2020 Nissan Leaf

We were asked by Nissan corporate to bring in the vehicle for a safety recall related to the battery. The Nissan dealership updated the battery software then gave the vehicle back to us. However, as soon as we drove away the dash lit up with warning lights. We were on the freeway so we pulled over. It was a dangerous situation. We called the dealership and they required us to bring the car back. So we slowly and carefully drove the car a few miles back to the dealership. In their analysis, they decided the battery must be replaced. However, they no longer make that kind of battery, the stocks were on back order for up to a year, and the software update could not be reversed. So they initiated a buyback. We were not interested in selling the vehicle -- we simply wanted the recall issue fixed -- but we had no choice. The procedure for determining a buyback dollar amount has been extremely frustrating and manipulative. From our perspective, it's unlikely we'll be able to buy a working used EV for the amount they're offering. We have searched and it's difficult-to-impossible. No one informed us this situation was a possibility. We asked for a higher dollar amount, only enough to actually buy an equivalent replacement vehicle. They tell us they require the original Bill of Sale for the vehicle. But we don't have that and can't get it. We sent it to DMV after the purchase. We did get certified copies from DMV at a cost but Nissan insists they must have the original Bill of Sale in order to make us an offer greater than Kelly Blue Book value + 40%, which is insufficient as noted. Obviously, this is an arbitrary demand. If they can offer us one amount without the Bill of Sale, they can offer us any amount. But they refuse to discuss or negotiate.

My 2020 Nissan LEAF is subject to open safety recall 24V700 / R24B2 for a high-voltage lithium-ion battery defect that poses a fire risk during Level 3 quick charging. On [XXX], I brought the vehicle to an authorized Nissan dealer for the recall remedy. Three days later, on [XXX], while driving from New Hampshire to Connecticut, the vehicle displayed a "Service EV" warning and entered a reduced-power (limp) state on the highway, creating a hazardous condition in traffic. A separate authorized Nissan dealer diagnosed a fault in the high-voltage battery pack. The vehicle is now undrivable and cannot be charged. Nissan has been unable to supply a replacement battery and has indicated the vehicle will likely be repurchased because the recall remedy is unavailable. As a result, I am the owner of a vehicle that is undrivable due to an unremedied federal safety recall, with no available remedy and no timeline for one. The mileage at diagnosis was 99,100, within the vehicle's battery warranty period. I am filing this complaint because the recall remedy for 24V700 was not effective in my case, the vehicle failed dangerously shortly after the recall service was performed, and Nissan is currently unable to remedy the recall. I am also documenting the manufacturer's failure to provide interim transportation while the recall remains unremedied. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

The contact owns a 2020 Nissan Leaf. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to the local dealer to be repaired under NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System). The contact stated that 100 miles of using the ED system, the power reduced message was displayed. The contact stated that the battery became disabled. The vehicle was taken back to the local dealer, but the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired after a week. The manufacturer was contacted, and a case was opened, but no further assistance was provided. The failure mileage was approximately 80,000.

SAFETY COMPLAINT / INCIDENT DESCRIPTION Vehicle presented to Dennis Dillon Nissan on June 20 2026 for a factory high voltage battery recall software update intended to fix Level 3 fast charging safety risks. The software update rendered the vehicle completely inoperable by disabling standard Level 2 charging. The vehicle has been held in continuous dealer custody for 58 consecutive days without a working repair. Nissan failed to disclose that the recall patch could brick a functioning EV. Loaner support was revoked prematurely forcing 850 in out of pocket rental costs. Inadequate buyback offer via Morley Companies was rejected. Factory recall update rendered vehicle useless and unsafe to operate.

Regarding Nissan Safety Recall 24V-700 / Campaign R24B2. After the recall remedy was performed on my 2020 LEAF in June I experienced the "Service EV System" message during normal highway driving on 8/1/26. I have an invoice from the dealership that documented logged safety recall code P33ED along with EV system codes P317E-97 and P3180-97. The dealership improperly cleared the recall safety codes, charged me a diagnostic fee, and released a vehicle that is subject to an active safety hold under Recall 24V-700 / Campaign R24B2. The dealership released an unsafe vehicle back to me that remains a documented thermal and fire risk. The Nissan Nissan Safety Recall 24V-700 / Campaign R24B2 states that vehicles that experience this situation after the recall remedy was performed will have the battery replaced or vehicle repurchased.

