Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| TIRES | |||
| 06/15/2009 | 135000 | 1 | |
| I bought 4 bridgestone weatherforce plus tires for my 2001 honda accord, size p19565r15. they performed well until the past month when, as of today, 3 of them went flat within a month of each other. in each case, the problem was the valve stem that broke. and it wasn't a small leak. every time, the valve stem was practically torn from the rest of the tire. i was lucky that two of them went flat as i was parking the car, but the last one went flat while i was driving on a highway. it seems a little strange that all 3 would go flat in the exact same way in such a short time span, so i believe it is a defect with the tires. the tires have about 30,000 miles on them, but they are supposed to go for longer than this. now, i'm just wondering when the fourth one will go and i hope it's not when i'm not close to home. *tr | |||
| 12/22/2006 | 85000 | 1 | |
| I bought set of yokohama tires in december 06 from tire kingdom. soon after installation i had a flat tire on trip from florida to new jersey (my home). i found a tire kingdom store in the carolinas, luckily. they replaced the tire valve. in 2 year+ since then i have had at least 4-5-6 flat tires, always the valve, rather than a puncture. i don't know why it took me so long to put 2 and 2 together, but when most recent failure occurred (last week, again valve failure) i did some research and discovered the re-call of dill valves. i called dill to see what kind of compensation i can get. not much ($ 4.00/per incident !!! ) i don't know what i'm hoping to get. i am upset and disappointed about this, but i guess i'm lucky i didn't have serious accident during these many tire failures. does nhtsa have any comment or recommendations? *tr | |||
| 11/15/2008 | 54000 | 1 | |
| Two tires have gone flat, one in november 2008, the second january 30, 2009 due to failure of the rubber valve stems. in both cases the valve stem was split apart near the base at the entrance to the metal wheel rim. the split appeared to be separation of rubber parts, possibly at a seam, rather than a gross tear due to some kind of physical force. the split in the rubber was not visible until the plastic wheel cover was removed. the car was parked in a locked garage when tires lost pressure and there was no evidence of any vandalism or tampering. the valve stems were replaced with new tires purchased at national tire and battery store # 603, 2435 maryland road, willow grove, pa on march 3, 2007. *tr | |||
| 09/01/2006 | 67000 | 2 | 08/31/2004 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2001 honda accord. the vehicle has b.f. goodrich tires. while the vehicle was being serviced for a routine inspection, the tire company discovered that all four replacement tires were cracking inbetween the tread. all four tires were replaced with the same make and brand of tire. approximately 23,000 miles later, the failure recurred with all four replacement tires. the replacement tires need to be replaced at the contact's expense. the tire line and size were unknown. the current mileage was 90,000 and first failure mileage was 67,000. updated 07/10/08. *lj updated 07/08/08 | |||
| 09/09/2007 | 95874 | 1 | 04/15/2001 |
| In april 2001, i purchased new honda accord ex from its dealer, planethonda in union, nj. the car had been sore for the last three years. the car was recalled because of faulty transmission. the faulty transmission affected the engine and brakes. not only, honda should have replaced the faulty transmission, but also the engine should have been replaced. the faulty transmission made the car run in the low gear, damaged the engine. my car engine is burning more motor oil and i have to add one quart of oil for every 700-800 miles. i also had to replace the brakes, rotor/drum,brake shoe pads every 6-8 months because of faulty transmission. my car has the side air bag and abs lights on since 30000 miles. i was advised by nhtsa to send the complaint to nhtsa. please forward the copy of the complaint to the appropriate department, so that they can look into the matter. thanks....... ashok kumar *tr | |||
| 05/14/2006 | 70000 | 2 | |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2001 honda accord with ling long 225/40-18 tires. he stated that he experienced a blow out on the passenger side front tire and noticed cracks on the tire walls of the other three tires. the dealer stated that the place where the tires were purchased was no longer in business. the failure mileage was 70,000 and the current mileage was 85,000. | |||
| 05/03/2005 | 1 | ||
| Blowout on freeway | |||
| 09/25/2004 | 40341 | 1 | |
| While driving 70 mph the rear driver side tire blew out without warning. as a result, the vehicle begin to skid and driver lost control, which resulted in the vehicle rolling over three times. the driver sustained multiple bruises and contusions and damage to her left arm. *jb | |||
| 11/15/2002 | 0 | ||
| All of the above dates and mileage are approximate. i have the information on paper at home. i have also had the hardest time with honda financial services with them calling me and saying that i never paid my monthly bill (last fall), which i did, and then finally they found the check and said "oh, our mistake, it has been here the whole time." and then now, i have them saying that i was in default of my lease because they never had information for my insurance, which my insurance was supposed to send them that information. i checked back with them a week later (today) and they said that they were going to impound my car because my insurance company never got back with them. called my insurance company, and it took 5 mins. to have someone fax over proof of insurance. that was all - was it that difficult??? this car had to have the back brakes replaced after 25000 miles (about a month ago - it was making this awful noise, like rattling chains underneath) - that should not have happened. the back window tinting lifted up after 1 year, the tire blew out on the freeway 1 month after getting it (leased the car aug 2001). the service engine light has come on twice, for no apparent reason. and the srs light was on 2 different times. had it turned off the 1st time. then 1 week later it was back on, brought back to my dealership and they said it was something wrong with the computer system, but they could not give me a good enough explanation. when i first was looking for a car at the dealership, this car was not on the lot where all the other cars for sale were, it was in the back, by the service department. asked the sales rep if the car was in okay condition and he said it was, and there was nothing wrong with it because it only had 10 miles on it - i should have known then. this car is a pain in the behind and it is just a hassle for everything that keeps happening with it. | |||
