Nissan Leaf Complaints

1,117 consumer complaints on file.

#11774184October 28, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
My High Voltage battery failed on my car at ~50k miles in 2022. Nissan replaced the battery under warranty. It has failed again now at 110k miles and is way worse than the previous failure. The car will abruptly shut down under load on hills or high speeds on the highway and I will get a P33ED battery fault code. Nissan customer service told me they would offer assistance and after 2 months of waiting on them to find the part number for the battery, they now informed me they won't help. After doing some research, there is a recall out for 2019-2022 Nissan leafs with possible fire related issues because of the batteries and the P33ED code that i am getting is directly related to this recall. I believe I have a recalled battery in my vehicle but Nissan won't offer any assistance because my VIN isn't necessarily recalled. I feel unsafe to charge or operate this car, especially under any type of speed or load and Nissan is offering no assistance in repairing the vehicle or even verifying the battery manufacturer date.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11773945October 27, 2026
SERVICE BRAKES, FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL, FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING
On 10/24/2026 at approximately 6:10 PM, I was driving this 2023 Nissan Leaf SV Plus (under 20,000 miles) southbound on I-575 in Woodstock, GA, with Intelligent Cruise Control and e-Pedal both engaged. When traffic ahead slowed, the vehicle did not slow down. I applied the brake pedal, but the vehicle did not decelerate as expected, and it struck the rear of the vehicle ahead. No warning I am aware of preceded the event. Earlier on the same drive, the vehicle also did not slow as expected when I braked for a yellow light, until I pressed the brake pedal very hard. No injuries. The vehicle sustained significant front-end damage. Police report: Woodstock PD Case WO26-003692. The vehicle is being preserved for inspection, including Event Data Recorder download. I will submit diagnostic and EDR results when available.
Crash:
Yes
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11772696October 21, 2026
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
So on October 1st, my car, my nissan Leaf went into turtle mode for the first time. And then yesterday, while I was on the highway, it went into turtle mode, dropped down to 50 miles per hour, and I got off the highway, and the car wouldn't move anymore. I had to turn off the car, wait a couple minutes, and turn it back on, and then it worked again. I was told to contact the dealer to get a car rental. The dealer said that they don't have any loaners available and that other customers are waiting. I contacted Nissan, and Nissan is using a third party called Morley to handle this, and Nissan's saying that Morley's in charge of it and Morley isn't responding. I have a car that's under warranty and has an approved battery replacement. They're trying to call buy the battery, and Nissan themselves says that they would provide a rental, but Nissan keeps referring me to Morley and the dealer is not providing me a rental. And I have a car that I believe is a Potential health hazard that I need to feel comfortable driving, and I don't feel like anybody's helping me.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11772797October 21, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The contact’s daughter owns a 2026 Nissan Leaf. While the owner was driving 70 MPH with the ProPILOT Assist engaged, a semi-truck merged into the lane and crashed into the vehicle. Following the impact and the deployment of the front air bags, the driver was able to safely maneuver the vehicle to the side of the highway. The button to engage the parking brake was activated, the vehicle was shifted in park(P) and turned off. However, after exiting the vehicle, the vehicle failed to shut off and the electronic parking brake failed to hold as intended, and the vehicle rolled back onto the highway and crashed with two other vehicles. The vehicle had damages to the hood, front bumper, windshield, and the front bumper reinforcement bar was bent. A Police report was filed. The owner sustained injuries to the face, neck, and shoulder due to the force of the seat belt and air bag deployment. The driver was currently receiving physical therapy for the injuries. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 5,000.
Crash:
Yes
Fire:
No
Injuries:
1
Deaths:
0
#11772361October 20, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
I am requesting information regarding the scope of Nissan's high-voltage battery safety recall 25V-655 (Nissan campaign R25C8) and whether early-production 2023 Nissan LEAF vehicles have been evaluated for the same potential defect. Vehicle information: Vehicle: 2023 Nissan LEAF SV Plus VIN: [XXX] Assembly plant: [XXX] Manufacture date: September 2022 Battery: 60+ kWh lithium-ion Battery ID reported by LeafSpy: N5M10318 Current mileage: Approximately 36,000 miles According to Nissan's XXX recall filing, Nissan identified 19,077 affected 2021–2022 LEAF vehicles using its production records. My vehicle was manufactured at the same Smyrna facility approximately four months after the currently identified recalled vehicle production period. I am concerned about whether the high-voltage battery installed in my vehicle may share cells, components, or manufacturing characteristics with the affected battery population. On XXX, I contacted Nissan Consumer Affairs to request clarification. Nissan established Case #XXX. During subsequent correspondence, Nissan repeatedly stated that the information I requested was unavailable. On October 8, Nissan specifically advised that it needed three additional business days to consult appropriate technical experts and promised a detailed response. However, its XXX and XXX responses provided no technical findings and did not confirm whether my vehicle's battery-production records had been reviewed. Nissan instead reiterated that recalls are VIN-specific. I understand that my vehicle is not currently identified as part of recall [XXX]. My concern is whether Nissan has adequately evaluated the early 2023 LEAF production population for the same safety condition. I respectfully request clarification on the following questions: Has Nissan provided NHTSA with findings regarding its investigation of 2023–2024 LEAF vehicles for the battery condition associated 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