This recall appointment does not take 2 hours to complete. The dealer quoted me 1-2 days with an inability to offer a loaner vehicle. Several Leaf owners have completed the recall appointment and subsequently been left stranded because the car went into an undrivable mode leaving the owner stranded and incurring towing and rental fees for weeks without resolution. Nissan Consumer Affairs has denied to consider a buyback without taking the vehicle in for the recall notice even though the recall notice successfully being applied does not guarantee the car will not stop abruptly after that visit. Without the recall appointment, Nissan has limited my ability to safely fast‑charge, preventing me from using the full functionality of the vehicle. Nissan is conditioning buyback eligibility on my willingness to undergo the recall inspection, even though the recall remedy has repeatedly resulted in battery failure and sudden loss of power for other Leaf owners. This effectively forces me to expose myself to a known safety hazard in order to qualify for a remedy Nissan itself acknowledges may be required. I am being denied both safe vehicle operation and access to the promised buyback unless I accept a repair that may leave me stranded or without a functioning battery. Nissan recognizes the potential risk of the recall remedy by issuing a second notice dated 6/17/2026 that if the vehicle experiences this battery specific condition within 12 months after the date the software reprogram remedy was completed on the vehicle. Nissan will replace the battery or offer to re-purchase the car. Nissan has also recognized that batteries are rare at this time. I thought that a manufacturer must offer a remedy that was deemed Safe and this does not seem like it’s guaranteeing safety.

My Nissan Leaf was affected in the NHTSA Recall 24V-700. We took it into the Valley Nissan of Longmont, where we initially purchased the car, on 6/19/2026. The dealership checked it out and told us it was fine, so we took the car home that day. We drove it around on 6/20/2026 and received an urgent EV service warning. The car went into turtle mode while we were driving on the highway. We called the dealer, and they said it was the code that indicated our battery was actually degraded. So, they gave us back a car that was unsafe to drive. They weren't able to look at it again til 6/22/2026, but they refused to provide us with a rental or loaner car for the weekend, despite this being our only car, and the recall specifically having a stop-drive order on affected vehicles. On 6/22/2026, we took the car in again, and they confirmed the battery was actually degraded due to the recall. Again, they refused to get us a rental or loaner car. Since Monday, the car has been sitting at the dealer, and as of 6/25/2026, we still have no information about when we will get the car back, if we can get a battery replacement, or what our options are. They have provided us with no information and no alternative vehicle, despite our car being undriveable. They said we could rent a car but refused to confirm if this would be reimbursed as part of the recall. We called Nissan Customer Affairs, and they have also been unhelpful and not provided any further information on a battery replacement or loaner vehicle. We have been calling multiple times this week to no avail. We want to have the battery fixed, but we have heard from other Leaf owners that this can take many months, and this was our only vehicle. We would not be able to have the battery replaced at no cost to us without a provided loaner vehicle. Since this comes as a result of a stop drive order recall, I think that should be provided from Nissan through direct payment rather than reimbursement.

We have a vehicle with a recall, NHTSA ID: 24V-700, NISSAN ID: R24B2, the dealer is unable to schedule a service appointment and the Nissan Corporate Case Manager no longer responds to communications, of which I have sent many. I currently have no known way of getting this safety recall resolved. I called Nissan Corporate Affairs (6/25) and all they could do was send a message that I called to the case worker Jonnita Amonette.

While driving with cruise control set to a certain speed (i do not recall the exact speed it was set to) I pressed the button that lowers the current speed it is set to, but instead of lowring by one mph it raised the speed, pressing again raised the speed again. this continued a few times until i turned off cruise control. The system has been buggy in the past, for example not responding to a button or raising by 2 or 3 mph instead of one (the Leaf goes one by one, not jumps like some vehicles). But this was the first time i saw it actually raise speed in response to a button that should lower it and that seems dangerous. The problem has not been reproduced or confirmed by a dealer or service center. It has not been inspected by anyone since the incident occurred. There were no warning lamps or messages. The overall bugginess has been noticeable for a long time (perhaps always?) but this occurred (raising the speed instead of lowering it) for the first time yesterday.