← New search

2013 Buick Regal

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2013 Buick Regal do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 29.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Regal years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

62 reports with mileage · 29 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 37 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 36 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 9 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

6 crash reports2 fire reports4 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

37 reports
Clear category filter
42,000 miles · Jan 5, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The contact owns a 2013 Buick Regal. The contact stated that the front driver's side headlight was replaced by the dealer six years ago. The contact stated that the front passenger's side front headlight was inoperable and replaced three years ago; however, the contact stated that the front driver's and passenger's side headligh…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2013 Buick Regal. The contact stated that the front driver's side headlight was replaced by the dealer six years ago. The contact stated that the front passenger's side front headlight was inoperable and replaced three years ago; however, the contact stated that the front driver's and passenger's side headlights have since become inoperable due to heavy condensation. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the vehicle was diagnosed with failed front driver's and passenger's headlights due to condensation. The contact was informed that the driver's and passenger's side headlights needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 42,000.

NHTSA ODI #11563741

Mileage unknown · Jul 21, 2023
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

There is condensation and moisture present inside the high definition front headlight assemblies, which causes the headlight illumination to be diminished and created a visibility hazard while driving at night. The vehicle was taken to the Ganley Chevrolet dealership who diagnosed that the front headlight assemblies were fault…

Read full complaint

There is condensation and moisture present inside the high definition front headlight assemblies, which causes the headlight illumination to be diminished and created a visibility hazard while driving at night. The vehicle was taken to the Ganley Chevrolet dealership who diagnosed that the front headlight assemblies were faulty and needed to be replaced. The cost to replace both is about $3,000. Then I went to Damper's Automotive of Cleveland Ohio for a second opinion and after replacing the bulb in the passenger side headlight, the bulb immediately blew. Based on complaints from other customers this is a known issue on low and high mileage vehicles of the same make and model. It's a astronomical cost to replace these assemblies and they could go out at any time while driving due to the trapped moisture and-or electrical wiring exposed behind the headlight.

NHTSA ODI #11533622

Mileage unknown · Mar 23, 2023
Electrical SystemEngineExterior Lighting

Left Headlamp Assembly and Driver’s Window Regulator were replaced under Warranty and now need replacing again! Trim Strips were replaced under Warranty because they were rusting and now they are all rusty again! Electrical System now blows fuses. 2103 Buick Regal Turbo just reached 60,000 miles. HOW MANY TIMES WILL I HAVE TO S…

Read full complaint

Left Headlamp Assembly and Driver’s Window Regulator were replaced under Warranty and now need replacing again! Trim Strips were replaced under Warranty because they were rusting and now they are all rusty again! Electrical System now blows fuses. 2103 Buick Regal Turbo just reached 60,000 miles. HOW MANY TIMES WILL I HAVE TO SPEND $2,000 TO FIX THE FAULTY LEFT HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY WHICH WAS GOING ON IN 2011 & 2012? There’s Complaints all over online!!!! I haven’t been able to go out at night for 6 months because of no front headlight!!!!! I have been to 3 Buick Dealers and they all have no idea how long this $2K light assembly will last because it should have been recalled!!! The lastest Buick Dealer was trying to steal my vehicle by saying the “Check Engine” light indicated that I am going to have all kinds of problems with my turbo or engine (he wasn’t sure what it was) and that my car was not worth keeping!!! I should get a new car! I asked him how much to take care of the engine problems and he said $3,500. So with the supposed engine problem & headlamp, that’s $5K. I SHOULD BUY A NEW CAR PER DIXIE BUICK IN FORT MYERS, FL!! The other Dealerships said it was likely just a sensor since the car was not running rough and there was no hurry to have the “Check Engine” Light looked at by their mechanics!!! They felt waiting 2 weeks until they could schedule an appointment for me was fine. BUICK NEEDS TO RECALL THEIR LEFT HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY WHICH WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM YEARS BEFORE MANUFACTURING THEIR 2013 REGALS AND GET RID OF THEIR SLEAZY RIPOFF SERVICE REP’S!!!

NHTSA ODI #11513462

Mileage unknown · Mar 6, 2023
Exterior LightingUnknown Or Other

Left Headlamp Assembly and Driver’s Window Regulator were replaced under Warranty and now have reoccurred and both need replacing again. My car just reach 60K miles. This began 6 months ago so I haven’t been able to drive at night or during storms nor crack my window to talk to strangers. I am a Realtor and feel my safety is …

Read full complaint

Left Headlamp Assembly and Driver’s Window Regulator were replaced under Warranty and now have reoccurred and both need replacing again. My car just reach 60K miles. This began 6 months ago so I haven’t been able to drive at night or during storms nor crack my window to talk to strangers. I am a Realtor and feel my safety is at risk. This headlight problem was going on in 2011 & 2012 yet Buick continued to use this headlamp assembly, knowing it fills with moisture then blows the bulb & fuse. With all the online Complaints, I am shocked that our government has not forced Buick to do a recall. I could kill someone or hit something with only one headlight!!!! Very concerned when my 4-year-old grandson is in my car too! Both problems are on the driver’s side and both keep reoccurring. The Headlight Assembly is almost $2K to replace. How many times am I going to have to pay for this reoccurring safety issue that Buick knew they should have redesigned years earlier? I may be reached at: [XXX] INFORMATION Redacted PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).

