Nissan Leaf Complaints (2019)

260 consumer complaints on file.

#11771674October 16, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System); however, the recall service failed to prevent a failure shortly after completion. The contact stated that while driving at approximately 30 MPH, an unknown battery warning light illuminated. The vehicle was returned to the dealer, where diagnosis confirmed an internal battery cell failure. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, and a case was filed via telephone. The failure mileage was approximately 100,000.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11766737September 24, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, ENGINE
Update to complaint XXX— XXX I am updating my complaint regarding Nissan LEAF recall R24B2 and the dealer’s handling of the recall remedy. On XXX I brought my 2019 Nissan LEAF to Ken Garff Nissan Salt Lake to have recall R24B2 performed. The dealer told me that performing the recall remedy could cause the vehicle to enter reduced-power mode or become non-drivable, and that replacement batteries were backordered or unavailable. The dealer therefore declined to perform the recall remedy at that time. A representative of Ken Garff Nissan Salt Lake also advised me that I could ignore the safety warnings, not have the recall remedy performed, and drive the vehicle through the desert anyway. This was particularly concerning because the recall restricted the vehicle’s use of Level 3/CHAdeMO quick charging pending completion of the remedy, affecting my ability to safely use the vehicle for a planned interstate relocation. After I escalated the matter to Nissan Consumer Affairs, Nissan told me that Ken Garff Nissan Salt Lake had said it declined to perform the remedy because of a time constraint. That account conflicts with what the dealer told me directly. I asked the dealer to perform the remedy before I mentioned my move or any timeline, and the dealer instead explained that it did not want to perform the remedy because it could leave the vehicle in reduced-power mode or non-drivable while replacement batteries were backordered or unavailable. I then obtained an appointment at [XXX] Nissan of Murray on XXX, for the R24B2 recall remedy. I will provide the final repair order, diagnostic codes, and outcome when available. My safety concern is not solely that an open recall exists. An authorized dealer declined to perform the prescribed recall remedy because it said the procedure could immobilize the vehicle, while Nissan later relayed a materially different explanation for the dealer’s refusal. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11766513September 23, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, POWER TRAIN
My 2019 Nissan Leaf's battery stopped charging due to a manufacturer defect. Nissan North America confirmed this is covered under NHTSA Recall 24V-700 and agreed to repurchase the vehicle (case #1163589). However, Nissan's repurchase process has been severely delayed by issues connected to the recall remedy itself: Nissan requires a physical title to complete the repurchase, but their own financing arm (NMAC) failed to release a lien for six years after payoff--despite the law requiring them to--and then provided a defective release letter, stalling the process for over a month. Separately, Nissan's own repurchase letter promised a courtesy rental vehicle for up to 30 days during the process, which was never provided despite requesting. They are also refusing to lock in their repurchase price so every day of their delay is benefiting them while costing me. I am raising this because the recall remedy process itself — not just the underlying defect — has been mishandled, leaving an affected consumer without a resolution or a functioning vehicle for an extended period.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11765811September 21, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The contact owned a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System). The local dealer was contacted and declined to perform the recall repair, stating that the recall repair would place the vehicle in LIMP Mode, and advised the contact to disregard any warning lights illuminated. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue and informed the contact to reach out to the dealer for assistance. The contact had not experienced a failure.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11765861September 21, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
I own a 2019 Nissan Leaf (recall R24B2/NHTSA 24V-700), 70,000 km, battery State of Health 97% per LeafSpy (OBD-based BMS health reading, not the dash gauge). I support the recall's intent and have stopped Level 3 fast charging entirely, using only home Level 1/2 charging. I'm raising a structural concern, relevant beyond my own vehicle: for cars that trip the SOC-fluctuation fault, the only remedy offered is full battery replacement or buyback — scrapping/replacing packs that are often barely degraded, at real environmental cost (mining, manufacturing, disposal) for a risk tied specifically to Level 3 charging, not to driving the car. I'd ask the agency to consider whether the remedy framework (repair/replace/refund-less-depreciation under 49 U.S.C. §30120, or Canada's equivalent) should allow a fourth, owner-consented option: permanent, verifiable disabling of DC fast-charging (physical connector removal, tamper-evident hardware, disclosed on the vehicle's title/history) in exchange for a smaller cash settlement — no battery replacement, no buyback, for owners who accept this in writing. There's precedent for this working in the used-vehicle market already: lemon-law and flood-damage titles both flag a documented condition change so future buyers can price it in, without requiring the vehicle be destroyed. This would function the same way — a documented manufacturer-owner agreement at a middle ground, rather than a binary full-remedy-or-buyback choice. This would let owners with healthy batteries keep driving, reduce prematurely retired EV packs, and likely cost manufacturers less than replacement or repurchase, while still eliminating the defect condition. I'd ask this be considered for Nissan's remedy program here, and as a standing option for future mode-specific recalls.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11765709September 20, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
