NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
93 reports82,499 miles · Feb 20, 2015
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 NISSAN QUEST. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE RESTARTED; HOWEVER, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE SOLENOID NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS EXHIBITING SAME FAILURES AS ME…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 NISSAN QUEST. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE RESTARTED; HOWEVER, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE SOLENOID NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS EXHIBITING SAME FAILURES AS MENTIONED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V076000 (ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE). THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 82,499.
NHTSA ODI #10689554
25,000 miles · Sep 19, 2014
TiresWheels
MANUFACTURER TIRES DEFECTIVE/BALD CAUSED LOSS OF TRACTION AND SPINNING. COULD NOT MAKE IT UP THE DRIVEWAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10637596
42,000 miles · Jul 14, 2014
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 NISSAN QUEST. WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN. THE FAILURE CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO CRASH INTO A WALL. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED INJURIES AND THE VEHICLE WAS DAMAGED EXTENSIVELY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AND THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOT. THE MA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 NISSAN QUEST. WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN. THE FAILURE CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO CRASH INTO A WALL. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED INJURIES AND THE VEHICLE WAS DAMAGED EXTENSIVELY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AND THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 42,000.
NHTSA ODI #10610449
26,000 miles · Jan 7, 2014
Tires
THIS IS A FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE TIRES/WHEELS THAT NISSAN HAS SELECTED FOR PLACEMENT ON THE 2012 NISSAN QUEST.THE TOYO A22 235/55/18 TIRES ARE COMPLETELY WORN AT 26,000 MILES.WE DID NOT DISCOVER THE ISSUE WITH THE TIRES UNTIL A THIRD PARTY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE.THE VEHICLE WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION.ALL SERVICE HAS OCCURRED AT A …
Read full complaint
THIS IS A FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE TIRES/WHEELS THAT NISSAN HAS SELECTED FOR PLACEMENT ON THE 2012 NISSAN QUEST.THE TOYO A22 235/55/18 TIRES ARE COMPLETELY WORN AT 26,000 MILES.WE DID NOT DISCOVER THE ISSUE WITH THE TIRES UNTIL A THIRD PARTY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE.THE VEHICLE WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION.ALL SERVICE HAS OCCURRED AT A NISSAN AUTHORIZED DEALER AT THE RECOMMENDED INTERVALS.THE SERVICE GROUPS AT SHEEHY NISSAN AND GRAPEVINE NISSAN DID NOT ALERT US TO THE DANGERS.I HAVE SPOKEN WITH NISSAN REGIONAL CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND ALERTED THEM TO THE CONCERN AND ISSUES SURROUNDING THE RAPID WEAR.IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE NISSAN QUEST IS TO HEAVY FOR THE TIRES THAT WERE