NHTSA ODI #11510447

Mileage unknown · May 6, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Both headlights have condensation and are not working.

NHTSA ODI #11463575

Mileage unknown · Apr 12, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Condensation in drivers headlight caused headlight malfunction. I have seen multiple posts regarding this issue that have not been addressed. Serious safety issue. No warning lights or indicators tell you light has malfunctioned either.

NHTSA ODI #11460474

Mileage unknown · Jun 28, 2021
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

CONDENSATION IN DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT NOW HEADLIGHT WILL NOT WORK BOUGHT A NEW 112.00 BULD AND STILL DOESNT WORK. LOOKED ISSUE UP ON INTERNET AND FOUND HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINTS

NHTSA ODI #11422551

90,560 miles · Mar 31, 2021
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

MY DRIVER'S SIDE HEADLIGHT IS OUT, CONDENSATION INSIDE THE HEADLIGHT AS WELL. BOUGHT $106.00 HALOGEN REPLACEMENT BULB AND LIGHT STILL ISN'T WORKING. AFTER LOOKING FOR OTHERS WITH THE SAME ISSUE I SEE THIS THERE IS COMPLAINTS AND RECALL FOR "SOME" MODELS OF THE 2013 BUICK REGAL (TURBO PREMIUM 3) SPECIFICALLY BY CHECKING MY VIN FO…

Read full complaint

MY DRIVER'S SIDE HEADLIGHT IS OUT, CONDENSATION INSIDE THE HEADLIGHT AS WELL. BOUGHT $106.00 HALOGEN REPLACEMENT BULB AND LIGHT STILL ISN'T WORKING. AFTER LOOKING FOR OTHERS WITH THE SAME ISSUE I SEE THIS THERE IS COMPLAINTS AND RECALL FOR "SOME" MODELS OF THE 2013 BUICK REGAL (TURBO PREMIUM 3) SPECIFICALLY BY CHECKING MY VIN FOR THE RECALL. OBVIOUSLY HAVING THE EXACT SAME ISSUE OTHER REGAL MODELS OF SAME YEAR WERE RECALLED FOR.

NHTSA ODI #11405891

70,000 miles · Mar 11, 2021
Exterior Lighting

DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY AMASSES OUNCES OF WATER / CONDENSATION CAUSING BULB AND BALLAST FAILURES - I'VE REMOVED THE ASSEMBLY TWICE TO REPLACE THE BALLAST AND BULBS COSTING $100.00 PER ATTEMPT ONLY TO HAVE TO REPLACE THEM AGAIN WITHIN A WEEK. PASSENGER SIDE IS DRY AND CRYSTAL CLEAR - ABSOLUTELY A DEFECTIVE PART AND IT COST…

Read full complaint

DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY AMASSES OUNCES OF WATER / CONDENSATION CAUSING BULB AND BALLAST FAILURES - I'VE REMOVED THE ASSEMBLY TWICE TO REPLACE THE BALLAST AND BULBS COSTING $100.00 PER ATTEMPT ONLY TO HAVE TO REPLACE THEM AGAIN WITHIN A WEEK. PASSENGER SIDE IS DRY AND CRYSTAL CLEAR - ABSOLUTELY A DEFECTIVE PART AND IT COSTS OVER A $1,400.00 A SIDE. DRIVING WITH A SINGLE HEADLIGHT IS ILLEGAL AND DANGEROUS. GM IS WELL AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND REFUSES TO ADDRESS IT.

NHTSA ODI #11400295

64,000 miles · Nov 17, 2020
Exterior Lighting

MY DRIVERS SIDE HID HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY DEVELOPED CONDENSATION INSIDE THE ASSEMBLY CAUSING A HEADLIGHT FAILURE. THOUGH THE CAR IS A 2013, IT HAD ONLY 64000 MILES ON IT WHEN THE CONDITION OCCURRED. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A MANUFACTURING DEFECT SINCE THERE HAS BEEN NO IMPACT TO THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY AND NO VISIBLE BREAK IN THE SEAL.