[XXX] of [XXX] sold me this vehicle as a certified pre owned vehicle with an unrepairable recall on XXX. This vehical had been diagnosed with this recall prior to sale and nissan issued a stop sale of this vehicle prior to me purchasing this vehicle. I am unable to fast charge due to potential fire risk. This has hindered my ability to travel and is very dishonest practice. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11763493September 10, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
My vehicle is subject to open NHTSA Recall 24V-700 (Nissan internal R24B2), for excessive lithium deposits in HV battery cells causing rapid heating during Level 3 DC fast charging, with a stated fire risk. At approximately 112,000 miles, my vehicle displayed the warning "Service EV System. Unable to restart after power off." I brought the vehicle to Dublin Nissan Service Department on July 2, 2026, where the dealer diagnosed a leak in the HV battery cells consistent with the defect described in Recall 24V-700. On July 20, 2026, I received a diagnostic estimate quoting me $5,162.23 for battery and $2,999.99 for the accessory/parts — charged to me as a customer-pay repair — along with a stated wait of 3-4 months for battery availability. This directly contradicts Nissan's own published remedy for Recall 24V-700, which states: "If a particular DTC for the EV battery is generated, the vehicle cannot be operated without a battery replacement... this repair will be performed free of charge for parts and labor... Nissan will provide a complimentary rental vehicle." The recall further states that if the dealer cannot obtain a battery, Nissan will contact the customer within 3 business days to offer repurchase above Kelley Blue Book private-party value. I contacted Nissan Consumer Affairs, who refused to authorize a free battery replacement and refused to consider repurchase, stating I did not qualify because I purchased the vehicle from a third-party dealer rather than a Nissan dealer. Nothing in the official recall remedy language conditions the free replacement or repurchase offer on where the vehicle was purchased. I am requesting NHTSA's assistance in ensuring Nissan honors the free-of-charge battery replacement and/or repurchase remedy as stated in its own recall documentation for Recall 24V-700.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11757052August 14, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The vehicle failed on XXX ("Service EV System / Unable to restart") and was towed to ABC Nissan, [XXX], where it has remained since (18 days as of this filing). On XXX dealer confirmed HV battery requires warranty replacement, stated that replacement batteries are backordered approx six months, with no loaner was available, and directed us to Nissan's repurchase process. Nissan's filed recall remedy promises a free replacement battery or, where unavailable, a repurchase offer above KBB private-party value initiated within three business days plus complimentary rental vehicle in either situation. No rental has been provided. Dealer confirmed non-availability in writing on 8/8, and we have self-funded a rental ($712 so far as of XXX) after Nissan's own representative recommended on XXX that we keep it. On XXX, Nissan verbally indicated the repurchase was declined because the dealership is "repairing" the vehicle. On XXX, dealership's service dept confirmed that the replacement battery has no arrival estimate and that it has discontinued providing rentals entirely and advised that the resolution must come from Nissan. Nissan's position appears to be that it will not repair on any known schedule, will not repurchase, and will not provide the rental its own filed remedy promises. We have requested reimbursement for incurred rental expenses and a "make whole" buyback at $18,000 which covers the full cost of an equivalent replacement vehicle including tax and licenses. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11756040August 10, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
My 2019 Nissan Leaf is currently grounded at Dublin Nissan with leaking battery cells caused by thermal distress from open Safety Recall R24B2. Nissan Consumer Affairs has refused to buy back or repair the vehicle because it has past the 100,000-mile mark, leaving me with an unresolvable, hazardous vehicle that has no available manufacturer remedy.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11749388July 9, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, BACK OVER PREVENTION
The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notifications of NHTSA Campaign Numbers: 24V700000 (Electrical System), 24V071000 (Back Over Prevention), and 23V494000 (Vehicle Speed Control); however, the parts to do the recall repairs were not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The contact stated that while her husband was driving at an undisclosed speed, the battery level dropped from 100% to zero, causing the vehicle to lose motive power. There were several unknown warning lights illuminated. The vehicle was towed to the residence, where the battery was replaced; however, the failure recurred, and the vehicle was towed back to the residence. The dealer was made aware of the failure but confirmed that parts were not yet available. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 30,000.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11748956July 8, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