SELECTED ON THE VEHICLE, AND/OR THE TIRE IS DEFECTIVE. NISSAN REGIONAL CONSUMER AFFAIRS HAS DECIDED NOT TO INTERVENE, OR ASSIST ON OUR BEHALF.ACCORDING TO NISSAN EMPLOYEE [XXX],NISSAN DOES NOT HAVE INFORMATION ON THE TOYO A22 TIRE,OR KNOWLEDGE OF WEIGHT CHARACTERISTICS&WHAT CONSTITUTES ABNORMAL WEAR. ACCORDING TO TOYO THE A22 235/55/18 TIRE IS A CUSTOM PART MANUFACTURED TO NISSAN SPECS.AFTER CONDUCTING AN INTERNET SEARCH THERE ARE MANY MENTIONS OF NISSAN QUEST TIRES WEARING EARLY.MY BELIEF IS THAT THE TOYO TIRE DOES NOT MATCH THE VEHICLE WEIGHT, OR THE TIRE IS DEFECTIVE. THE RAPID WEAR EXPERIENCED WITH THESE TIRES TIRES CAN JEOPARDIZE THE SAFETY OF THE PASSENGERS&MOTORISTS. AN ADDITIONAL COMPLAINT TO NISSAN IS BEING FILED STATING THAT THE TIRE IS NOT ROBUST ENOUGH FOR THE VEHICLE WEIGHT IT IS HANDLING. MY WIFE HAS EXPERIENCED DIFFICULTY IN WET CONDITIONS WHEN HANDLING THE VEHICLE, I BELIEVE THIS IS DUE TO THE ABNORMAL TREAD WEAR. TOYO HAS OFFERED A 35% WEAR WARRANTY ON THE TIRES. NISSAN HAS DENIED ANY WARRANTY CLAIM OR ASSISTANCE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE TIRES. THIS SITUATION REMINDS BE OF THE TIRE RECALLS SURROUNDING THE FORD EXPLORER IN 2000. IT IS MY (SPECULATIVE) BELIEF THAT TOYO OR NISSAN HAVE NOT NOTIFIED THE NHTSA OF THESE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS. THE TIRES MUST BE REPLACED. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5
NHTSA ODI #10558912
26,000 miles · Jan 7, 2014
TiresWheels
THIS IS A FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE TIRES/WHEELS THAT NISSAN HAS SELECTED FOR PLACEMENT ON THE 2012 NISSAN QUEST.THE TOYO A22 235/55/18 TIRES ARE COMPLETELY WORN AT 26,000 MILES.WE DID NOT DISCOVER THE ISSUE WITH THE TIRES UNTIL A THIRD PARTY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE.THE VEHICLE WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION.ALL SERVICE HAS OCCURRED AT A …
Read full complaint
THIS IS A FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE TIRES/WHEELS THAT NISSAN HAS SELECTED FOR PLACEMENT ON THE 2012 NISSAN QUEST.THE TOYO A22 235/55/18 TIRES ARE COMPLETELY WORN AT 26,000 MILES.WE DID NOT DISCOVER THE ISSUE WITH THE TIRES UNTIL A THIRD PARTY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE.THE VEHICLE WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION.ALL SERVICE HAS OCCURRED AT A NISSAN AUTHORIZED DEALER AT THE RECOMMENDED INTERVALS.THE SERVICE GROUPS AT SHEEHY NISSAN AND GRAPEVINE NISSAN DID NOT ALERT US TO THE DANGERS.I HAVE SPOKEN WITH NISSAN REGIONAL CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND ALERTED THEM TO THE CONCERN AND ISSUES SURROUNDING THE RAPID WEAR.IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE NISSAN QUEST IS TO HEAVY FOR THE TIRES THAT WERE SELECTED ON THE VEHICLE, AND/OR THE TIRE IS DEFECTIVE. NISSAN REGIONAL CONSUMER AFFAIRS HAS DECIDED NOT TO INTERVENE, OR ASSIST ON OUR BEHALF.ACCORDING TO NISSAN EMPLOYEE [XXX],NISSAN DOES NOT HAVE INFORMATION ON THE TOYO A22 TIRE,OR KNOWLEDGE OF WEIGHT CHARACTERISTICS&WHAT CONSTITUTES ABNORMAL WEAR. WHEN EXPLAINING I WAS RECORDING THE CALL SHE ABRUPTLY HUNG UP. SHE DID STATE THAT THE TIRE WAS SOFT&DID NOT HAVE A WARRANTY. IN ADDITION, SHE STATED THAT NISSAN DOES NOT HAVE ANY RESPONSIBILITY TO THE CONSUMER REGARDING THE TIRES,& THAT THE ENTIRE MATTER IS TOYO'S