1999 BUICK PARK AVENUE Complaints

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 BUICK PARK AVENUE. THE VEHICLE HAS BRIDGESTONE INSIGNIA SL, SIZE P225/60R16 TIRES. THE TIRES WERE PURCHASED IN MAY OF 2004. IN MAY OF 2007, THE FIRST TIRE BEGAN TO SEPARATE AT 45,000 MILES WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH. THE CONTACT WAS UNSURE OF WHERE THE TIRE WAS LOCATED ON THE VEHICLE. THE SECOND TIRE BEGAN TO SEPARATE AT 78,000 MILES IN SEPTEMBER OF 2007 AND THE THIRD TIRE SEPARATED IN THE BEGINNING OF NOVEMBER OF 2007 AT 87,000 MILES. THE TIRES WERE BOUGHT IN A SET OF FOUR AND SHE BELIEVES THAT IT WAS A MANUFACTURER DEFECT THAT CAUSED 3 OUT OF THE 4 TIRES TO SEPARATE WITHIN MONTHS OF ONE ANOTHER. THE DEALER REPLACED THE FIRST TIRE FAILURE AND PAID FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE SECOND AND THIRD TIRES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 45,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 87,000.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 BUICK PARK AVENUE. IN 2004, THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V090000 (FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:DELIVERY). HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND HAD THE RECALL REPAIRED AT 30,000 MILES. AFTER THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN PARKED ALL DAY, THE CONTACT STARTED THE VEHICLE AND THE INTAKE MANIFOLD CAUGHT FIRE. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE SAME DEALER THAT PERFORMED THE RECALL REPAIR AND THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THEY WERE UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE, BUT A MECHANIC AT A DIFFERENT SHOP STATED THAT THE FAILURE ORIGINATED FROM THE ISSUE STATED IN THE RECALL NOTICE. THE VEHICLE IS STILL AT THE DEALER AND HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 60,000. UPDATED 01-14-08. *KB

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 BUICK PARK AVENUE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED FOR THE ANTIFREEZE. WHEN HE CHECKED THE LEVEL IN THE PROPER RECEPTACLE, IT WAS EMPTY. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND THEY REPLACED THE MANIFOLD AND CATALYTIC CONVERTER. THE ANTIFREEZE IS STILL LEAKING. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 40,000.

PLASTIC UPPER INTAKE MANIFOLD FAILED FLOODING ENGINE INTERIOR WITH COOLANT. ENGINE LOCKED UP. VEHICLE OPERATOR WAS ACCELERATING FROM IDLE TO ENTER TRAFFIC WHEN ENGINE LOCK UP OCCURRED, BUT LUCKILY HAD NOT YET ENTERED TRAFFIC. MECHANIC INFORMED OWNER THAT THIS IS A COMMON FAILURE FOR BUICK PARK AVENUES WITH MILEAGE ABOVE 90,000 MILES. REPAIRS EXCEEDED $1,100. *NM

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH ON DRY HIGHWAY ROADS, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SHAKE. THE SHAKING GRADUALLY BECAME WORSE, CAUSING LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER BY A POLICE OFFICER, WHO INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND NOTED THAT THERE WAS A BLISTER THE SIZE OF A MELON ON THE TREAD OF THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE REPAIR SHOP. THE MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE TIRE WAS MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY. THE TIRE WAS REPLACED WITH A DIFFERENT BRAND. THE CONSUMERS SECOND TIRE ALSO HAD TREAD SEPARATION. UPDATED 10/04/06. *JB

1998 BUICK PARK AVENUE SEVERED BRAKE LINES, LEFT FRONT AXLE BROKE DUE TO A CRACKED CRADLE. *KB ***NAR*** WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH THE VEHICLE STEERING FAILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR FACILITY. UPON INSPECTION THE TECHNICIAN FOUND THAT THE CRADLE HAD CRACKED. WHEN THE CRADLE CRACKED IT SEVERED THE BRAKE LINE AND BROKE THE FRONT LEFT AXLE. THE TECHNICIAN ORDER TWO CRADLES FROM TWO DIFFERENT JUNK YARDS. BOTH CRADLE HAD CRACKS IN THE SAME LOCATION AS THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE. NEW CRADLES HAD TO BE ORDERED AND INSTALLED AND THE LEFT AXLE AND BRAKE LINES WERE REPLACE. *NM

