Nissan Won't Honor Capacity Warranty, Says I Am 4 Days Late. 8 Bars

[rwherrick]

Hey guys,
I'm probably going to start a new thread to publicize this, but you all are talking about it like Nissan is "all or nothing", and that it not the case. My friend and I are early adopters with 2011 Leafs. I lost by 4th bar at 48.4k miles and 66months; my friend lost his at 51.1k miles and 61 months. Nissan paid 75% of the cost of my battery replacement, so I only paid $1,564 + tax. My friend had Nissan cover 90% of the replacement cost, so he'll only have to cover 10% of the cost.
Yes, it would be better if Nissan set up a formal "pro-rated" warranty, and notified everyone. But this "out-of-warranty" assistance is not rare. My service advisor alone has handled a number of them. You'll see more on other forums like the Facebook page, which is where I first heard of it. Nissan has complicated criteria for how much assistance they will give, like how far past the warranty you are, what your battery scores are, and how often you've brought your car in for service. So don't expect a lot if you never got your battery tests done, and never paid for service. But everyone who has lost the 4th bar shortly after the warranty has expired should consider calling up Nissan and ask for "out of warranty" assistance at the EV 800 number. If you don't ask, you'll definitely get zero.
Nissan's informal "pro-rated" support has definitely improved my perception on them. Before this, I was ready to say "I'll never buy another Nissan again." They definitely screwed up, and rushed to market a product that didn't meet normal battery degradation expectations, but at least for my friend and I, the settlements Nissan issued were fair compensation for the premature product degradation. It's good to see them starting to invest in protecting the brand again, instead of just trying to minimize warranty costs.
- Bob

 

[DaveEV]

Count yourself lucky. I lost bar 4 after 62 months. Nissan won't budge. All they'll say is that my battery is normal. I'm not the only one, others have had similar experiences. Got the annual battery check every year and even paid for unnecessary brake fluid flushes and overpriced cabin air filters. And paid another $130 diagnostic at 62 months for them to tell me everything is OK.

No, I'm not bitter. Not bitter at all that I've got a car that barely does 50 miles on a charge after 5 years when Nissan told everyone to expect 8 years of service and most likely 10 unless you live in Dubai.

 

[TimLee]

The inconsistency by Nissan is baffling.

Maybe dealer involvement and/or the dealers relationship with Nissan has a big impact :?:

 

[ttweed]

The inconsistency by Nissan is baffling.

Maybe dealer involvement and/or the dealers relationship with Nissan has a big impact :?:

I believe what makes a bigger impact than anything else is whether or not your car was part of the class action lawsuit. My 2011 Leaf performed slightly better than drees', losing its fourth bar almost 4 months after the warranty period ended, instead of two months. The car still had less than 60K miles on it. I made an appeal to the customer service folks over the phone and in writing that this performance did not live up to the claims they made when they sold me the car. They would not give me a warranty replacement, since the 60 month time period had expired, but since my car was not part of the class action suit, they did offer me a "good will" 80% discount on buying a new battery pack for it, which I accepted. The only conclusion I can reach in seeing the disparate treatment of myself and drees is that they feared further legal action on my part, since I had not "settled" for the class action benefit previously. I cannot see any other difference between my case and his to explain it.

TT

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

The inconsistency by Nissan is baffling.

Maybe dealer involvement and/or the dealers relationship with Nissan has a big impact :?:

I believe what makes a bigger impact than anything else is whether or not your car was part of the class action lawsuit. My 2011 Leaf performed slightly better than drees', losing its fourth bar almost 4 months after the warranty period ended, instead of two months. The car still had less than 60K miles on it. I made an appeal to the customer service folks over the phone and in writing that this performance did not live up to the claims they made when they sold me the car. They would not give me a warranty replacement, since the 60 month time period had expired, but since my car was not part of the class action suit, they did offer me a "good will" 80% discount on buying a new battery pack for it, which I accepted. The only conclusion I can reach in seeing the disparate treatment of myself and drees is that they feared further legal action on my part, since I had not "settled" for the class action benefit previously. I cannot see any other difference between my case and his to explain it.

TT

interesting theory. anyone else care to add to this?

 

[TimLee]

Could be a major factor.

I initially opted out, but took my chances after final agreement was approved and opted back in.

Nissan may have considered that along with mine being only two weeks past and miles being under 34,000.

Would be better and people would be less displeased if they had a clear proration formula.

 

[ydnas7]

Could be a major factor.

I initially opted out, but took my chances after final agreement was approved and opted back in.

