2020 Nissan Leaf

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 Loaner support was revoked prematurely forcing 850 in out of pocket rental costs.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.

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.

The contact owns a 2020 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (ELECTRICAL SYSTEM); however, the local dealer stated that the part for the recall repair was not available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact stated that while operating the vehicle, the message "Service EV System - Power Reduced" was displayed. The failure mileage was approximately 43,000.

My 2020 Nissan Leaf is affected by recall R24B2 / NHTSA recall 24V-700 involving the high-voltage battery and Level 3 DC fast charging system (CHAdeMO). Nissan and NHTSA instructed owners not to use Level 3 quick charging because the battery may rapidly overheat and potentially create a fire risk. The recall remains incomplete and the remedy is still unavailable. This issue has existed for a prolonged period and materially impacts the vehicle’s usability, charging capability, long-distance travel capability, and safety confidence. The vehicle’s Level 3/DC fast charging capability was effectively removed or severely restricted due to the recall. Nissan dealerships confirmed the recall status and lack of available repair remedy. The issue was documented during service visits and remains unresolved. The battery system and charging system are available for inspection upon request.

The vehicle is affected by an unrepaired safety recall involving the high-voltage battery during Level 3 quick charging. The recall states that affected vehicles may develop excessive lithium deposits in battery cells, increasing electrical resistance and potentially causing rapid battery heating while Level 3 quick charging. The recall also states that if quick charging continues, a battery fire may occur, increasing the risk of injury. The recall status remains incomplete with the remedy not yet available. Owners are instructed not to use Level 3 quick charging through the CHAdeMO connector until the remedy is completed. This removes the vehicle’s fast-charging capability and leaves the vehicle subject to an unresolved battery safety recall. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. The issue is confirmed by the active NHTSA recall record and manufacturer recall number R24B2 / NHTSA recall number 24V-700.

The contact owns a 2020 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System) however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The dealer was contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The dealer confirmed that the remedy parts were not yet available and referred the contact to the manufacturer for further assistance. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The contact had not experienced a failure.