#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
#11771090October 14, 2026
ENGINE, ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
I purchased this EV in 2021 with ~30k miles on it. On cold days ~20 degrees, the battery would drop rapidly under a load (going uphill, high speeds, etc) It would continue to drop until you were not under load anymore. The dealer said nothing was wrong until I had my family in the vehicle and it totally shut down on the highway going 70 mph and i lost all brakes, steering, etc. They finally took me seriously and put a new battery in at ~55k miles in 2022. I continued to have similar issues in the winter on really cold days, but not nearly as bad so i lived with it. At about 100k miles, it started doing a very similar issue, but way worse, and at any temperature. It got so bad i couldn't drive without the battery always being fully charged. Took it to the first dealer who said nothing is wrong with it even though i had videos of it happening. I then called nissan corporate and opened up a case and asked them directly "before i take it to another dealer for a second opinion, is this something that you can offer financial assistance with" and that lady said "yes, we can offer assistance for sure". I took it to another dealer who did some tests and confirmed it needed a battery. Shortly after that, the car now shuts down under even a slight load. A small backroad hill will shut it down and I get an error code P33ED now. This code is related to a battery recall on 2019- 2022 models that can cause a battery fire! After almost 2 months of nissan saying they didn't have the part available, they just informed me they won't offer any assistance because im out of warranty! Not only did i have the battery replaced once, but it has already failed a second time, and they installed a battery that is now recalled but wont honor the recall because my vin is a 2018. I am beyond frustrated with their lack of care about my families safety since this could catch fire! I am hoping to reach out to you for some additional guidance on this situation. Thank you.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11771193October 14, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:12V/24V/48V BATTERY
The contact owns a 2023 Nissan Leaf. The contact stated that while driving at highway speeds on multiple occasions, the battery warning light illuminated, and an unknown warning message displayed on the instrument panel. The vehicle was taken to a dealer, where diagnostic testing was performed; however, the contact was informed that the failure could not be duplicated. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 33,900.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11770700October 12, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, POWER TRAIN
Vehicle experienced total electrical propulsion loss while driving on a public highway and had to be towed. Dealer diagnosis confirmed Diagnostic Trouble Code P33ED-00 per Nissan Bulletin NTB26-032. This is related to the open federal battery recall R25C8; the recall remedy failed. Nissan authorized a high-voltage traction battery replacement under Powertrain Authorization #[XXX]. The vehicle has been held disabled at the dealership (Nissan of Everett, Washington) since [XXX] because it is unsafe to operate, and no replacement parts are available. Nissan North America agreed in writing (Intent Letter dated June 29, 2026, Case #[XXX]) to repurchase the vehicle but has not completed the buyback. The safety risk is a sudden, total loss of motive power while driving on public roads. 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
#11769440October 6, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM, POWER TRAIN
I purchased this 2020 Nissan Leaf S Plus on September 22, 2020 for $39,104. The vehicle was fully functional when I delivered it to Nissan's authorized service center to comply with NHTSA Recall 24V-700. Following the software update performed by Nissan's technician, the vehicle would not operate. It has remained inoperable since that date. Nissan provided a rental vehicle, which I am currently using. I did not cause this damage. I complied fully with Nissan's recall instructions. Nissan's own repair process destroyed the functionality of my vehicle.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11767952September 30, 2026
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
I am writing to formally document a catastrophic safety failure involving my vehicle, a Nissan LEAF, which resulted in a total vehicle fire, the destruction of personal property, and severe risk to human life. Prior to this incident, the vehicle had operated without issue. However, the vehicle became subject to an official safety recall. In attempting to resolve this, I brought the car to a Nissan dealership multiple times, only to be informed that no remedy was available yet. I was subsequently directed to call Nissan Consumer Affairs via their 800-number. The corporate representative instructed me to take the vehicle to a dealership for a formal evaluation. Following these instructions, I brought the vehicle to an alternative Nissan dealership. This facility performed a software update and explicitly assured me that the recall issue had been resolved. Furthermore, service personnel stated that it was entirely safe to utilize high-speed DC fast chargers (commonly referred to as superchargers). Approximately one month after this service was completed, I connected the vehicle to an EVgo fast-charging station. While the vehicle was charging, my son and I remained inside the cabin. We were resting and on the verge of falling asleep due to the expected charging duration. Suddenly, I heard loud crackling noises and witnessed heavy fumes emerging from the vehicle. We immediately evacuated the cabin. Within moments, the vehicle filled with thick smoke, and an active fire erupted. I contacted emergency services, and the fire department arrived to extinguish the blaze. Due to the extreme toxicity of lithium-ion battery smoke, emergency personnel ordered us to evacuate the immediate area to avoid lethal inhalation. The vehicle was completely incinerated, resulting in a total loss of both the automobile and all personal property contained within it. My son and I are incredibly fortunate to have survived.
