loss does not align with those numbers. We would be no less accurate if we just called it a 30% capacity warranty, and I'd much prefer that over 70%, given that it wouldn't err on Nissan's side. :twisted:

 

[RickS]

Having looked back at some pictures of the dash right when I lost my first bar to now the numbers have gotten worse. Thought I should mention that. Late spring should be interesting.

 

[cyellen]

Interesting development (or maybe just a quirk...): my car was plugged in all weekend and was timer charged to 100% on Saturday. This morning, the Guess-o-meter said 93 miles (in EcoMode) - the highest number I've seen in ages with my two bar loss. Most recently, the GOM showed a 79-82 range at 100%. Tomorrow, I'll be back to 80% charge, so we'll see what it says in the morning.

I never really push the limits of the range, so who knows how much I really have. Thankfully, I haven't been too affected by the loss of those two bars, but after another summer, I might be singing a different tune.

 

[mark1313]

I do not want to lose site of this thread,its TV famous :lol: Im just waiting for the summer to hit again and cause HAVOC on our batteries...Losing 2 bars in 45 days last summer with out even running the AC ..This summer I will be doing all 100% charges to get to work and back and using the AC this time..

It will be interesting to see who hits the 4 charging bars first and what warranty work will be done to the batteries and how long it takes before the car is returned...

 

[Volusiano]

It'll be interesting to see a whole new slew of new capacity loss reports this coming summer. I'm curious to see if the 1 bar loss list will continue to rise and top the 200 mark or not. And 2 bar loss top the 100 mark.

 

[KJD]

For me personally, I opened up a case to let Nissan know about my first bar loss in June 2012, then called again to update my case for the second bar loss in July 2012. I made it clear that I'm not happy and I'm looking for a remedy, not just reporting the losses. When I called back in December for a status, they closed my first case already without my consent. So I had to open up a new case with them, explicitly requested a buyback. They called me back a week later and asked me to wait for the warranty announcement to see if I like it or not. I agreed to wait. Then I waited some more to go to the Phoenix town hall to see if it might bear better results. Then a week after that I called them to let them know that I still want a buyback. That was 2 days ago. I called and left another message again today, and still no response. That's my personal ordeal so far asking for a buyback.

Did Nissan buy your car back or do you still have it ?