My Claim vs. Tom Benner vs. Nissan Motors

  • Review this case.
  • Propose your solution.
  • Win the reward (500 pts)

Complaint(s) Involved (3) Hide

Bad Business Practices
  • Poor quality

Claimant's opinion: There is a existing problem with the rear differentials on the 2005 Titan and you cant buy the parts you have to buy the whole rear differential 4,000.00

Problem With A Product
  • Product is defective
"I Just Feel Ripped Off."

Claimant's opinion: Again Nissan is the only one who wont sell parts for the rear end they make you buy the whole assembly. Instead of a couple hundred dollars it is 4,000.00

View Nissan North America Inc's response

Claimant's opinion:

The rear differential went out on my 2005 Nissan Titan and when the mechanic calls all Nissan garages they won't sell just the gears needed they tell us that you have to buy the whole assembly and it is 4,000.00 My mechanic says any other company you can buy just the parts but Nissan will not allow it. How can they be allowed to do this ? The part would be a couple hundred dollars if they sold it that way. How can they expect people to have that kind of money laying around, plus Nissan knows there is trouble with the rear differentials on the 2005 Titan but are not willing to do anything about it now. The truck only has 102,000 miles on and has never towed anything or hauled heavy weight, just used to get back and forth to work. So they know of an existing problem but continue to price gouge the public and there is nothing we can do about it.

What Claimant Wants

  • Claimant agrees to resolve this matter under the following proposed terms of settlement.
  • Status: In Negotiation
    This claim has posted for public comment and negotiation. It will remain posted until resolved to the claimant's satisfaction. Suggest a resolution to help these parties reach a settlement.
  • Nissan North America Inc is asked to agree and settle or make a good-faith counteroffer, offer a rebuttal, or request additional information.
Just make me happy!
Claimant invites Nissan North America Inc to make a fair offer to resolve this complaint (subject to acceptance by claimant).
What By When How Much
1. Other – Copy claim to regulators Apr 27, 2016 $14.99
2. Other – Pay for claim posting cost Apr 27, 2016 $7.99
3. Other – Physical delivery charges Apr 27, 2016 $2.99
Cash total : TBD

Response from Nissan North America Inc Hide

  • Nissan North America Inc to claimant
  • Status: Rejected
    Respondent has rejected claimant's terms. This claim will remain posted until mutually acceptable terms are agreed to.
The claimant's settlement terms were rejected with the following explanation:
  • ""

This claim will remain posted until resolved.

Additional Communication Between Claimant and Nissan North America Inc View

Help resolve this case. Earn negotiation points. See how it works.

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ABOUT THIS CLAIM Hide

The PeopleClaim community includes volunteers who are passionate about justice – consumer advocates, legal professionals, people with knowledge of specific industries and trades, and anyone who has useful suggestions to help disputing parties resolve a case.
  • Show:
  • Sort by:
  • My Solution: Would like to see Nissan explain why gears etc. aren't available
  • Contributed by Fran F. Paralegal - On: 10/04/2016

  • Parts for differentials (gears etc.) are quite commonly available for other cars. I believe the OP's complaint is that he had to buy the full differential assembly rather than buying just the bits that were broken. $4,000 is a lot to spend on a 2005 truck, especially if he'd have only been in the hole for a few hundred dollars with any other make of truck.

    The 2005 Nissan Titan rear differential seems to be a common problem. I googled it and LemonLaw shows tons of complaints.

    I was interested in the expert comments from Joseph H and Nissan, but I think that Nissan could do more to explain why they chose to make only a full assembly available rather than component parts. If repair standards (as mentioned by Joseph H) are an issue, I'd like to know that and also know what failures were anticipated or experienced for parts-only repairs.

    As I look at replacing my current car, I have mixed feelings on Nissan's response. It's good to see that Nissan is following the discussion and keeping tabs on what its customers are experiencing, but I'm also now a little wary about potential large bills for any Nissan car I consider buying. I always buy new and then keep cars for a long time, so longevity and annual cost of ownership is important to me.

How would you rate this solution?
  • Unfair
  • 0
  • Very Fair
-5
5
  • Comment: Contributed by Jim W., Atip Intern, Occasional Contributor - On: 10/03/2016
  • Joseph H's question and comment bring up some key points.  It's valuable to get insight into this situation from someone with inside knowledge and long experience.   (Small point:  I would classify this not so much a solution as necessary questions before a recommendation can be made for what a settlement ought to be.)

    The claimant says his mechanic singled out Nissan as being alone in its adherence to the full-assembly-replacement approach – which, if accurate, would seem to say that other manufacturers are finding a way to deal with this type of repair that's more economical for owners.  So maybe there's a basic difference in philosophy between Nissan and the others –and it's one that buyers might want to be aware of before making a purchase if they're thinking of long-term ownership.



