IllustrationDRIVER SEAT BELT IS TWISTED AND DOES NOT LAY FLAT ACROSS THE BODY. *JS
2004 Chevrolet Trailblazer
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Trailblazer years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Chevrolet Trailblazer are substantially higher than the model-year median of 87.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Trailblazer 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
880–25K
16325–50K
27450–75K
17675–100K
137100–150K
61150K+
899 reports with mileage · 182 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.
- Electrical System. Review the 627 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 101 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 93 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
56 crash reports31 fire reports47 injury reports
Seat Belts complaints
8 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE DRIVER BECAME DISTRACTED AND CRASHED INTO A TREE. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY AND THE SEAT BELT FAILED TO RESTRAIN, CAUSING THE DRIVER TO BE THROWN FORWARD. THE DRIVER'S HEAD IMPACTED THE WINDSHIELD AND AS A RESULT, HE SUSTAINE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE DRIVER BECAME DISTRACTED AND CRASHED INTO A TREE. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY AND THE SEAT BELT FAILED TO RESTRAIN, CAUSING THE DRIVER TO BE THROWN FORWARD. THE DRIVER'S HEAD IMPACTED THE WINDSHIELD AND AS A RESULT, HE SUSTAINED BLEEDING FROM THE BRAIN. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
WE HAVE A SEAT BELT THAT DOES NOT WORK. IT STOPPED WORKING A FEW DAYS AGO AND SO WE CANNOT GO ANYWHERE AS A FAMILY. THE SEAT BELT IS STUCK AND WILL NOT COME OUT AT ALL. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER SEAT BELT THAT HAS BEEN BROKEN FOR YEARS. EVERYTIME I MENTION THIS LIKE THIS TO THE CHEVY DEALER, THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME AND A…
Read full complaint
WE HAVE A SEAT BELT THAT DOES NOT WORK. IT STOPPED WORKING A FEW DAYS AGO AND SO WE CANNOT GO ANYWHERE AS A FAMILY. THE SEAT BELT IS STUCK AND WILL NOT COME OUT AT ALL. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER SEAT BELT THAT HAS BEEN BROKEN FOR YEARS. EVERYTIME I MENTION THIS LIKE THIS TO THE CHEVY DEALER, THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME AND ARM AND A LEG AND WILL NOT WORK WITH ME. SEAT BELTS SHOULD NOT BREAK. THE PEOPLE AT CHEVROLET SHOULD COVER AT ALL TIMES SOMETHING AS SERIOUS AS THIS BUT THEY SIMPLY DO NOT CARE! DO NOT BUY A CHEVY! *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO INSTALL A CHILD SAFETY SEAT IN THE THIRD ROW SEATING, BUT NONE OF THE SEAT BELTS WOULD SUCCESSFULLY TIGHTEN AND RETAIN THE CHILD SEAT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO HAVE THE FAILURE DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE CONT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO INSTALL A CHILD SAFETY SEAT IN THE THIRD ROW SEATING, BUT NONE OF THE SEAT BELTS WOULD SUCCESSFULLY TIGHTEN AND RETAIN THE CHILD SEAT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO HAVE THE FAILURE DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WERE EXPERIENCING A RECURRING FAILURE IN WHICH THEY WOULD PERIODICALLY BURN OUT. UPON EXAMINING THE HEADLIGHT HOUSING, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE WIRES WERE BURNED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE REPLACED EACH HEADLIGHT APPROXIMATELY THREE TIMES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURES. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 85,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
DRIVER'S SEAT BELT WILL NOT RELEASE. BOUGHT BRAND NEW IN 2004 AND HAPPENED WHILE DRIVING OFF THE CAR LOT. HAS SINCE BEEN REPLACED JUST ONCE, BUT PROBLEM CONTINUED. UP UNTIL 2 MONTHS AGO, SEATBELT WOULD RELEASE SHORTLY, BUT NOW IT HAS BEEN STUCK FOR 3 WEEKS. TRYING TO GET GM TO REPLACE, BUT THEY HAVE JUST NOW AGREED TO PAY 50…
Read full complaint