NHTSA ODI #11375104

Official recalls

6

26V113000 · Suspension:rear

Feb 26, 2026

General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2012–2013 Buick Regal Turbo and GS trim-level vehicles that were sold or ever registered, in Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, or Wisconsin. The rear suspension toe links may have received improper corrosion protection, which can result in rear toe link fracture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Rear toe link fracture can cause a loss of vehicle control, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will replace the rear suspension toe links and adjuster fasteners, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed April 3, 2026. Owners may contact Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300. GM's number for this recall is N252537580. This recall expands previous NHTSA recall numbers 20V764, 21V633, and 21V00F.

21V00F000 · Suspension:rear

Dec 22, 2021

General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2010-2013 Buick Lacrosse, 2012-2013 Buick Regal, and 2013 Chevrolet Malibu vehicles sold or ever registered in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, or Wisconsin. These vehicles may have rear toe links that received an improper amount of electrocoating (e-coat) corrosion protection, which could cause the e-coat to become brittle and break away when contacted by road debris. Over time, the e-coat may chip away, exposing the metal toe link and making it more susceptible to corrosion. Corrosion may eventually cause the toe link to thin and ultimately fracture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A rear toe link fracture may reduce the driver's ability to control the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will replace the rear suspension toe links and adjuster fasteners, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 27, 2022. Owners may contact Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300 or Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is N212346640. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recalls 20V-764 and 21V-633.

21V633000 · Suspension:rear

Aug 12, 2021

General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2013 Buick Regal, Chevrolet Malibu, and Buick Lacrosse vehicles sold or ever registered in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, or Wisconsin. These vehicles may have rear toe links that received excessive electrocoating (e-coat) corrosion protection, which could cause the e-coat to become brittle and break away when contacted by road debris. Over time, the e-coat may chip away, exposing the metal toe link and making it more susceptible to corrosion. Corrosion may eventually cause the toe link to thin and ultimately fracture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A rear toe link fracture may reduce the driver's ability to control the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will replace the rear suspension toe links and adjuster fasteners, free of charge. Interim owner notification letters were mailed on September 30, 2021. Owner notification letters were mailed on January 3, 2022. Owners may contact Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300 or Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is N212330130.

20V764000 · Suspension:rear

Dec 21, 2020

General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2012-2013 Buick Regal, 2013 Chevrolet Malibu, and 2010-2013 Buick Lacrosse vehicles sold or ever registered in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, or Wisconsin. These vehicles may have rear toe links that received excessive electrocoating (e-coat) corrosion protection, which could cause the e-coat to become brittle and break away when contacted by road debris. Over time, the e-coat may chip away, exposing the metal toe link and making it more susceptible to corrosion. Corrosion may eventually cause the toe link to thin and ultimately to fracture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A rear toe link fracture may reduce the driver's ability to control the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will replace the rear suspension toe links and adjuster fasteners free of charge. Parts are not currently available. Owners were mailed an interim notification on January 27, 2021, and April 15, 2021. A third notification was mailed on August 19, 201. Owners may contact Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300 or Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is N202308930.

13V173000 · Electrical System

May 6, 2013

General Motors (GM) is recalling certain model year 2012 and 2013 Buick LaCrosse and Regal, and model year 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco vehicles equipped with eAssist. These vehicles may have a condition in which the Generator Control Module (GCM) may not function properly. This could cause a gradual loss of battery charge and the illumination of the malfunction indicator light.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the vehicle is continued to be driven, the engine may stall and/or the vehicle may not start. In addition, there may be a burning or melting odor, smoke, and possibly a fire in the trunk.

Remedy: GM will notify owners and dealers will test the GCM and replace it, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began on June 11, 2013. Owners may contact GM at 1-800-521-7300. GM's recall campaign number is 13136.

12V484000 · Exterior Lighting:turn Signal

Oct 4, 2012

General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 2011-2013 Buick Regal and model year 2013 Chevrolet Malibu vehicles. These vehicles are equipped with two turn signal bulbs in each front turn signal. If one of the two front turn signal bulbs burn out in either front turn signal lamp, there is no indication to the driver. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the driver is not aware that a turn signal is not functioning properly, the driver may continue to drive the vehicle. If half of a front turn signal is not illuminating, other driver's may not be aware that the affected vehicle is turning, thereby increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: GM will notify owners, dealers will update the body control module software, free of charge. The recall began in September 2014. Owners may contact Buick at 1-800-521-7300 or Chevrolet at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is 12212.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