Crash:
No
Fire:
Yes
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11768046September 30, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
In XXX, my 2020 Nissan Leaf experienced a catastrophic battery failure while plugged into a Level 3 DC fast charger at the Nissan dealership where the vehicle was originally purchased. During the charging session, the high-voltage traction battery severely overheated, physically expanded/swelled, and tripped a major vehicle fault sensor. The dealership confirmed the battery was permanently damaged and rendered the vehicle entirely inoperable. Initially, Nissan corporate quoted $22,000 out-of-pocket to replace the defective battery. A few weeks after this safety incident, a national safety recall was officially issued regarding Nissan Leaf high-voltage battery defects and fire risks during fast charging. Approximately two years later, I received an official letter from Nissan offering a vehicle buyback due to the recall and lack of replacement parts. I spent three months actively working with a Nissan corporate representative to finalize the buyback paperwork. However, with the claim nearly complete, Nissan abruptly closed the case without resolution and transferred it to a third-party administrator, [XXX], forcing me to restart the entire process from the beginning. [XXX] has completely ignored all communications and has failed to respond or advance the claim for over a month. Safety Risk & Request for Action: The vehicle experienced a severe thermal event (overheating and physical expansion) during normal operation at an authorized charging station, presenting an immediate fire and explosion hazard. To date, the vehicle has been disabled and unrepairable for over two years. Nissan has failed to provide a timely remedy under the federal safety recall, and their administrative handling has unreasonably delayed removing this hazardous vehicle/component from circulation. I am requesting NHTSA intervention to hold Nissan accountable for executing their recall remedy and resolving this safety claim immediately. 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
#11767872September 29, 2026
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING
The Automatic Emergency Braking system on my 2021 Nissan Leaf S Plus engaged erroneously (phantom braking) twice. One time was on a sunny day in August 2026 when I had just backed out of my driveway onto my residential street. There was a person walking well to the right side of the road about 100 feet ahead of me. I had just finished backing out and put the car in drive and stepped on the accelerator when the AEB system suddenly engaged despite there being nothing at all directly in front of the car. The second incident was in August or September 2026 when I had come to a stop at a stop sign on a covered roadway just outside a parking garage. As soon as I stepped on the accelerator to make a left turn into the parking garage the AEB system suddenly engaged despite nothing being in front of the vehicle. I have owned this car since August 2023 and have not had any other incidents of phantom braking before these two incidents. I have had no accidents or any other incidents leading up to these incidents. I took the car to Nissan of Bellevue where they could not reproduce the issue. They ran diagnostic codes (none came up), checked the physical brakes and checked the 12 volt battery (not sure if they tested under load). They then said they could find no cause of the issue and returned the car to me.
Crash:
No
Fire:
No
Injuries:
0
Deaths:
0
#11766659September 24, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, UNKNOWN OR OTHER
Vehicle: 2020 Nissan Leaf SV, VIN [[XXX]], ~55,000 miles Recall: R24B2 / NHTSA campaign 24V700000 (battery may overheat during Level 3 charging — fire risk) I brought my vehicle to Conicelli Nissan (Conshohocken, PA) for the R24B2 recall software update.The vehicle has been held at the dealership since on or about XXX with the recall remedy incomplete; the dealer says it cannot proceed without Nissan's approval (dealer case XXX). I opened case XXX with Nissan Consumer Affairs requesting rental coverage while the vehicle is grounded for this safety recall. Nissan verbally denied the request on XXX and refused to put the denial in writing. I have no transportation. Nissan provided rental cars to owners in its XXX Leaf battery recall until repairs were complete, but refuses the same here. I ask NHTSA to intervene: (1) compel completion of the recall remedy, and (2) require Nissan to provide alternate transportation while the vehicle is grounded for a safety recall its own procedure failed to remedy. 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
#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
#11766095September 22, 2026
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
I am submitting this complaint regarding a manufacturer‑performed recall on my 2022 Nissan LEAF that resulted in a complete loss of charging capability immediately after Nissan applied its software update. Prior to the recall, the vehicle operated normally and had no charging issues. Following the recall intervention, the vehicle became unable to charge at all. This failure occurred directly and immediately after Nissan’s recall action. At the dealership, battery replacement was initially presented as a potential remedy. However, Nissan corporate assigned the case to a third‑party administrator, and it became clear that no repair option — including battery replacement — was available. Ultimately, Nissan proceeded with a buyback of the vehicle. This outcome raises a significant fairness concern. The vehicle is only four years old, and a battery replacement should reasonably be available to consumers when a manufacturer‑initiated recall causes the battery system to fail. Treating a four‑year‑old electric vehicle as irreparable — and offering repurchase as the only remedy — is not consistent with reasonable consumer expectations, especially when the failure was caused by the manufacturer’s own recall procedure. I am requesting that the agency review Nissan’s handling of this recall, the denial of battery replacement for a relatively new vehicle, and the use of repurchase as the sole remedy. The recall directly caused the vehicle to become inoperable, and Nissan’s refusal to authorize repair left the consumer with no reasonable path other than surrendering the vehicle.
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

← Back to Nissan Leaf