DRIVER'S SEAT BELT WILL NOT RELEASE. BOUGHT BRAND NEW IN 2004 AND HAPPENED WHILE DRIVING OFF THE CAR LOT. HAS SINCE BEEN REPLACED JUST ONCE, BUT PROBLEM CONTINUED. UP UNTIL 2 MONTHS AGO, SEATBELT WOULD RELEASE SHORTLY, BUT NOW IT HAS BEEN STUCK FOR 3 WEEKS. TRYING TO GET GM TO REPLACE, BUT THEY HAVE JUST NOW AGREED TO PAY 50%. PREVIOUSLY WHEN IT WAS REPLACED IT WAS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE OF THEIRS AND I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO DRIVE IT AT ALL. THIS TIME, SINCE IT IS OUT OF WARRANTY, THEY HAVE NOT MADE AN ATTEMPT TO PUT ME IN ANOTHER VEHICLE OR OFFER TO FIX IT. IT TOOK ALMOST 6 WEEKS FOR THEM TO SAY THEY WOULD PAY 50%. SEEMS VERY CARELESS OF GM CONSIDERING I AM OUT OF THE HABIT OF EVEN REACHING FOR MY SEATBELT B/C IT NEVER WORKS. I HAVE AN APPT. WITH THE CHEVY DEALER WEDNESDAY AND AM GOING TO TRY TO CONTINUE TO PRESS TO GM THAT THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS BUILT AND THEY NEED TO REALIZE WHAT A PRIORITY THIS IS, AND BE THANKFUL THAT I HAVE YET TO GET INTO AN ACCIDENT. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT BELT IS INOPERATIVE. THE MECHANISM THAT ALLOWS THE SEAT BELT TO SAFELY POSITION THE STRAP ONTO THE PASSENGER DOES NOT RETRACT; THEREFORE, THE SEAT BELT HARNESS IS EXTREMELY LOOSE. IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, THE OCCUPANTS WOULD…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT BELT IS INOPERATIVE. THE MECHANISM THAT ALLOWS THE SEAT BELT TO SAFELY POSITION THE STRAP ONTO THE PASSENGER DOES NOT RETRACT; THEREFORE, THE SEAT BELT HARNESS IS EXTREMELY LOOSE. IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, THE OCCUPANTS WOULD NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED, WHICH INCREASES THE RISK OF A SERIOUS INJURY. THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 61,000.
MY SEAT BELT REMINDER LIGHT DOES NOT COME ON WHEN STARTING THE VEHICLE NOR DOES IT CHIME WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR SEAT BELT ON LIKE THE OWNERS MANUAL SAYS IT SUPPOSE TO DO. *TR
I BOUGHT VEHICLE IN OCTOBER 2003. IT IS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. IN THE MONTHS FOLLOWING I BEGAN HAVING ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS . CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WOULD FLASH ON AND THEN WENT OFF AGAIN. THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED CAR STALLED AS WELL. I WOULD BRING IT IN TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY WOULD SAY THAT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICAT…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT VEHICLE IN OCTOBER 2003. IT IS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. IN THE MONTHS FOLLOWING I BEGAN HAVING ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS . CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WOULD FLASH ON AND THEN WENT OFF AGAIN. THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED CAR STALLED AS WELL. I WOULD BRING IT IN TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY WOULD SAY THAT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM, AND THEY HOOKED UP TO THE COMPUTER AND DIDN'T FIND ANY PROBLEMS. I ALSO HAD MY HEADLIGHTS FLICKER WHEN ACCELERATING AND DECELERATING. I HAVE HAD NUMEROUS PROBLEMS WITH MY BLINKERS. I HAVE HAD THE TAIL LIGHT ASSEMBLIES REPLACED TWICE. I RECENTLY TOOK IT AGAIN BECAUSE MY LEFT BLINKER WOULD FLASH MUCH FASTER WHEN I TOUCHED THE BRAKE. ALSO, IF I JUST TOUCHED THE BRAKE THE RIGHT BLINKER LIGHT ON MY CONSOLE WOULD ILLUMINATE. ALSO, IT LOOKED AS IF I HAD MY LIGHTS ON FOR REVERSING WHILE I WAS DRIVING, WHICH WAS EXTREMELY UNSAFE AS OTHER DRIVERS THOUGHT I WAS REVERSING WHEN I WAS GOING FORWARD. I HAVE HAD 4WD LIGHT COME ON AND THEN TURN OFF AGAIN LATER. I HAVE HAD MY MAIN COMPUTER REPLACED TWICE AND MY FLASHER COMPUTER REPLACED ONCE. I HAD TO HAVE MY KEYS REPROGRAMMED TWICE AND THEY FINALLY FOUND OUT TODAY I HAD FAULTY ELECTRICAL WIRING WHICH WAS SUPPOSEDLY CAUSING THE TROUBLE WITH THE BRAKES AND FLASHERS. I HAVE BROUGHT IT IN FOR THIS PROBLEM 3 TIMES IN THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS. I ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE GAS TANK OVERFLOWING EVERYTHING I FILL UP NO MATTER WHAT I DO AND I AM NOT TRYING TO "TOP OFF". ALSO, I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH MY SEAT BELTS AND HAVE THEM REPLACED AS WELL. THEY WOULD LOCK AND I WOULD BE UNABLE TO GET IT ONE TO DRIVE THE CAR SAFELY. I HAD TO DRIVE MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP WITH NO SEAT BELT. OVERALL, THESE PROBLEMS AMOUNT TO A POORLY MADE VERY EXPENSIVE CAR THAT LEAVES ME FEELING UNSAFE IN MY CAR. PLEASE MAKE CHEVROLET LISTEN TO ITS CONSUMERS AND PAY RESTITUTION. WE WERE ALL LIED TO BY THE CAR MANUFACTURER, WHO HAD TO HAVE KNOWN IT WAS PRODUCING AN INFERIOR PRODUCT.*AK