2

AQ14001 · Sands Chevrolet/hybrid System Fire/stall

Opened May 2, 2014 · Closed May 22, 2016

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System

NHTSA opened AQ14-001 to determine whether Sands Chevrolet of Surprise, Arizona complied with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 (Safety Act) and its implementing regulations. The Safety Act requires, among other things, that a manufacturer notify its dealers of defects related to motor vehicle safety and non-compliances with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and, in turn, that a dealer not sell and deliver a new vehicle subject to a recall unless the recall remedy has been performed (49 U.S.C. ?? 30112(a), 30120(i)).NHTSA issued an information request (IR) letter to Sands Chevrolet on May 5, 2014.Sands Chevrolet responded to this request on May 22, 2014.To ensure NHTSA?s information request encompassed all possible reference codes for General Motors recall 13V-173, NHTSA issued another IR letter to Sands Chevrolet on June 8, 2015.Again, a response letter was received on June 9, 2015.NHTSA?s investigation indicated that Sands Chevrolet did sell and deliver recalled vehicles that did not have the recall remedy completed at the time the vehicles were delivered to the customers.NHTSA therefore concluded that Sands Chevrolet was liable for civil penalties for violations of the Safety Act, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. ? 30165.Under a Settlement Agreement dated March 24, 2016, Sands Chevrolet represented that it improved its processes to verify that it checks every vehicle for recalls prior to delivery to the purchaser and that it has not sold and delivered any unremedied new motor vehicles since June 9, 2015.Sands Chevrolet also represented that it now also checks for open recalls on every customer vehicle brought in for service, and that it checks for open recalls on every used trade-in vehicle, regardless of make or model, and takes steps to have all used trade-in vehicles repaired prior to retail sale. Sands Chevrolet admitted to violating the law and must pay civil penalties in the amount of $40,000.This Audit Query is closed.

RQ13003 · Generator Control Module Fires

Opened Jul 5, 2013 · Closed Jul 22, 2014

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System:traction Battery

On July 5, 2013 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Recall Query RQ13-003 to investigate whether the service procedures utilized in recall bulletins 13136 and 13142 for safety recall 13V-173 were sufficient to identify the safety defect in the subject vehicles.These safety recalls were issue on May 3, 2013 to address the improper function of the Generator Control Module (GCM) in certain model year (MY) 2012-13 Buick LaCrosse and Regal and MY 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco equipped with eAssist.This condition may result in a loss of battery charge, engine stall and/or inability for the vehicle to start.In severe cases it may also lead to odor, smoke and possibly a fire in the trunk.During discussions with General Motors (GM), ODI was informed that the subject vehicles could be separated into 4 distinct build populations, or groups. Group A contained vehicles built from the start of production through 3/19/2012.Group B involved vehicles built from 3/20/2012 to 8/20/2012, group C from 8/21/2012 to 12/31/12, and group D from 1/1/2013 onwards.Bulletin 13136 instructed dealers to inspect and, if necessary, replace the GCM for vehicles in groups A or C.Bulletin 13142 instructed dealers to replace the GCM of any vehicle in group B.Group D vehicles were not recalled.All eAssist vehicles have a Powerpack which contains a BAS (belt alternator-starter) Power Inverter Module (BPIM)/Accessory Power Module (APM) and a 115-V Lithium-Ion battery.The Powerpack is known by GM's Part Description System as the GCM and Battery Module. The BPIM/APM contains 3 multi-layered printed circuit boards (PCBs) comprised of conductive layers separated by isolating layers.Vehicles built within the time periods of groups A and B had PCBs using single isolation layers.Vehicles build in group C had dual isolation layers on 1 of the 3 PCBs, and group D had all 3 PCBs built with dual insulation.Adding dual insulation to a PCB makes it more robust to material and manufacturing variations, and ultimately less susceptible to an electrical short circuit and subsequent failure.Through initial analysis of the GCM failures, GM identified that vehicles within group B contained PCBs that were contaminated during production due to increased production volumes that resulted in inadequate quality control.GM also noted that GCM failures occurred early in the life of the vehicle (typically <1000 miles).Therefore a service procedure was developed to replicate early life failures by subjecting the GCM to high current loads which would cause the identified failure mechanism (copper migration) to occur quickly and reveal any underlying PCB defect.Although groups A and C were built with PCBs containing single layer PCBs, they were built using better quality control, and as the data supports, experienced significantly lower failures.GM advised that for these reasons the two different service procedures were used in the Recall 13V-173 population.In response to ODI's Information Request (IR) GM submitted 234 unique reports related to the alleged problem. It was noted that 197 (84%) of the received reports fell into the group B population.The 2 fire incidents noted were events in which flames were evident and/or damage was experienced outside of the GCM. Both of these incidents involved group B vehicles. One hundred four warranty claims were also submitted in response to the IR, with 96 claims (92%) from group B.It was also noted that none of the claims from groups A or C occurred after the service procedure was conducted, and that the majority of the A or C incidents occurred during the service procedure.Given the data, ODI believes the ser