Last post on Oct 26, 2013 at 6:16 PM
You are in the Nissan Murano
What is this discussion about?
Nissan Murano, Bugatti, Transmission, SUV
#98 of 709 Re: Murano CVT [allykat]
May 31, 2008 (7:26 pm)
first off I dont work for Nissan. and there is no nead to be nasty and be a wise guy if you no what I mean. just trying to Help you guys out. I am not a spokes person for nissan. I am Just telling it like it is I have sum inside information I have done sum digging you no guys resirtch. pleas look at Nissan help.com Under Maranno 2003 the 2004 and up marannos are fine. and they charged you $9000 to put in a new trans they ripped you off big time. it is good you had the worintee. Not every nissan dealer is like this coman I no the cvt is a bit mor Money then your convinshinal 5 speed trans but every Nissan dealer is indapendantally owned so they have no controle over what they do. That is the way it is with most auto manufactors. Put in sintitick trans flewid. best to do this your selfe if you no about cars flush and refill the trans with sintatick flewid. amko will ripe you off also. Pritty shore they are changing the trans for no reason. They just have to replace the tcm trans controle Mojuwall Thankyou for reading Hope I am able to help sum of you guys out Thanks for reading my posting Marco.
#99 of 709 2003 Murano CVT (Transmission)
May 31, 2008 (8:29 pm)
On May 29,2008, I went to the dealership to address one problem (with my car). Before I left, the mechanic found a new problem with my transmission. Keep in mind that none of my sensor light ever came on to indicate that there was a problem with my SUV. The mechanic told me that there was leaking fluid from my transmission case. I was in total disbelief about this situation. The next day I drove it to a Auto Zone. He plug a device to check the Sensor(CK ENG LITE), a code for the "Cam Shaft Sensor", which is affilate with the Timing System. He told me not to drive the car, because I could blow the engine. Now my car is just sitting in the driveway. I can't drive it because the (VDC,SLIP, & CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON).
#100 of 709 2003 Murano Transmission Problem
Jun 01, 2008 (5:07 pm)
Someone asked whether there was an attorney out there who owns a 2003 Murano with this problem? Well, I am it! I have the same problem everyone else has. In October of 2007, when the car had about 75,000 miles on it, I was waiting in bumper to bumper traffic when I tried to accelerate and the car did not respond then about five seconds later, it lurched forward. It did this until I got to my destination. After turning the car off and then restarting, I drove home with no problem. I took it to my mechanic and he thought it was the fuel injector. He cleaned it, and it seemed fine, until about five weeks ago it did it again. I made an appointment to take it back to get looked at, then for whatever reason at work, I googled "2003 Murano, failure to accelerate in traffic" and up popped numerous websites, including this one, that gave me the first indication that it was a defect in the transmission. I filed a claim with Nissan North America, then took it to a dealer to be diagnosed, and it is the valve body in the transmission. It is a defective part that Nissan has known about since at least November of 2004 (and I suspect well before that). I obtained a copy of the repair bulletin that was sent by Nissan to its dealers in early 2005 and it describes the problem exactly and indicates that the valve body needs to be replaced. I was quoted an estimate of $1700 to do this. I have had various discussions with Nissan regarding the fact that I am a litigation attorney and that I fully intend to sue them here in NJ if they do not pay to fix my car. In spite of the fact that they do not consider it a "safety problem" worthy of recall (it's more like they don't want to pay the $ to recall all those cars), I think it is most definitely a safety problem. I have spoken with a transmission mechanic who states that that part should not fail at that mileage and that it is an early failure.
I am going to file a lawsuit against Nissan North America here in NJ for breach of the implied warranty. I am including a count for Consumer Fraud. My theory is that they knew about this problem in as early as 2004, but never notified the consumers of the problem or the potential for it, so as to permit them to avail themselves of the remedy of possibly taking out an extended warranty, or having their cars evaluated to see if the problem could be detected while the car was still in warranty. That to me is fraud. In NJ, a complaint that includes a count for Consumer Fraud must be forwarded to the Attorney General's office. I intend to do that, along with copies of all your internet postings attesting to the widespread nature of this problem. Under NJ law, if I am successful in prosecuting the Consumer Fraud complaint, I will get treble (triple) my damages, plus I will also ask for my attorney's fees (to get paid for my time).
