2004 Infiniti Q45

MY LOW BEAM HEADLAMP SYSTEM HAS NOW FAILED AT TWO SEPARATE TIMES, BOTH DURING NIGHTTIME DRIVING. THE FIRST WAS ON NOVEMBER 2, 2009, AT 37,600 MILES, THE LEFT HID BALLAST FAILED; NISSAN REPAIRED THE FAILURE UNDER WARRANTY ALTHOUGH ITS TIME-PORTION HAD EXPIRED. THE SECOND FAILURE WAS AT 47,600 MILES ON DECEMBER 1, 2011. NISSAN/INFINITI CONSUMER AFFAIRS WERE TOLD AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT MILEAGE WARRANTY WAS NO-WHERE-NEAR EXPIRED - BUT TIME HAD - YET, TALKED AS THOUGH THEY WOULD HELP WITH THE REPAIR. THE QUID-PRO-QUO WAS THAT I GET AN INFINITI DEALER TO VERIFY PROBLEM AND COST TO REPAIR. AT MY COST OF $125.88 THE INFINITI DEALER AGREED THE RIGHT BALLAST WAS NOW BAD; COST TO REPAIR APPROXIMATELY $1100. NISSAN CONSUMER AFFAIRS WERE INSTRUCTED (ACCORDING TO CA) BY A HIGHER ECHELON OF NISSAN NOT TO REPAIR. CA DID AGREE TO REFUND MY DEALER COST OF $125.88. CONCLUSION: IN 2004 THIS WAS NISSAN/INFINITI'S PREMIUM PRODUCT. THIS CAR WAS EARLIER REPORTED TO NHTSA BECAUSE THE FORE-AFT POWER FUNCTION OF THE DRIVER'S SEAT FAILED AT 42,170 MILES AND NISSAN WOULD ACCEPT NO RESPONSIBILITY. SURELY THE NHTSA MUST REASONABLY THINK THAT FAILURE OF A DRIVER'S SEAT IN ITS REARMOST POSITION AND TWO FAILURES OF THE LOW-BEAM HEADLAMP SYSTEM COULD EASILY PLACE ANY DRIVER AND HIS/HER PASSENGERS IN A LIFE THREATENING SITUATION. *TR

2004 INFINITI Q45 LEMON THIS AUTOMOBILE HAS AN IN-SERVICE DATE OF 12-17-04, PURCHASED BY ME ON 02-08-08 AT 26,670 MILES WITH 10 MONTHS REMAINING ON THE TIME WARRANTY THAT'S EXPIRED. IT WAS RETURNED TO MAJOR INFINITI ON 09-29-10 WITH 42,171 MILES ^0,000 WARRANTY) AND AN INOPERATIVE DRIVER'S SEAT (NO REAR/FORWARD FUNCTION) FIXED IN AN UNSAFE POSITION FOR ME AND IMPOSSIBLE FOR MY WIFE - (7) INCHES SHORTER. AFTER DIAGNOSIS, MAJOR INFORMED ME THE REPAIR COST WOULD BE $1300 AND THAT INFINITI REFUSED ANY WARRANTY RESPONSIBILITY. I CALLED NISSAN CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND SPOKE TO EMILY WHO GAVE ME A FILE # [XXX] AND TOLD ME A REGIONAL SPECIALIST WOULD CALL WITHIN TWO DAYS, NEXT DAY, SEPTEMBER 30, I CALLED NCA AGAIN AND TALKED TO [XXX], REGIONAL SPECIALIST. SHE TOLD ME I COULDN'T HAVE AN ANSWER ON NCA COVERING THE SEAT PROBLEM UNTIL MONDAY 10-4-10. OCTOBER 1, I AUTHORIZED ORDERING OF THE SEAT ADJUSTER ASSEMBLY AS I HAD NO OPTION SINCE OUR OTHER CAR WOULD BE UNAVAILABLE AFTER MONDAY. [XXX] CALLED OCTOBER 4 AND SAID NISSAN WOULD DO NOTHING TOWARD A WARRANTY REPAIR. MY COMPLAINT: FIRST, AN INOPERATIVE DRIVER'S SEAT SHOULD QUALIFY AS A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT. MY WIFE AND I DRIVE WITH A 9 INCH HEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL AND WITH AN INOPERATIVE SEAT - AS IT WAS - SHE COULDN'T DRIVE WITHOUT PERCHING ON THE VERY FRONT EDGE. WITHOUT A SEAT BELT. I HAD NO OPTION BUT TO REPAIR THIS SEAT OR ABANDON ANY NOTION OF DRIVING OUT OF TOWN. IF WE DROVE OUT OF CELL PHONE COVERAGE AND I BECAME UNABLE TO DRIVE, AS IN AN EMERGENCY, MY WIFE WOULD BE COMPELLED TO DRIVE US WITHOUT THE SECURITY OF ADEQUATE SEATING AND SEAT RESTRAINTS. SECOND, AND ANOTHER REASON MY COMPLAINT, THIS CAR HAS A HISTORY OF ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS: CD @ 28395; CRUISE CONTROL @ 32442; BATTERY@35193; HEADLIGHT BALLAST AND LAMP @ 37694. UNRELATED BRAKE REPLACEMENT @ 36396. A DRIVER'S SEAT SHOULD QUALIFY AS SAFETY-RELATED. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).*TR