RESPONSIBILITY.I REQUESTED TO SPEAK WITH A SUPERVISOR & WAS DENIED. I ASKED IF THE COMPLAINT COULD BE REPORTED.SHE SAID THERE WAS NO OTHER MECHANISM TO REPORT THIS WITHIN NISSAN. ACCORDING TO TOYO THE A22 235/55/18 TIRE IS A CUSTOM PART MANUFACTURED TO NISSAN SPECS.AFTER CONDUCTING AN INTERNET SEARCH THERE ARE MANY MENTIONS OF NISSAN QUEST TIRES WEARING EARLY.MY BELIEF IS THAT NISSAN HAS NOT ACCURATELY CALCULATED THE VEHICLE WEIGHT CORRECTLY,&HAS CHOSEN TIRES THAT CAN JEOPARDIZE THE SAFETY OF THE PASSENGERS&MOTORISTS. AN ADDITIONAL COMPLAINT FOR TOYO IS BEING FILED STATING THAT THE TIRE IS NOT ROBUST ENOUGH FOR THE VEHICLE WEIGHT IT IS HANDLING. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10558900
20,000 miles · Nov 30, 2013
TiresWheels
I HAVE 20,000 MILES ON MY CAR AND MY TIRES NEED REPLACING! I PURCHASED IT NEW IN APRIL 2012. I HAVE HAD IT FOR A YEAR AND A HALF. I DRIVE IT CAREFULLY AND HAVE THE TIRES ROTATED WHEN NEEDED. I HAD A FLAT ON MONDAY ON MY WAY TO WORK. THAT EVENING I HAD IT LOOKED AT FOR REPAIR. IT CANNOT BE REPAIRED. THE TIRE TREAD IS VERY …
Read full complaint
I HAVE 20,000 MILES ON MY CAR AND MY TIRES NEED REPLACING! I PURCHASED IT NEW IN APRIL 2012. I HAVE HAD IT FOR A YEAR AND A HALF. I DRIVE IT CAREFULLY AND HAVE THE TIRES ROTATED WHEN NEEDED. I HAD A FLAT ON MONDAY ON MY WAY TO WORK. THAT EVENING I HAD IT LOOKED AT FOR REPAIR. IT CANNOT BE REPAIRED. THE TIRE TREAD IS VERY LOW. THEY ARE BRIDGESTONE TURANZA. I BOUGHT A VAN BECAUSE I'M DRIVING CHILDREN AROUND FREQUENTLY. WHY COULDN'T NISSAN PUT BETTER TIRES ON THIS VEHICLE? WHEN YOU BUY A NEW CAR, YOU ASSUME THAT YOU WON'T HAVE TO REPAIR ANYTHING FOR SEVERAL YEARS. NOW I HAVE TO BUY A NEW SET OF TIRES AT CHRISTMAS TIME! I AM REALLY UNHAPPY! I CHECKED THIS SITE TO SEE IF THERE IS A RECALL ON TIRES. I CERTAINLY HOPE SO! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10554203
8,700 miles · Jul 23, 2013
EngineService BrakesStructureCrash
MY CAR RANDOMLY ACCELERATED ON 2 OCCASIONS , MAY 30, 2013 AND JUNE 27, 2013. THE FIRST INCIDENT RESULTED IN A CRASH, HITTING A POLE, TREE, AND ANOTHER VEHICLE. 2ND INCIDENT WAS A NEAR MISS, ALMOST HAD A HEAD ON COLLISION WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE. MY 9 YEAR OLD SON AND I WERE IN THE CAR. NO RESOLUTION FROM NISSAN. THEY ARE NOT CONCE…
Read full complaint
MY CAR RANDOMLY ACCELERATED ON 2 OCCASIONS , MAY 30, 2013 AND JUNE 27, 2013. THE FIRST INCIDENT RESULTED IN A CRASH, HITTING A POLE, TREE, AND ANOTHER VEHICLE. 2ND INCIDENT WAS A NEAR MISS, ALMOST HAD A HEAD ON COLLISION WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE. MY 9 YEAR OLD SON AND I WERE IN THE CAR. NO RESOLUTION FROM NISSAN. THEY ARE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY. WANT ME TO TAKE CAR BACK WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531525
6,000 miles · May 27, 2013
Electrical System
I REALIZED THAT I WAS GOING FASTER THAN ALL CARS AROUND ME ON ROAD. UPON CHECKING WITH GPS ON IPHONE AND TOMTOM GPS DEVICE , THE VEHICLE INDICATED 60MPH ON SPEEDOMETER, BUT BOTH GPS DEVICES INDICATED 70MPH. I VARIED SPEED AND FOUND THE VEHICLE IS GOING 10MPH FASTER THAN INDICATED ON SPEEDOMETER AT 30-70MPH RANGE. THE CLUSTER INC…
Read full complaint