I have two safety recalls from Nissan that says to schedule the appointment with the dealer - Daytona Nissan. The dealer cancelled the appointment without any reason and unable to reach the dealer. Screenshot of email as proof.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11748504July 6, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received a notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that while attempting to start the vehicle by pressing the Push-To-Start button, the engine failed to turn over, and no electrical features were available. The vehicle was towed to the local dealer, where it was diagnosed with needing a battery module replacement. The vehicle was not repaired due to the out-of-pocket cost. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 90,000.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11747842July 1, 2026
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
MANUFACTURER RECALL CAMPAIGN: Nissan R24B2 / NHTSA Campaign 24V-700 VEHICLE: 2019 Nissan LEAF (13,801 original miles) SUMMARY OF SAFETY DEFECT & REMEDY FAILURE: The manufacturer's safety recall software remedy has failed to stabilize or remedy a known high-voltage battery defect under real-world driving conditions, creating a severe, immediate risk of unexpected vehicle stalling in active traffic. The vehicle was serviced for the R24B2 campaign and returned a baseline "No DTC" stationary scan at 13,801 miles. Immediately upon driving the vehicle into public traffic post-repair, the high-voltage battery pack suffered a severe energy collapse under standard road loads. I documented the failure via an 11-photograph instrument cluster log in real time over a brief 39-minute window: 05:03 PM | 13,801 miles | 100% Battery | 127 mi Range (Trip Start) 05:07 PM | 13,802 miles | 98% Battery | -- mi Range 05:09 PM | 13,802 miles | 96% Battery | 123 mi Range 05:11 PM | 13,803 miles | 94% Battery | 118 mi Range 05:23 PM | 13,807 miles | 89% Battery | 108 mi Range 05:28 PM | 13,808 miles | 87% Battery | 105 mi Range 05:31 PM | 13,809 miles | 85% Battery | 102 mi Range 05:33 PM | 13,810 miles | 84% Battery | 100 mi Range 05:42 PM | 13,813 miles | 81% Battery | 95 mi Range (Trip End) CRITICAL SAFETY HAZARDS: 1. UNEXPLAINED ENERGY DRAIN: The vehicle consumed 19% of its total battery capacity to travel a distance of only 12 miles. This drops the vehicle's functional real-world range to roughly 63 miles on a full charge. 2. INACCURATE RANGE AND RISK OF STRANDING: While the battery charge dropped by nearly 20% in 12 miles, the dashboard continued to display an inflated, mathematically impossible estimate of "95 miles remaining, creating a risk of sudden, unpredictable stranding. 3. CONSIDERED TOGETHER, this proves that the software update fails to accurately remedy or even measure the state of health and safety of the battery, and adds additional safety risks.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11746800June 26, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
This vehicle experienced an EV system power failure and low battery message. The manufacturer has diagnosed a covered warranty battery defect but has refused to repair the vehicle citing supply constraints. They are using their parts shortage to pressure a [XXX] senior citizen on a fixed income in an inadequate cash buyback that leaves her stranded without transportation. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11746072June 23, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
My 2019 Nissan Leaf SL Plus is subject to NHTSA Recall 24V-700 for a battery defect that poses a fire risk during DC fast charging. The recall was issued in September 2024 with a fix promised by November 2024. Nissan repeatedly delayed the remedy, first to Spring 2025, then Q3 2025, then March 2026, then an indefinite date in 2026. During this time I was instructed not to use Level 3 DC fast charging. I was without this capability for approximately 18 months. I purchased the SL Plus specifically for the extended range provided by the 62 kWh battery, which depends on fast charging for longer trips. Without fast charging the vehicle was reduced to short-range local use only. The remedy Nissan eventually provided was a software update only. It does not repair the underlying battery defect; excessive lithium deposits within battery cells causing increased electrical resistance. The software monitors for conditions that could lead to a thermal event and shuts down charging if detected. The physical defect remains in the battery. Nissan included a letter with the software update stating that if the vehicle triggers a specific error code within one year of the update, they would replace the battery or buy back the vehicle. This suggests Nissan acknowledges the software update does not adequately address the defect. I am filing this complaint because the recall remedy does not fix the root cause of the safety defect, and because Nissan took 18 months to provide even this inadequate remedy. The component is the lithium-ion battery pack and it is available for inspection.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11744625June 16, 2026
BACK OVER PREVENTION: SENSING SYSTEM: CAMERA
