2000 ISUZU RODEO Complaints

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 ISUZU RODEO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE PERFORMED ON THE VEHICLE, THE TECHNICIAN ADVISED THAT THE UNDER-CARRIAGE WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SECOND MECHANIC WHO ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE FAILURE WAS SO SEVERE, THAT IT WAS NOT WORTH INSTALLING REINFORCEMENT BRACKETS BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DRIVABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 124,000. *TR

I WAS TOLD THERE WAS RECALLS THAT COULD CAUSE SERIOUS INJURY, WHEN I CALLED ISUZU THEY TOLD ME THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO ABOUT IT, I TRUSTED THEIR NAME, THINKING IT WAS A SAFE AND RELIABLE VEHICLE FOR MYSELF AND MY CHILDREN, PLEASE HELP ME AS THE UNDER CARRIAGE OF VEHICLE IS COMPLETELY ROTTED!!! [XXX]. I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO TURN FOR HELP, BUT THIS IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND ISUZU WILL NOT HELP ME. I CANT AFFORD ANOTHER VEHICLE AT THIS TIME, BUT I DO NEED TO TRANSPORT MY CHILDREN. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

I BOUGHT THE CAR FROM A FRIEND AND I DID A OIL CHANGE AND THE BRACKET IS RUSTING FROM THE FRAME WHAT CAN I DO. *TR

LOST CONTROL OF VEHICLE WITH NO WARNING ON THE FREEWAY DURING RUSH HOUR .. GENERAL MOTORS / ISUZU / HONDA RECALL SAID IT IS THE BRACKET DETACHING FROM THE FRAME . IT IS NOT . THE BRACKET PULLED A PIECE OF FRAME FROM MY VEHICLE . THE FRAMES OF THESE VEHICLES ARE THE PROBLEM " NOT " THE BRACKET . THE BRACKET IS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION AS WELL AS THE WELD TO THE PIECE OF FRAME WHICH WAS " TORE " FROM THE REST OF THE FRAME . THESE FRAMES ARE COLLAPSING , RUSTING OUT FAR BEFORE THEIR TIME . NHTSA & TRANSPORT CANADA BOTH NEED TO OPEN AN " NEW INVESTIGATION " INTO THE FRAMES OF THESE VEHICLES & WHAT'S IN THEM , PRODUCTION & TESTING OF THE FRAMES . GENERAL MOTORS ALSO DID NOT OFFER ME A FAIR PRICE FOR MY VEHICLE AND TREATED ME IN A TERRIBLE MANNER . IT IS STILL NOT RESOLVED AFTER 1 YEAR & 4 MONTHS , NOTHING HAS BEEN RESOLVED !!! NHTSA & TRANSPORT CANADA NEED TO INVESTIGATE THESE FRAMES ! *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 ISUZU RODEO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR SERVICE WHEN THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT BOTH SIDE MOUNTING BRACKETS WERE CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND CONFIRMED THAT THE CONTACT'S VIN QUALIFIED FOR REPAIRS UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER:10V436000 (SUSPENSION:REAR) BUT THE RECALL CAMPAIGN HAD ALREADY EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 104,492.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 ISUZU RODEO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PERFORMING REGULAR SERVICE, THE MECHANIC TEST DROVE THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE REAR END WAS SHAKING. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AND THE MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE REAR FRAME AND STABILIZER BAR WERE CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 150,000. ...UPDATED 10/03/12 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED THAT ISUZU WOULD NOT ASSIST WITH REPAIRS BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS NOT APART OF THE RECALL. UPDATED 10/09/2012 *JS

2000 ISUZU RODEO. ATTORNEY WRITES ON BEHALF OF CLIENT IN REGARDS TO DENIED VEHICLE CLAIM *TGW THE ATTORNEY STATED HIS CLIENT WAS NOT GIVEN THE PROPER ALTERNATIVES REGARDING THE VEHICLE. THE ATTORNEY STATED, HIS CLIENT WAS NOT PROVIDED WITH AN ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION LETTER, NOR WAS SHE ADVISED WHAT THE OFFER WAS BASED UPON. THE DEALER REFUSED TO RELEASE THE VEHICLE TO THE CONSUMER. THE ATTORNEY STATED ISUZU WROTE A LETTER STATING, THEY CLOSED THE FILE. THE VEHICLE. RECALL # 10V436000. *JB

HELLO, MY 2000 ISUZU RODEO WAS GETTING REPAIRED THIS WEEKEND AND THE MECHANIC TOLD ME THE FRAME OF THE CAR WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND DAMAGED. HE SAID THERE WAS A RECALL LAST YEAR ON THE MAKE AND MODEL OF MY CAR. I DID NOT RECEIVE A RECALL NOTICE AND THEREFORE MISSED THE DEADLINE TO SUBMIT MY CAR FOR REPAIR ON THE RECALL. AFTER SEARCHING ONLINE IT APPEARS THERE ARE MANY ISUZU THAT 1. DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THIS RECALL OR 2. MISSED THE DEADLINE LIKE I DID. IF THESE CARS AND THIS DAMAGE IS AS SEVERE AS IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE SHOULD NOT BE A DEADLINE ON THIS RECALL. ALL CARS SHOULD BE TAKEN OFF THE ROAD. I CALLED ISUZU AND THEY SAID THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO FOR ME. I HAVE LIVED IN NORTH CAROLINA FOR THE LAST YEAR BUT FOR THE FIRST 11 YEARS I HAD THIS CAR IT WAS IN CHICAGO, IL. *TR

PLEASE RE-OPEN NHTSA CAMPAIGN 10V436000 A SAFETY ISSUE SUCH AS THIS SHOULD NEVER HAVE A RECALL EXPIRATION DATE. THIS IS MY ONLY VEHICLE, I LIVE 1 AND A HALF HOURS AWAY FROM AN ISUZU DEALERSHIP (WAS TOLD I COULD ONLY GO TO AN ISUZU DEALERSHIP TO GET THIS FIXED) WAS ALSO TOLD THIS IS AN ALL DAY REPAIR AND NO LOANER CAR WOULD BE GIVEN.

2000 ISUZU RODEO. LAW OFFICE WRITES IN REGARDS TO CONSUMER AND CASE INVOLVING ISUZU RODEO RECALL 10V-436 *TGW IN DECEMBER 2011, THE CONSUMER DELIVERED HER VEHICLE TO THE DEALER PURSUANT TO THE RECALL FOR REPAIR. HOWEVER, IN JANUARY 2012, AFTER INSPECTION AND TESTING BY THE DEALER, THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT BE REPAIRED AS IT WAS UNSAFE. THE DEALER RETAINED POSSESSION OF THE VEHICLE. WHEN THE CONSUMER REQUESTED THE RETURN OF HER VEHICLE, THE DEALER REFUSED TO RELINQUISH POSSESSION. THE DEALER OFFERED THE CONSUMER $2,100. THE RESALE VALUE OF THE VEHICLE WAS $5,261. THE DEALER PRESENTED A TAKE IT OR LEAVE OFFER WHILE RETAINING POSSESSION OF THE VEHICLE. DESPITE REPEATED ATTEMPTS AND PROTEST, THE ISSUE IS STILL ONGOING. *JB