1999 PARK AVENUE SENSOR FOR THE REAR WINDSHIELD CAUSED MOISTURE TO FREEZE ON THE WIPERS. *TS THE DEVICE CAUSED MOISTURE ON THE WINDSHIELD TO FREEZE ONTO THE WIPERS. THE END RESULT WAS THAT THE WIPERS WOULD NOT CLEAN OFF THE WINDSHIELD. THE SENSOR CAUSED THE BLADES TO MOVE SO QUICKLY THAT THEY SPED UP THE FREEZING PROCESS. *NM

OUTSIDE DOOR HANDLES ON RF, RR, AND LR FAILED. MECHANISM INSIDE OF DOOR BROKE MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO OPEN FROM THE OUTSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. EMPHASIZE THAT ONLY THE LF DOOR COULD BE OPENED FROM THE OUTSIDE. IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NECESSARY TO USE EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES TO REACH OCCUPANTS. RF, RR, AND LR DOOR HANDLES ALL FAILED IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER (PLASTIC COMPONENT ON DOOR HANDLE CRACKED/FATIGUED). CONDITION WAS CORRECTED BY REPLACING DOOR HANDLES. NO OBVIOUS DESIGN ENHANCEMENTS WERE OBSERVED ON REPLACEMENT PARTS. FAILED PARTS ARE AVAILABLE BY REQUEST.*JB

1999 BUICK PARK AVE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT BELT BECAME STUCK IN THE LOWER RETRACTION SYSTEM. *TS A RECALL WAS ISSUED, HOWEVER THE CONSUMER'S MODEL YEAR WAS NOT INCLUDED. *JB

ON 12/28/2005, THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT BELT BECAME STUCK IN THE LOWER RETRACTION SYSTEM ON OUR 1999 BUICK PARK AVENUE. I ASSUME THE BELT BECAME TWISTED AS IT WAS RETRACTING, BUT I AM UNSURE. THE FAILURE & POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES FOR THIS SEAT BELT FAILURE WOULD BE THE INJURY AND/OR DEATH OF A PASSENGER IN THE FRONT LEFT PASSENGER SEAT. I CALLED OUR LOCAL DEALER (GIUFFRE BUICK) & THEY SAID IT WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY THE FACTORY WARRANTY SINCE IT IS OVER 3 YEARS OLD. TO VERIFY THIS STATEMENT, I CONTACTED BUICK CORPORATE DIRECTLY VIA EMAIL & THEY SAID THE SAME THING. I DID SOME FURTHER RESEARCH VIA THIS SITE & FOUND THE FOLLOWING INFO UNDER THE ODI DEFECT INVESTIGATION SEARCH: NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN NUMBER 00V117000. ALTHOUGH THE RECALL IS FOR 1997 & 1998 IT DID MENTION THE SAME TYPE OF SEAT BELT FAILURES ON 784 OUT OF 55,960 VEHICLES ON MODEL YEAR 1999 VEHICLES. I FORWARDED THE DOCUMENT TO MICHAEL REETZ, CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGER, BUICK CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE CENTER, TO WHICH HE REPLIED - QUOTE "THANK YOU FOR CONTACTING THE BUICK CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE CENTER. WE APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME TO WRITE US IN REGARDS TO YOUR FURTHER RESEARCH INTO THE CONCERN WITH YOUR SEAT BELTS. INFORMATION ON THIRD PARTY WEBSITES IN NOT ALWAYS ACCURATE. THERE IS NO RECALL FOR THE 1999 BUICK PARK AVENUE FOR YOUR SEAT BELT CONCERN." I AGREE, THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY A RECALL FOR MY 99' PARK AVENUE, BUT I FEEL THERE SHOULD BE. *NM