I REALIZED THAT I WAS GOING FASTER THAN ALL CARS AROUND ME ON ROAD. UPON CHECKING WITH GPS ON IPHONE AND TOMTOM GPS DEVICE , THE VEHICLE INDICATED 60MPH ON SPEEDOMETER, BUT BOTH GPS DEVICES INDICATED 70MPH. I VARIED SPEED AND FOUND THE VEHICLE IS GOING 10MPH FASTER THAN INDICATED ON SPEEDOMETER AT 30-70MPH RANGE. THE CLUSTER INCLUDING SPEEDOMETER DIED AND WAS REPLACED 1 MONTH AGO. THE NEW ONE IS FAULTY AGAIN OR SET-UP WRONG. THIS IS DANGEROUS! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10513670
36,800 miles · May 19, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS GOING TO GET GAS FOR MY NISSAN QUEST, THE READING SAID I HAD 30 MORE MILES TO GO BEFORE EMPTY. I DROVE AROUND THE CIRCLE IN THE ROAD AND MADE THE TURN ONTO THE ROAD AND MY CAR STALLED. I WAS ALMOST HIT BY A TRUCK BEHIND ME, BUT IT SWERVED OFF THE ROAD TO AVOID MY CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10512735
20,000 miles · May 6, 2013
TiresWheels
I BOUGHT A 2012 NISSAN QUEST ALMOST 2 YEARS AGO. I HAVE 20,000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AND THE TIRES ARE HORRIBLE! THEY ARE BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL 400. THEY ARE FEATHERING AND BALDING. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DRIVE IN THE RAIN OR OTHER WEATHER CONDITIONS. THESE TIRES HAVE BEEN ROTATED EVERY 5,000 MILES...IT IS EXTREMELY FRUSTR…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT A 2012 NISSAN QUEST ALMOST 2 YEARS AGO. I HAVE 20,000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AND THE TIRES ARE HORRIBLE! THEY ARE BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL 400. THEY ARE FEATHERING AND BALDING. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DRIVE IN THE RAIN OR OTHER WEATHER CONDITIONS. THESE TIRES HAVE BEEN ROTATED EVERY 5,000 MILES...IT IS EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING THAT YOU BUY A 30,000 VEHICLE AND HAVE TIRES THAT AREN'T WORTH ANYTHING ON IT! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10510871
NHTSA investigations
1AQ12003 · Gwinnett Place Nissan / Quest Recall
Opened Oct 25, 2012 · Closed Dec 12, 2014
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:software
NHTSA opened Audit Query (AQ) 12-003 to determine whether Gwinnett Place Nissan of Duluth, Georgia 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 noncompliances with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and, in turn, that a dealer not sell a new vehicle subject to a recall unless the recall remedy has been performed. 49 U.S.C. ? 30120(i). NHTSA issued an information request (IR) to Gwinnett Place Nissan on October 31, 2012. Gwinnett Place Nissan responded to this request on November 19, 2012. NHTSA then issued an IR to Nissan North America, Inc. on March 11, 2013. Nissan North America, Inc. responded to this request on April 5, 2013.NHTSA's investigation indicated that Gwinnett Place Nissan sold and delivered 28 recalled vehicles that did not have the recall remedy completed at the time the vehicles were delivered to the customers. Gwinnett Place Nissan did not contest this finding. NHTSA therefore concluded that Gwinnett Place Nissan was liable for civil penalties for violations of the Safety Act, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. ? 30165. Under a Settlement Agreement dated November 24, 2014, Gwinnett Place Nissan paid compromised civil penalties in the amount of $110,000.This AQ is closed.