  • My Solution: Much more repair information is required to resolve this issue. Start with the (4) C's . Complaint, Cause, Correction, and Confirmation of repair. Factual details of each are necessary to make a valid determination.
  • Contributed by Joseph H. Over 30 Years Automotive Aftermarket Repair , Industry Standards & Regulatory Compliance, - On: 10/03/2016

  • Also, automotive repair standards and business practice standards are in play.   Repair standards may indicate that simply replacing some of the parts of the assembly may not provide an adequate/long-term/warrantable repair.  Anecdotal research indicates that when Nissan was repairing differentials on these vehicles during the warranty period, they were replacing the entire unit as well.   That type of repair may provide the best (or only) positive outcomes  Additionally, legal regulations typically require that vehicle manufacturers must be able to provide (replacement) parts only during the term of a warranty.  

    There appear to be no NHTSA complaints/recalls regarding this  repair issue.

    Other questions: Are any "aftermarket" repair parts available?  Is the vehicle owner the original owner?  Has the vehicle owner faithfully followed Nissan's recommended inspection and maintenance intervals regarding the differential?  

    Lastly, when seeking any goodwill consideration from a  dealer or automotive manufacturer, loyalty is generally a high priority.  If little or no maintenance/service work was performed at a Nissan dealership over the 10 years of vehicle ownership, there may be little cause for any monetary consideration.


How would you rate this solution?
  • Unfair
  • 0
  • Very Fair
-5
5
  • Question: Contributed by Jared M. - On: 10/02/2016
  • My question is what parts in question have actually failed, that would only cost $200?


    Jared Monroe

    ASE Master certified Technician.

  • My Solution: Remarkably reasonable query from claimant and remarkably disingenuous response from Nissan regarding Titan rear differential.
  • Contributed by J P. 40 Years In Busines. Curious About Everything, Love Helping People Figure Things Out. - On: 09/28/2016

  • I'm old enough to mourn the days when you could actually repair something and keep using it, instead of being forced to buy a new 'whatever' because the repair cost is so excessive.

    As I understand it, Sweden is set to implement tax breaks for repairing consumer goods so that consumers will be encouraged not to indulge in the throw-away culture.

    Wouldn't it be wonderful if we did this in the US?

    More to the point, it's absolutely shocking that Nissan is apparently aware that there is a problem with this make and model of Nissan and yet has failed to make parts available. As I read it, the customer is more than aware that his vehicle is out of warranty but thinks that replacement, instead of repair, is unreasonable at some ten times the cost of parts. 

    And I agree with him. Nissan's response appears to be designed to make its customer look unreasonable, and he (or she) isn't. Nissan, this is shameful.  It certainly isn't the way to 'win lifetime customers.'

How would you rate this solution?
  • Unfair
  • 0
  • Very Fair
-5
5
4 avg. rating / 1 participant
Reply: by Mr. K. - On: 09/29/2016

We are sorry to learn of Mr. Benner’s continued dissatisfaction with our position.

We understand Mr. Benner is dissatisfied the rear differential was only available as an assembly when repairs were completed by an independent repair facility and we apologize for any inconvenience the situation may have caused. Our records indicate Mr. Benner’s request for financial assistance was reviewed by a Specialist, who determined Nissan would not be in a position to accommodate his request as his 2005 Titan had substantially exceeded the terms of the New Vehicle Limited Warranty, and therefore, he was responsible for all repair costs.

Should Mr. Benner have any questions regarding our position, he is welcome to contact the Specialist directly.

Thank you.

Reply: by Matt M.Retired Mediator - On: 10/03/2016

I'd like to see any comments from mechanics or other auto industry people about how they feel about this design. Anybody have an opinion? Seems to me the claimant has a case if it costs an arm and a leg to fix something that can be repaired on competing products for a few hundred dollars.

Need help resolving a dispute? Learn more.
Invite a mediator to help get your claim resolved fairly.
Important: All information contained herein is the opinion of the posting parties, who are solely responsible for its content. PeopleClaim offers both free and paid services to help consumers, patients, employee, tenants, and others resolve disputes without lawyers or courts, through negotiated online settlement and public disclosure of wrongdoing or unfair treatment.
Claims against parties operating under bankruptcy protection, by law must be processed solely through the appropriate US bankruptcy court. Any claims against this party currently posted on PeopleClaim are available for purposes of public business review only and are not an attempt to collect money or recover assets subject to protections under the United States Bankruptcy Code.

*IMPORTANT: PeopleClaim is a public dispute resolution system, independent of the BBB, small claims court, or other dispute resolution services. PeopleClaim is not a law firm and does not provide legal services, opinions, or advice. PeopleClaim facilitates peer-to-peer negotiation and resolution and crowdsourced input on issues of fairness to help resolve complaints. Users should contact professional legal counsel on any matters of law or regulation regarding their claims. PeopleClaim does not review or evaluate the merits of claims submitted through its site, and users are solely responsible for all content filed in their claims.