2001 Daewoo Puerto Rico Nubira Recalls & Complaints

Incident: March 15, 2007 · Filed: March 16, 2007

TL* - THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 DAEWOO NUBIRA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED RECALL 04V357000. THE RECALL STATED THAT THE CAMSHAFT POSITION SENSOR MAY MELT, RESULTING IN A BURNING SMELL AND VISIBLE SMOKE, WHICH MAY SUBSEQUENTLY LEAD TO THE MELTING OF THE CAMSHAFT COVER AND THE CAMSHAFT POSITION SENSOR WIRE HARNESS. THE BUICK DEALER REFUSED TO PERFORM RECALL REPAIRS DUE TO THE VEHICLE BEING OUT OF WARRANTY. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 62,007. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT STAYED ON. *AK

Incident: October 13, 2006 · Filed: October 13, 2006

CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED ON DASHBOARD I HAD RECEIVED A LETTER FROM DAEWOO INDICATING THAT THE CAMSHAFT POSITION SENSOR IS BEING RECALLED AND THAT I NEEDED TO HAVE IT REPLACED OR RISK FIRE/INSULATION BURN DAMAGE TO MY VEHICLE. I MADE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE CMP SENSOR LOOKED AT, AND TO HAVE THE DIAGNOSTIC TEST RUN TO DETERMINE WHY MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT WORKING ON MY CAR HAS DETERMINE THROUGH THE DIAGNOSTIC TESTING THAT IT IS THE CMP SENSOR THAT CAUSED MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT TO GO OFF AND THAT IT MUST BE REPLACED FOR SAFETY PURPOSES. THEY HAVE ALSO DETERMINED THAT MY PARTICULAR CMP SENSOR IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE RECALL DUE TO ITS SERIAL#, AND THAT IT IS COSTING ME $300 TO HAVE THIS REPLACED FOR THE PARTS AND LABOR. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW MY CMP SENSOR CANNOT BE COVERED BY THE RECALL. I THINK THE RECALL NEEDS TO BE ENLARGED TO COVER MORE CMP SENSORS, OR OTHER DAEWOO OWNERS WHO DO NOT HAVE $300 TO CORRECT THIS DAMAGED SENSOR MAY ELECT NOT TO HAVE IT FIXED AND COULD DAMAGE THEIR CAR IN THE PROCESS. *NM

Incident: September 1, 2006 · Filed: September 9, 2006

I OWN A DAEWOO NUBIRA THAT WAS UNDER TWO SEPARATE RECALLS. I WAS UNAWARE OF THE BRAKE RECALL AND TOOK MY CAR UP TO GET THE CAM SENSOR RECALL TAKEN CARE OF. WITHOUT MY APPROVAL OR NOTIFCATION, THE BRAKE RECALL WAS ADDRESSED. THE CAM SENSOR RECALL WAS FOUND NOT TO APPLY TO MY CAR. AFTER HAVING MY NUBIRA FIXED BY AN AUTHORIZED DAEWOO DEALERSHIP, MY BRAKES COMPLETELY FAILED, WHILE I WAS DRIVING. I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM THROUGH DAEWOO OF LITHIA SPRINGS AT NO COST TO MYSELF. THEY HAVE MADE SEVERAL CLAIMS THAT IT WAS MY FAULT, IT WAS THE FAULT OF A POTHOLE AND VARIOUS OTHER ASSERTATIONS. I HAD MY CAR TOWED (AT MY EXPENSE) TO JUST BRAKES WHO SAID THAT THE HOSE UNDER RECALL WERE IMPROPERLY INSTALLED, RUBBING AGAINST MY TIRE CAUSING BREAKAGE. THIS COMPANY HAS BEEN VERY OFFHANDED ABOUT THIS SITUATION AND WON'T EVEN LET ME SPEAK TO THE HEAD SUPERVISOR. DAEWOO DOES NOT CARE ABOUT RECALLS OR THEIR OBLIGATION TO PROTECT THE PUBLIIC. *NM