Official recalls
205V198000 · Exterior Lighting:turn Signal
May 5, 2005
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE DRIVER WISHING TO SIGNAL A TURN BY MOVING THE DIRECTIONAL SIGNAL LEVER, (UP OR DOWN) MAY CAUSE THE FRONT MARKER/TURN LIGHTS AND REAR TURN LIGHTS TO FLASH IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO HAZARD WARNING, RATHER THAN FLASHING ON THE DESIRED SIDE ONLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CLEARLY SIGNAL THEIR INTENTIONS TO TURN, CHANGE TRAVEL LANES, OR POTENTIALLY WARN OTHERS OF AN IMPAIRED VEHICLE OPERATING CONDITION INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SUSPECT FLASHER MODULES WITH A NEW FLASHER MODULE DESIGNED WITH SEALED RELAYS AND MORE DURABLE CONTACT MATERIAL INSIDE OF THE RELAYS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 4, 2005. ISUZU BEGAN MAILING OWNER LETTERS ON AUGUST 4, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, GMC AT 1-866-996-9463, ISUZU AT 1-800-255-6727, BUICK AT 1-866-608-8080, AND OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537.
04V527000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
Nov 1, 2004
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, VIBRATION AND HEAT MAY CAUSE THE TAIL LAMP/STOP LAMP BULB TO LOOSEN IN ITS SOCKET. IF THIS OCCURS, THE BULB MAY FLICKER AND EVENTUALLY BECOME INOPERATIVE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AN INOPERATIVE BRAKE LAMP WILL NOT CONVEY THE DRIVER'S INTENTION OF STOPPING TO DRIVERS IN FOLLOWING VEHICLES, AND AN INOPERATIVE REAR TURN SIGNAL LAMP WILL NOT CONVEY THE DRIVER'S INTENTION TO TURN TO DRIVERS IN FOLLOWING VEHICLES. BOTH OF THESE FAILURES CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE TAIL LAMP/STOP LAMP ASSEMBLIES, AND IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THEM. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 22, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537, BUICK AT 1-866-608-8080, OR GMC AT 1-866-996-9463.
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
4RQ17002 · Loss Of Headlights
Opened Apr 24, 2017 · Closed Mar 29, 2021
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:headlights
The subject vehicles are model year (MY) 2002-2009 Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, 2004-2007 Buick Rainier, 2003-2008 Isuzu Ascender, 2005-2009 Saab 9-7X, 2002-2004 Oldsmobile Bravada, 2003-2006 Chevrolet SSR, 2005-2009 Buick Lacrosse, and 2006-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix. This scope includes the Trailblazer/Envoy variants: 2002-2006 Envoy XL/Trailblazer EXT and 2004-2005 Envoy XUV. The original scope of this investigation was expanded to include all vehicles equipped with the subject Headlight Driver Module (HDM). The focus of the investigation was to determine whether actions performed by General Motors adequately addressed any unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety in the subject vehicles concerning the headlights and the HDM that controls them.Under normal electrical load and environmental conditions, the HDM can overheat inside the Underhood Electrical Center (UEC). This can cause the module to fail and result in a simultaneous loss of both low beam headlights and both daytime running lights (DRLs), often with no warning or prior detectability to the driver. This failure can be intermittent or permanent. No other exterior lights are affected. High beams, turn signals, brake lights, and reverse lights are still operational.General Motors addressed this issue with 2 recalls (14V755 & 15V519) and a special coverage program (N172091910). In view of the recalls and special coverage program implemented by GM and the vehicle high beams continuing to operate, ODI has tentatively concluded that the actions taken by GM mitigate any unreasonable risk to safety posed by HDM failure in the subject vehicles.Accordingly, the investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances.The ODI reports cited above are available for review online at NHTSA.gov under the identification numbers in the attached document.