If anyone is at all interested in e-mailing me your detailed story re: your 2003 Murano with your name and address, I will include it as an Exhibit in my complaint (my e-mail is vanessaesqaol.com). I fully intend to litigate this with Nissan until such time as a jury tells me that I have no case. At some point, these corporations have to take responsibility for the products they put on the market, and in particular, products such as a car, which can cause catastrophic injury when they contain a defect such as this. Thanks and good luck to everyone with this same problem. This is my third new Nissan, and my last.
#101 of 709 Re: 2003 Murano Transmission Problem [vanessaesq]
Jun 01, 2008 (5:30 pm)
That to me is fraud.
To prove that it was fraud you would have to show that they knew about the problem when they sold you the vehicle. Your conjecture implies they didn't know about it until more than a year later.
SUVs and Smart Shopper
#104 of 709 Re: 2003 Murano Transmission Problem [tidester]
Jun 02, 2008 (11:06 am)
Tidester: I disagree with the statement that to prove fraud I have to show they knew about the problem when they sold me the car. The NJ Consumer Fraud Statute provides the following constitutes fraud:
"The act, use or employment by any person of any unconscionable commercial practice, deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or the knowing, concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise or real estate, or with the subsequent performance of such person as aforesaid, whether or not any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby, is declared to be an unlawful practice; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall apply to the owner or publisher of newspapers, magazines, publications or printed matter wherein such advertisement appears, or to the owner or operator of a radio or television station which disseminates such advertisement when the owner, publisher, or operator has no knowledge of the intent, design or purpose of the advertiser"
The statute states that the fraud can attach to Nissan's subsequent performance associated with the sale of my car. My argument is that Nissan's obligation to me does not end with the express warranty. There is an implied warranty that attaches to that sale as well, which means that Nissan warrants that they are selling me a car whose systems are fit for the purpose for which they are intended. If they receive subsequent knowledge after selling me the car that the transmission in that car contains a defective or misdesigned part, and especially when that knowledge comes to their attention during a time when the vehicle was in warranty, then they commit fraud when they fail to advise me of this fact. It is a purposeful concealment of a material fact concerning not only the performance of the car, but the safety as well. That is my theory of liability.
Secondly, in the fifteen years that I have practiced law, I have yet to be involved in litigation with a corporation whose "knowledge" of a particular fact comports with the date on an "issued memorandum." In other words, once I get involved in litigating this case with Nissan and I do a document demand requesting each and every document generated by Nissan that in any way pertains to this particular problem, you can bet that there will be ample evidence to demonstrate Nissan's knowledge of the problem WELL BEFORE November of 2004.
#105 of 709 Re: 2003 Murano Transmission Problem [vanessaesq]
Jun 02, 2008 (11:59 am)
I think we can agree that it is an "unlawful practice" and may be "concealment" after the fact. My understanding is that fraud or intent to defraud occur before the fact. In any case, good luck with your case!
SUVs and Smart Shopper
#106 of 709 Re: 2003 Murano Transmission Problem [tidester]
Jun 02, 2008 (12:06 pm)
#107 of 709 Re: 2003 Murano Transmission Problem [vanessaesq]
Jun 03, 2008 (9:21 am)
Apparently they did not fix the issue with the transmission in 2004 as my 2004 Murano with 80,000 miles was diagnosed with the same problem this AM. Pretty much the same estimated costs "if" the whole transmission does not need to be replaced. I barely avoided a bad accident when the engine failed to rev when starting to merge into traffic, then suddenly did rev a second or two later. Between the delay and the surprise of no forward movement it was a close call with on coming traffic.
Having read through the many complaints posted here and having experienced the very real danger from this equipment failure, I would certainly be interested in a legal means of compensation since Nissan is adamant that this is not a manufacturer issue. Assuming what is posted on this site is just a small percentage of actual occurences there should be a large group out there to support litigation.