Bulletins
| Bulletin | Bulletin date | Replacement Bulletin | Item no. | Summary | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES | |||||
| 3214 | 10010617 | Rear door locks inoperative sir lamp radio onstar has poor sound quality. *eh | 12/02/2004 | ||
| LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES - DOORS - LATCH | |||||
| PI-0011A | 02/01/2011 | 10038344 | Ready | 06/15/2011 | |
| PI-0011A | 02/01/2011 | 10038344 | Gm: the front or rear door may not open from the inside or outside handle, the door will not unlock with any method. the probably cause an incorrect installation of a handle component. *rm | 06/15/2011 | |
| LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES - HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE - LOCK | |||||
| 070852003 | 09/01/2007 | 10023223 | Rear liftgate glass may not lock when using remote keyless entry (rke), key fob transmitter or door lock switch, and/or liftgate hatch or liftgate glass may lock then unlock when rear liftgate glass button is depressed (reposition lock cyl | 11/02/2007 | |
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES | |||
| 10/12/2010 | 101000 | ||
| In june of 2007 i could not close either of the rear doors on my vehicle. they failed approximately two hours apart. i was transporting two grand children at the time. thank heaven they were young enough to require car seats. we were at the mercy of strangers on the highway. with donated rope to secure the doors we made it home. the dealer replaced both door lock assemblies. i paid $125 for labor only. the dealer must have replaced the door lock assemblies with the same faulty part. on 10/12/10 the left rear door failed again! after tying the door and using duct tape to secure it i drove the 30 miles to the nearest dealer. although i had to pay $295.35 to replace the left rear door lock assembly the dealer was able to do it immediately. i am now carrying rope and duct tape in anticipation of failure of the right rear door lock. my vehicle is well taken care of. maintenance is followed religiously. (there is nothing in the manual to indicate door locks should be checked. lubricated but not checked for possible failure.) these failures are in no way my responsibility. this is a faulty design that can very well end in injury. i would have assumed that gm would have been concerned and if not issue a recall take responsibility for the defective locks. have dealer service departments check these locks when vehicles are brought in for normal maintenance. not only do they not take responsibility they actually replace the locks with the same lock assembly that is doomed for failure. | |||
| LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES - DOORS - LATCH | |||
| 07/01/2006 | 2 | ||
| 2005 gmc envoy rear door locks do not stay latched. consumer states that the latches were replaced in 2006 and now the locks are defective. dealer told the him that the locks did not work and made him pay $100 to tell him that. *kb | |||
| 12/17/2007 | 2 | 08/18/2005 | |
| Left and right rear door locks will not remain latched, whether locked or unlocked. these latches were replaced in july 2006 and the replacement locks are now defective as well. van devere dealership in akron, ohio charged $100.15 to determine locks will not work; advised me to call gm customer service. called gm customer service 866-790-5600 x 32380 complaint file 71-585106455; robert johnson stated that the service manager of the repairing dealer in july 2006, premier in rittman, ohio would not replace locks because parts beyond 12 month warranty. i explained that this was a safety issue, and explained the danger of defective locks; robert johnson stated there was nothing else he would do. aside from the poor quality, locks are crucial to vehicle safety, and locks on a 2005 vehicle should not fail in 2006 and 2007. moreover, i am appalled that gm would not insist that these be replaced immediately at company expense, considering the safety risk and embarrassing lack of quality. *tr | |||