EA07009 · Fuel Pump Module Leaks Gasoline
Opened Jul 10, 2007 · Closed Aug 28, 2008
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump
DURING THE COURSE OF THIS EA INVESTIGATION, ODI OBSERVED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE COMPLAINTS (88%) AND WARRANTY CLAIMS (94%) WERE REPORTED FOR VEHICLES THAT ARE REGISTERED FOR USE IN THE SALT BELT REGION OF THE US.THIS AREA INCLUDES 20 STATES IN THE NORTHEAST, MID ATLANTIC AND THE MIDWEST REGIONS AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.CONSUMERS IN THE SALT BELT REGION REPORTED TO ODI THAT THEY COULD SMELL FUEL VAPORS IN THEIR VEHICLES WHILE DRIVING.UPON FURTHER EXAMINATION OF THEIR VEHICLES, THEY DISCOVERED THAT FUEL VAPORS WERE COMING OUT OF THE TOP OF THE FUEL TANK. THIS CONDITION IS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE RETURN AND SENDER LINES OF THE FUEL PUMP MODULE.WATER AND ROAD SALT COLLECT ON TOP OF THE FUEL PUMP LEADING TO SMALL PINHOLES APPEARING ON THE FUEL LINES.FUEL MAY LEAK AND COLLECT ON TOP OF THE MODULE AND/OR SPILL ONTO THE GROUND.THE DATA EVALUATED UNDER THIS INVESTIGATION REFLECT A RELATIVELY LOW FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE THAT LARGELY ARISES IN SALT BELT STATES.GM HAS EXTENDED THE WARRANTY ON THE SUBJECT COMPONENT TO TEN YEARS OR 120,000 MILES.FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED AT THIS TIME; ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SELECT DOCUMENT SEARCH.
EA04021 · Brake Lamp Failure
Opened Aug 3, 2004 · Closed Nov 4, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
GM STATES THAT SOME BRAKE/TAIL LAMP BULBS CAN PREMATURELY BECOME INOPERATIVE DUE TO MALFUNCTIONING BRAKE/TAIL LAMP SOCKETS.ON MARCH 2, 2004, GM INITIATED A 6-YEAR/72,000 MILE SPECIAL POLICY FOR 989,487 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO INSPECT AND REPLACE THE REAR BRAKE/TAIL LAMP BULB SOCKET ASSEMBLIES.ON APRIL 4, 2004, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE04-032) BASED ON CONSUMER COMPLAINTS ALLEGING BRAKE LIGHTS NOT OPERATING WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED.ON AUGUST 3, 2004 ODI UPGRADED PE04-032 TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA04-021).BY LETTER DATED OCTOBER 27, 2004 GM NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT IT WILL CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA # 04V527) COVERING SUBJECT VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT ALREADY REPAIRED UNDER GM'S SPECIAL POLICY.MY 2004 SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILT AFTER AUGUST 8, 2003 CONTAIN IMPROVED BRAKE LAMP ASSEMBLIES AND ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM DEALERS WILL INSTALL THE IMPROVED BRAKE LAMP ASSEMBLY ON SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILT ON AUGUST 8, 2003 AND EARLIER.THE ACTION TAKEN BY GM IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
PE04032 · Brake Lamp Failure
Opened Apr 6, 2004 · Closed Aug 3, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002-04 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER VEHICLES.GM REPORTS THAT OTHER VEHICLES SHARING THIS PLATFORM AND BRAKE LAMP DESIGN ARE THE MY 2002-2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER EXT; GMC ENVOY, XL, XUV; OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA AND 2004 BUICK RAINIER.COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THAT THE REAR BRAKE LAMP DOES NOT OPERATE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED.THERE IS NO INDICATION TO THE DRIVER FROM INSIDE THE VEHICLE THAT ONE OR MORE BRAKE LAMPS BULBS ARE NOT FUNCTIONING.GM FOUND THAT HEAT FROM THE BULB COULD DEFORM THE LAMP SOCKET, PRODUCE ELECTRICAL ARCING AND AN INOPERATIVE BULB.TO CORRECT THE CONDITION, GM CHANGED THE BULB TO A BULB THAT TRANSMITS LESS HEAT TO THE SOCKET AND CHANGED THE SOCKET TO A THERMOPLASTIC POLYMER TO IMPROVE THERMAL STABILITY.THESE CHANGES WERE IMPLEMENTED INTO PRODUCTION VEHICLES ON OCTOBER 1, 2003.GM IMPLEMENTED A SPECIAL POLICY BY NOTIFYING CONSUMERS THAT IF THEY SHOULD EXPERIENCE A BRAKE LAMP FAILURE TO GO TO THEIR GM DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE CIRCUIT BOARD CONTAINING THE BRAKE LAMP REPLACED ALONG WITH NEW BULBS.THIS POLICY IS GOOD FOR THE FIRST 6 YEARS OR 72,000 MILES OF THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE.ODI WILL UPGRADE THIS INVESTIGATION TO EA 04-021 AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE MENTIONED VEHICLES.