LEXUS Complaints

At 55,310 miles the car stalled without warning while driving at low speed. The car was towed to a Lexus dealership and it was reported by the dealer after inspection that the engine had seized. The vehicle is available for inspection. The motor failed while driving the vehicle. The V35A-FTS engine has numerous reports of main bearing failure and is subject to a recall for other models that have this engine, however, the Lexus LS500 model is not included in the recall despite having the same/similar catastrophic engine failure with low miles. Lexus corporate has been notified and has contacted the dealer directly regarding the failure. There were no warning lights, no engine sounds, and no indications that there were any issues with the engine.

I am unable to shut the engine off to pump fuel into the vehicle. The purge valve has been replaced, that maf sensor has been cleaned the leak detector pump has been changed. The vehicle will shut off and go into low power mode while driving on Highway, the idling is rough. The check engine light will not go off. The code is reading Po171.

The interior door latch is electronic with a manual lever in case it loses power. The problem is the electronic latch will occasionally malfunctions, and the door is partially open. When this happens, you cannot get the door to open all the way with the electric door latch or the manual door latch. The only way to get it open is to pull very hard on the door to close it again or get someone to push on the outside of the door. I alerted the dealer about this, and they said I have to push harder when I open the door. This has happened to me many times. The safety issue here is plain. If a person is not strong enough to pull the door closed it will not open.

The contact owns a 2026 Lexus NX 350. The contact stated that the instrument panel was extremely dim. The vehicle was equipped with a toggle for brightness. The contact stated that with the toggle set to max brightness, the instrument panel failed to provide adequate illumination. The contact stated that the failure was a hazard while driving. The vehicle was taken to a local dealer where the vehicle was inspected, and the contact was informed that the instrument panel was operating as designed. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 500.

The car was taken into Lexus under warranty January 2026. There a loud noise coming from the car when it is going down the road. Lexus tried to say it must be the tires. The car was under 3 years old. I replaced the front tires any way. There cars noise even louder and it was not fixed. I feel the car is un-safe. The car currently has 40,000 miles. I simply wanted the car fixed.

Technical Incident Timeline Suspected Unintended Acceleration Event 2026 Lexus RX 350h Premium+ (Approximately 96 Miles) Vehicle: 2026 Lexus RX 350h Premium+ Purchase Date: July 10, 2026 Dealer: Woodfield Lexus Incident Date: July 12, 2026 Approximate Time: 11:30 AM Vehicle Mileage at Incident: Approximately 96 miles ? Event Sequence 1. Vehicle Startup * I entered the vehicle and started the vehicle normally. * The vehicle was in Park (P) at startup. * My right foot was on the brake pedal, as required to start the vehicle. * The accelerator pedal was not intentionally pressed. 2. Immediate Vehicle Behavior After Startup * Immediately after startup, the vehicle produced an unusually loud powertrain noise similar to a motorcycle engine. * The vehicle unexpectedly moved forward with strong acceleration without my intended input. * The acceleration was sudden and unexpected. 3. Loss of Vehicle Control * The vehicle traveled uphill at high speed. * The event occurred so quickly that I did not have sufficient time to react or take corrective action. * The vehicle became difficult to control during this period. * The front wheels climbed up the hill first. 4. Impact With Tree Trunk * The vehicle continued uphill and shortly thereafter struck a tree trunk. * After the impact, the vehicle changed direction toward the right. * The vehicle continued moving at high speed after the impact. 5. Attempt to Stop Vehicle * After the vehicle changed direction and continued moving, I recognized the need to stop the vehicle before it reached a concrete structure with a Jewel-Osco sign. * I applied the brake pedal again. * At this point, the brake responded and the vehicle stopped. 6. Resulting Damage * The collision caused significant damage to the vehicle, including damage to the driver’s side. * No warning lights or dashboard alerts appeared during the event.

On March 26, 2026 my vehicle was towed to dealership and diagnosed with a bad fuel pump. On April 8 it was recalled for this pump. It has been sitting at the dealership since then, almost 4 months, with Lexus claiming they do not know when they can fix it due to the recall. This complaint is because the vehicle is not being repaired in a timely manner and I do not have use or possession of it.

The contact owns a 2016 Lexus NX 300H. The contact stated that the brake pedal was soft and had low performance. The contact stated that while his wife was driving at an undisclosed speed, the brake pedal was depressed, and the vehicle was slow to respond. The message “Braking Power Low - Visit the Dealer” was displayed. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, and the contact was informed that there was a fee for a diagnostic test. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The contact contacted another local dealer, Lexus Service of Glendale (1221 S Brand Blvd, Glendale, CA 91204). The manufacturer was contacted and informed the contact that the vehicle was previously repaired under Manufacturer Recall: 21L302; for the brake booster assembly and brake booster pump assembly. The failure mileage was approximately 150,000.

On May 13, 2026, while traveling at approximately 31 mph under normal driving conditions, a critical right-front suspension or steering component suddenly suffered a catastrophic structural failure on its own. This spontaneous mechanical failure caused the vehicle to immediately and violently veer to the right, rendering the steering ineffective and resulting in an unavoidable collision with two parked vehicles. The vehicle has been determined to be a total loss. Furthermore, during the crash event, the front passenger-side seat-mounted side airbag and side curtain airbags deployed despite the front passenger seat being completely unoccupied. Conversely, the driver's front steering wheel airbag failed to deploy completely during the impact. A corporate inspection by Toyota Motor North America/Engineering Analysis Associates confirmed severe, localized separation of the right front strut, knuckle, tie rod end, brake line, and ABS wiring. Toyota is currently utilizing its own interpretation of the Event Data Recorder (EDR) steering/speed metrics to deny component defect liability, attributing the structural suspension failure to post-crash forces rather than pre-crash causation. I am filing this report to log a potential structural component defect in the 2016 Lexus ES 350 front suspension/steering assembly, as well as an irregular Supplemental Restraint System (SRS) deployment pattern, which presents an unreasonable safety risk to drivers.

The contact owns a 2015 Lexus NX 200t. The contact stated that while driving at various speeds, an abnormal, ticking sound was emitted from the fuel tank. As the failure persisted, the vehicle entered "Reduced Engine Power Mode" and the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic shop where a diagnostic check was performed, and it was discovered that the fuel pump was defective and needed to be replaced. A local dealer was contacted and an appointment was scheduled to have the vehicle serviced. The contact arrived for the appointment but was informed that the fuel pump was on backorder and the appointment needed to be rescheduled. The contact informed the dealer that driving the vehicle felt unsafe because the commute exceeded one hour. The dealer assured the contact that the vehicle was safe; however, while driving the vehicle back to the residence, the same failure returned. After restarting the vehicle, the contact drove the vehicle to the residence. A second appointment was scheduled with the dealer, and a service advisor arrived at the residence of the contact in a rental vehicle and drove the vehicle back to the dealer for service. The vehicle was returned to the contact; however, the failure persisted. The dealer was notified and informed the contact that the failure resulted from a loose panel that technicians had difficulty bolting down. The vehicle was towed back to the dealer for diagnostic testing and repair. The contact test drove the vehicle with a mechanic inside the vehicle and informed the mechanic that the same failure remained noticeable. The failure returned a few days after the repair. The contact stated that both the dealer and the manufacturer avoided phone calls to service the vehicle. The vehicle was not yet repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 130,000.