Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| STRUCTURE | |||
| 11/02/2012 | 1 | ||
| 2000 suzuki esteem. consumer writes in regards to vehicle front end problems and seeks reimbursement for unauthorized repairs. *smd the consumer stated he took the vehicle to a repair shop for front end problems. while there, he was informed a recall had been issued for a frame problem. the consumer then contacted the dealer, and they confirmed, that in fact, the vehicle was covered. the vehicle was then towed to the dealer. the next day, the consumer received a call from the dealer, stating a mistake had been made, and the vehicle was no longer covered under the recall. according to the dealer, the vehicle was not covered because it was five months older than the recalled covered. the dealer informed the consumer the cost for the repair was $603.26 after deducting $300 from the original bill. the consumer stated he never authorized them to perform the work, since the recall was no longer valid. | |||
| 1 | |||
| Consumer hears a clicking noise under the car while driving. *slc | |||
| STRUCTURE - BODY | |||
| 04/26/2012 | 125000 | ||
| Tl -the contact owns a 2000 suzuki esteem. the contact stated that while having the vehicle inspected, she was notified that the sub frame was corroded. the vehicle was taken to a dealer who stated that the sub frame needed to be replaced. the manufacturer was made aware of the failure and did not offer any assistance. the vehicle was not repaired. the failure and current mileages were 125,000. kmj | |||
| 04/26/2012 | 125000 | ||
| Tl -the contact owns a 2000 suzuki esteem. the contact stated that while having the vehicle inspected, she was notified that the sub frame was corroded. the vehicle was taken to a dealer who stated that the sub frame needed to be replaced. the manufacturer was made aware of the failure who did not offer any assistance. the vehicle was not repaired. the failure and current mileage was 125,000. kmj | |||
| 04/26/2012 | 125000 | ||
| Tl -the contact owns a 2000 suzuki esteem. the contact stated that while having the vehicle inspected she was notified that the sub frame was corroded. the vehicle was taken to a dealer who stated that the sub frame needed to be replaced. the manufacturer was made aware of the failure who did not offer any assistance. the vehicle was not repaired. the failure and current mileage was 125,000. pm | |||
| STRUCTURE - FRAME AND MEMBERS | |||
| 06/10/2010 | 96000 | ||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2000 suzuki esteem. while driving at approximately 15 mph a loud grinding noise was heard. while pulling over the grinding noise got more severe and the vehicle was parked. the vehicle was then towed to an independent mechanic where the contact was informed the front k frame was severely rotted and the left lower control arm ripped through the main frame. the vehicle has not been serviced. the failure and current mileages were 96,000. sm. | |||
| 11/22/2009 | 96000 | 1 | |
| I was a licensed mechanic for many years with a lot of expertise. i bought my daughter a 2000 suzuki esteem two years ago. we live in michigan and i bought this particular car because it was from virginia and was immaculate not like the cars from the rust belt here in michgan. she was driving the car and it all of a sudden, violently and without warning pulled very hard. she called me i told her to stop the car and let me inspect it. she got it to a safe area and also told me the passenger side wheel was bent in. i inspected it and immediately noticed the cross frame that supports the two a frames to the subframe of the car had completed rusted out and detached on the passenger side and was almost gone on the driver side too. all other surrounding metal frames and the car body itself were in excellent condition but this cross frame was very obviously defective and rotted out causing catastrophic failure of the vehicles front suspension and steering loss. again, this particular part is defective to the most casual observer as everything around it is in great condition and when this main frame part fails it has the possibility of tossing the car violently especially at highway speeds. my daughter is an emt used to driving an ambulance at high speed and is an excellent driver. a lesser driver may have had a catastrophic outcome. the car is here and can be inspected. *tr | |||
| 04/28/2008 | 122367 | 1 | 03/01/2000 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2000 suzuki esteem. while driving approximately 10 mph, the passenger wheel went out of the alignment. the dealer stated that the passenger front sub- frame had excessive rust. updated 05/20/08 | |||
| 07/23/2007 | 80000 | 1 | |
| I was driving my 2000 suzuki esteem home from uptown with my sister and 8-year-old daughter in the car when a noise which was faint over the last couple of weeks grew quickly louder and all of a sudden my car jerked to the right, practically out of my hands. i grasped the steering wheel as hard as i could just to keep the vehicle on the road. i was only traveling about 20-25 mph. i fought the difficult steering long enough at a very slow speed to get the car to my sister's house. i parked the car there and called my husband at work to explain what had happened and to come pick me up. as i exited the car, i noticed the right front (passenger's) wheel was shoved clear back almost into the back of the fender well. when my husband and a colleague of his from work stopped by later, they crawled under the vehicle to assess what the problem was. to his astonishment, the front frame section of the car had rusted through enough to crack and crumple backwards far enough to allow the wheel to move into the fender well. he said that i was very lucky i was not on the highway doing 55-60 mph, because the speed could have been enough to throw the tire back into the fender well hard enough to lock the one front tire, causing the car to lose control, spin sideways and possibly flip over, killing all three of us. it was only by the grace of god that we were traveling at a slow speed in a remote area where no other cars were around to interact with at the time. the car is currently at my sister's house awaiting a decision on what to do with it. a seven-year-old car with an average of less than 12,000 miles per year on it should not have a frame rusted through long before the body shows any signs of significant rust. i just had a full brake job done on the vehicle and thought that something was wrong with them still. suzuki should recall these vehicles to install a sturdier frame in the front section, before someone does get killed.*jb | |||