| 04/19/2003 | 27000 | 1 | |
| While driving 60 mph the steering wheel locked up followed by a tire blowout on the rear driver side, causing the vehicle to roll over, as a result the airbags failed to deploy. the consumer suffered neck and back injuries. *ak the cd player did not always work and experienced static. *sc *jb | |||
| 06/10/2002 | 21844 | 1 | 06/30/2002 |
| When the brakes were applied the vehicle accelerated without warning. *ak the vehicle suddenly accelerated from 0 k.m. to 80 k.m. within 15 feet and became stuck between two houses. the left tire blewout and the air bags deployed and cracked the windshield. the vehicle sustained damage. . engine reved high when taking foot off gas pedal. the dealer adjusted the base idle because it was too high. *ts *nlm | |||
| 05/24/2002 | 1 | 04/01/2001 | |
| I purchased a michelin tire for a honda accord in december 2001. i did not realize at the time of purchase that the tire was 34 months old. tire failed 4 weeks ago (5/24/02) with less than 10,000 miles on it. dealer claims it was due to road hazard. the tire failed in a parking lot at less than 10 mph. there were no road hazards in sight. the dealer would not replace the tire. i had to buy another michelin tire to match the other tires. the replacement tire they sold to me was manufactured at the same time as the original tire--making it 40 months old at time of purchase. i think it is highly unusual that michelin can sell tires that are 3 1/2 years old as new tires. are there any regulations in place that prevent tire manufacturers from selling stock as new when it was actually manufactured 2.5 - 3.5 years earlier? this appears to be a gross misrepresentation of a new product. would appreciate your comments. thank-you. don bintz 702-656-8074 h.p.*ak | |||
| 11/29/2001 | 1 | 12/23/2000 | |
| While driving and without warning, the front passenger side tire deflated instantly which blew out, consumers son pulled over and noticed several severe tears in the tire wall, consumer took vehicle to mechanic and explained what happened, after careful examination by the mechanic there were no signs of a puncture, nail or road hazard, nevertheless the repair shop rejected consumers request for a free tire replacement, and the tire was well within the warranty period, consumer is requesting reimbursement for the tire.(michelin energy mxv4 plus 195/65 r15 rrbl91h).*jb | |||
| 01/24/2002 | 2 | 01/01/2001 | |
| Both front tires bursted at the same time on freeway.*ak (dot number: frg690 tiresize: p185/65r15) | |||
| While driving on highway front right tire continuously loses air, took to dealer. please provide any further information and identification number.*ak | |||
| 10/29/2001 | 07/01/2001 | ||
| Tire failed after 6000 miles (mostly low speed miles). there was no evidence of road hazard. no punctures in tire. manufacturer was unable to provide a valid reason as to why the tire failed. without a valid reason as to why the tire failed i cannot allow my wife to drive the car with bridgstone tires on it. i have paid for four replacment goodyear tires. manufacturer refuses to take the tires back saying that they will only give me one new tire. i have kept the tire in case anyone needed to look at it.*ak (dot number: 4791oep130 tiresize: 205/65/r15) | |||
| TIRES - SIDEWALL | |||
| 02/27/2006 | 34100 | 1 | 02/01/2001 |
| Dt*: the contact stated while driving 70 mph the rear passenger side tire ran flat without warning. upon inspection the tire felt hot compared to the other tires. there was no road debris present when the tire ran flat. the flat tire was replaced by the spare and then driven to the dealership. when attempting to refill the tire it exploded. upon inspection the dealer discovered a split on the inside of the sidewall. all four tires were replaced previously due to normal tread wear. after the incident the blown tire was replaced at the consumer's expense. the tire is a goodyear assurance triple tread. updated 3/17/2006 - *nm | |||
| 1 | |||
| After having vehicle serviced for its 7500 mile check, from that point on, consumer noticed that the left front tire needed air each day, vehicle was taken back to dealership and consumer was informed that there was a plug in the sidewall of the tire and it needed to be replaced.(michelin mxv4 plus)*jb | |||
| 06/11/2001 | 2 | 04/01/2001 | |
| Tires dvelop bubbles on sidewalls, weakening, the tire and may cause tire to pop at any time. *ak (tiresize: 1956515h) | |||
| 1 | |||
| After having vehicle serviced for its 7500 mile check, from that point on, consumer noticed that the left front tire needed air each day, vehicle was taken back to dealership and consumer was informed that there was a plug in the sidewall of the tire and it needed to be replaced.(michelin mxv4 plus)*jb | |||
| 09/01/2001 | 1 | ||
| While traveling approximately 50 mph front passenger air bag deployed unexpectedly, causing loss of control. vehicle impacted a sidewall, causing damage to wheels and tires. please provide any additional information / attachments.*ak | |||
| TIRES - TREAD/BELT | |||
| 08/27/2004 | 37254 | 3 | 08/27/2004 |
| The car was sold with illegal tires. the car was sold in a condition that is not allowable by law. this was done with full authorization and approval by mike harvey honda, and sold and delivered to the customer. this was an illegal act. the customer was also lied to by staff regarding the other remaining due bill items. this vehicle by law should not have been sold in the condition it was in; an allowed to be driven on the roads of california illegally.*ak | |||