Incident: August 29, 2006 · Filed: August 30, 2006

FOUR (4) TIRES WERE PURCHASED (02/05) FROM FIRESTONE, 08/06 ONE OF THE FRONT TIRES SEPARATED, A SECOND FRONT TIRE APPEARS TO BE DEFECTIVE ALSO. TIRES WERE WARRANTED FOR 55,000K, THEY WERE DRIVEN ABOUT 17,223K. WHILE DRIVING 08/06 VEHICLE BEGAN TO SHAKE BADLY, UPON CHECKING, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE PASSENGER FRONT TIRE HAD SEPARATED. TOOK TIRE TO FIRESTONE, REQUESTING TIRE BE REPLACED AT N/C, THEY REFUSED CLAIMING (1) IT WAS MY VEHICLES FAULT, (2) TIRE WAS OVERINFLATED (3)TIRES HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED. I ASKED IF MY VEHICLE WOULD REQUIRE AN ALIGNMENT, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE DEFECTIVE (SEPARATED) TIRE PROBABLY CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO BECOME MISALIGNED, WAS TOLD PROBABLY. I WAS CHARGED $46.80 (08/29) FOR REPLACEMENT TIRE,(08/30) $69.47 FOR THE ALIGNMENT AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE OTHER DEFECTIVE TIRE IS STILL ON THE VEHICLE, AND I AM HOPEFUL IT DOESN'T SEPARATE. I REQUESTED THE DEFECTIVE TIRE BE GIVEN TO ME AND I HAVE IT IN MY POSSESSION FOR INSPECTION. I HAVE E-MAILED FIRESTONE, INFORMING THEM OF THE PROBLEM(S), THEY HAVE NOT RESPONDED. *NM

Incident: August 16, 2006 · Filed: August 16, 2006

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED IN THE VEHICLE. A RECALL LETTER WAS RECEIVED ON 9-04. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE CONTACTED AND AGREED THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA RECALL, # 04V357000, CONCERNING ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING. HOWEVER, BOTH REFUSED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE WITHOUT CHARGE.

Incident: May 1, 2006 · Filed: July 31, 2006

DT*:THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EMITS A BURNING SMELL WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN. A RECALL LETTER WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THE CAMSHAFT SENSOR. THE CONTACT HAS NOT FOUND A SERVICE DEALER TO ASSIST WITH THE RECALL DUE TO UNAVAILABLE PARTS. THE MANUFACTURER HAS NOT RETURNED ANY OF THE SIX CALLS AND MESSAGES LEFT ON THE CUSTOMER LINE SINCE 5/1/06.

Incident: June 7, 2006 · Filed: June 27, 2006

2001 NUBIRA HAS A PROBLEM CAMSHAFT POSITION. *TS THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A RECALL FOR THE CAMSHAFT POSITION SENSOR ON JUNE 6, 2006. ON JUNE 7 THE CONSUMER CALLED THE NEAREST AUTHORIZED DEALER TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE VEHICLE REPAIRED. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT THEY WERE NOT ACCEPTING DAEWOO RECALLS. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED DAEWOO CUSTOMER SERVICE AND LEFT TWO MESSAGES. NO ONE EVER CALLED THE CONSUMER BACK. *NM

Incident: June 23, 2006 · Filed: June 26, 2006

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED IN THE VEHICLE. AFTER RECEIVING A RECALL LETTER, THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE ALERTED AND AGREED THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA RECALL, # 04V357000 CONCERNING THE ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING. HOWEVER, THE DEALERSHIP INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE CAM SHAFT SENSOR DID NOT FALL WITHIN THE REPLACEMENT RANGE. THE DEALERSHIP CHARGED THE CONTACT FOR THE PARTS. THE RECALL LETTER DID NOT STATE THE CAM SHAFT SENSOR HAD TO BE WITHIN A SPECIFIC RANGE. UPDATED 7/14/2006 -*NM

Incident: June 15, 2006 · Filed: June 23, 2006

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS RESULTING IN THE VEHICLE LOSING POWER EACH TIME. ON THE FIRST VISIT TO THE DEALER, REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE TRANSMISSION. SHORTLY AFTER FIRST VISIT TO DEALERS, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO EXPERIENCE SAME PROBLEMS. AFTER SEVERAL VISITS TO THE DEALER, THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL LETTER PERTAINING TO THE POSITION CENTER AND ENGINE CONTROL MODULATOR STATING THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS DEFECT COULD CAUSE A FIRE IN ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALERS WITH A COPY OF THE RECALL LETTER. DEALERS DETERMINED THAT THE ONLY REPAIRS NEEDED WERE TO TIGHTEN THE GAS CAP. THE RECALL REMEDY REPAIRS WERE NOT MADE. PROBLEM PERSISTS AND THE DEALERS WILL NOT REPAIR OR REPLACE PARTS ADDRESSED BY RECALL LETTER.

Incident: June 21, 2006 · Filed: June 22, 2006

DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT HAD BEEN ILLUMINATING FOR THE PAST 5 MONTHS. A RECALL NOTICE WAS RECIEVED FROM DAEWOO REGARDING THE CAMSHAFT POSITION SENSOR WHICH CAUSES THE ENGINE LIGHT TO ILLUMINATE. ON THE RECALL LETTER, THE VEHICLE'S VIN# WAS INCLUDED. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE THE DEALERSHIP, THEY DETERMINED THE CAMSHIFT FAILED CAUSES THE ENGINE LIGHT TO ILLUMINATE HOWEVER THE CAMSHIFT PART ON THIS VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIR BUT AT A COST.