Nissan may have considered that along with mine being only two weeks past and miles being under 34,000.

Would be better and people would be less displeased if they had a clear proration formula.

The prorate formula is binary. because the cost to Nissan is binary.

but, the humans on the other end of the phone are just that, humans

If they (the human) feels that the other person is friendly, then they can be friendly back, and expedite actions that their employer would not corporately do.

If they (the human) feels that the other person is legalistic, then they can be courteous back, and quietly mutter under their breath they will provide the full extent required by both Nissan and the law, and not a cent more.

Its how the IT industry works, I'm pretty sure the automotive is the same.

also, generally only the customers who buy new, can get special consideration, others don't really count.

 

[ydnas7]

also, if car company wants to be consistent across the USA, then they are motivated to sell new cars, not upgrades, because of California's ARBs rules.

3 ZEV credit for a car was worth about 3 x 4500 = $13,500
now 3 ZEV credits are worth about 3 x 2,250 = $6,750

just check out Tesla financial statements. The opportunity cost of replacement batterys is probably higher than the cost of the battery itself.

 

[ttweed]

I initially opted out, but took my chances after final agreement was approved and opted back in...

Tim-
Are you sure that the B1033 Exclusion was not still registered against your VIN when you first talked to them about your 4-bar loss? Did you ever verify after you opted back in to the class-action suit that it was cleared from your service record? I am not certain, but I believe that the B1033 Exclusion tag was NOT removed from the record of every individual vehicle when the owner opted back into the suit after the final agreement.

TT

 

[ttweed]

also, if car company wants to be consistent across the USA, then they are motivated to sell new cars, not upgrades, because of California's ARBs rules.

3 ZEV credit for a car was worth about 3 x 4500 = $13,500
now 3 ZEV credits are worth about 3 x 2,250 = $6,750

just check out Tesla financial statements. The opportunity cost of replacement batterys is probably higher than the cost of the battery itself.

I am a little confused by this post. Are you saying that a car company earns 3 ZEV credits in CA for providing a replacement battery, which equates to $6,750, or more than the cost of the battery?

TT

 

[TimLee]

Are you sure that the B1033 Exclusion was not still registered against your VIN when you first talked to them about your 4-bar loss? Did you ever verify after you opted back in to the class-action suit that it was cleared from your service record? I am not certain, but I believe that the B1033 Exclusion tag was NOT removed from the record of every individual vehicle when the owner opted back into the suit after the final agreement.

TT

I verified a few weeks after opting back in that B1033 Exclusion tag was removed from the vehicle service record.

Part of why Nissan may have replaced mine was that I was unable to use the vehicle for more than a week when my wife was hospitalized with pneumonia.

 

[ydnas7]

I am a little confused by this post. Are you saying that a car company earns 3 ZEV credits in CA for providing a replacement battery, which equates to $6,750, or more than the cost of the battery?

TT

No,

what I'm saying , due to CARB rules, it is in the car companies benefit to place cars on the road, than to keep the cars on the road.
In extreme, look at BMW activeEVs, and Honda Fit EVs. They were leased for 3 years and then crushed.

Each car had ZEV credits of between an open market price of about $7,000 and and internal market price of $15,000.

Currently, Ford and Fiat prefer to buy credits from Tesla at $6,750 per car, than to sell/lease discount their current EVs in California.

 

[Reddy]

The inconsistency by Nissan is baffling.

Maybe dealer involvement and/or the dealers relationship with Nissan has a big impact :?:

I believe what makes a bigger impact than anything else is whether or not your car was part of the class action lawsuit. My 2011 Leaf performed slightly better than drees', losing its fourth bar almost 4 months after the warranty period ended, instead of two months. The car still had less than 60K miles on it. I made an appeal to the customer service folks over the phone and in writing that this performance did not live up to the claims they made when they sold me the car. They would not give me a warranty replacement, since the 60 month time period had expired, but since my car was not part of the class action suit, they did offer me a "good will" 80% discount on buying a new battery pack for it, which I accepted. The only conclusion I can reach in seeing the disparate treatment of myself and drees is that they feared further legal action on my part, since I had not "settled" for the class action benefit previously. I cannot see any other difference between my case and his to explain it.

TT

OK, I just bookmarked this quote and will recall it when my car loses the 4th bar, estimated to be sometime in 2018/19. I also opted out and I'm not expecting much from Nissan, but we'll see. I might pay $2000 in 2019 for a 24 KWh (ideally 30 KWh) replacement, but I'll probably wait as long as possible, maybe even 2025 since a 6-bar car will still be usable in my small community.