I had intermittent loss of back-up camera picture, with initial repair paid by me on 8/3/22. The problem persisted intermittently, I was told the only option was to replace the camera, which I found with online search didn't fix the problem. 9/11/24 the dealer "fixed" the problem when a recall was issued. It worked for a short time. I returned 11/11/24 with the same problem, but because it was intermittent they could not find an issue. I have photos of 8 more intermittent failures since then, my partner doesn't document problems when she's using the vehicle. I have seen no change in the frequency or effects of the backup camera malfunctions since it first began prior to the first visit for repair in 2022.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11744060June 14, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
I am filing a complaint regarding NHTSA Recall 24V-700 (R24B2) for my 2019 Nissan LEAF S Plus, VIN: [XXX], Nissan Case No. XXX. I complied fully with Nissan's recall instructions, avoiding Level 3 fast charging for my entire ownership. On or about April 23, I filed a complaint with Nissan Consumer Affairs (Case #XXX) regarding the impact of the charging restriction on my vehicle's usability and requested a buyback. Nissan denied my claim approximately two months ago. I then surrendered my vehicle for the recall repair. The dealer returned it, stating the recall was remedied. Over the following three days, I drove only short local trips with minimal driving — no fast charging. The vehicle lurched violently on a public road, entered turtle mode, and displayed multiple dashboard warning lights. I drove it slowly to the dealership. My dealer confirmed full battery replacement is required and submitted a Goodwill Warranty claim on my behalf — acknowledging this failure was not due to owner misuse. Nissan North America (Case No. XXX) has since informed me in writing that battery replacement cannot be provided and is now offering repurchase. The battery failure occurred directly after Nissan's purported recall repair with minimal driving. Nissan claimed the defect was fixed — it was not. I am concerned the KBB value Nissan intends to use may be artificially suppressed by five open safety recalls, including 24V-700, and the vehicle's current non-operational status — caused entirely by Nissan's defective repair. I request NHTSA scrutinize Nissan's repurchase valuation methodology for affected owners. I request NHTSA investigate Nissan's failure to remedy this recall. My preferred remedy remains battery replacement. I should not bear the financial consequences of a repair Nissan certified as complete. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11743795June 12, 2026
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
This car has turned off on me randomly 3 times. I have taken it twice now to the dealership and each time they have found “nothing wrong with the car”. All of the recalls and maintenance on the car have continuously been done. The most recent recall was already done on it 2 days ago. The information on here that it hasn’t been done is false. The first time the car turned off was at a red light while my foot was fully on the brake so I was fully stopped. There were absolutely no warning signs and I immediately turned the car back on with no issues at all and drove normally after that (other than the fact I was scared to death about what just happened). The second 2 times have been when the car is on park. It is extremely random and my family and I fear for our life and safety. I ignored it after the first time that we took it in and they said nothing was wrong after running a diagnostic, but it has happened 2 times after that. I took it back in 2 days ago and they still found nothing wrong after doing the diagnostic. I am in “contact” with a regional affairs specialist but if you don’t answer them the first time there’s no way to get back in contact with them because they DO NOT answer your call at all. I called the general line and they said to wait until the 17th, which is almost in a WEEK. I know in my heart that I’m not lying and there’s something severely wrong with this car. I don’t even want to sell it because I don’t want to put other people’s safety at risk and feel responsible for that. I need an engineer an actual specialist someone who can help.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11742304June 5, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System). The contact stated that while driving approximately 60 MPH, the message that the "Battery was Low" was displayed, and while the vehicle was slowing down, the vehicle regained charge back up to 80%. The contact stated that on another occasion, after the vehicle was parked and charging with a Level 2 charger, the vehicle failed to start the next day. The contact stated that the battery only charged to 61% and the vehicle failed to start up. The message "Service EV System" and the battery warning light were illuminated. A battery tester was connected to the vehicle and indicated that the battery was fully charged. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 56,408.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11740583May 28, 2026
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
Manufacturer announced a recall regarding L3 charging more than 18 months ago. The announcement included a warning that, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, should L3 charging be attempted. The announcement included assurances that the fix would be announced by March 2025. In the interim period, two follow-ups have been announced, both coming well after the previous deadline. At this point. I have been unable to use my car in a normal manner, causing us to purchase an additional vehicle to cover the loss of use due to the defect. The manufacturer has offered no fix, no concrete timeline, and no compensation for the loss of use of the vehicle.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0

← Back to Nissan Leaf