1996 Acura Tl

THIS LETTER WAS SENT TO ACURA: HAVE A 1996 ACURA 2.5 TL THAT WAS PURCHASED AT RADLEY ACURA. MY VIN # [XXX]. I NOW KNOW THAT THERE WAS A RECALL AND SAW THAT AN ACURA 2.5 TL VIN # [XXX] COLLAPSED DUE TO THE LOWER JOINT BREAKING ON MAY 22, 2003. I HAD TO REPLACE MY LOWER BALL JOINTS ON THE FRONT OF MY CAR ON 11/19/2003. AS I DROVE INTO THE CAR DEALERSHIP, I WAS NOT DRIVING ON A ROUGH ROAD SURFACE. I MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT DRIVING ON A ROUGH ROAD SURFACE. MY CAR WAS MAKING A VERY LOUD NOISE WHEN I DROVE INTO THE SURFACE AREA. FOR THE PAST 3 YEARS I TOLD THE RADLEY DEALERSHIP ABOUT THE NOISE IN MY PASSENGER FRONT SUSPENSION. EACH TIME THEY TOLD ME THEY WOULD LUBRICATE THE AREA BECAUSE THE BUSHINGS NEEDED LUBRICATION. NO ONE EVER TOLD ME THAT THEY WOULD CHECK THE BALL JOINTS. PAM VAUGHAN (ACURA SERVICE ADVISOR) SHOULD REMEMBER THAT MY VEHICLE WAS LUBRICATED BECAUSE I TALKED WITH HER EACH TIME I HAD THE PROBLEM. AT THIS TIME MY CAR WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY BECAUSE I HAD PURCHASED AN EXTRA 3-YEAR WARRANTY ON THE CAR. I DID HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A NOISE IN MY FRONT SUSPENSION AS EARLY AS 7/22/96 (SEE RECEIPT). RADLEY SAID THEY JUST TIGHTENED THE SUSPENSION. THE DEALERSHIP DID NOT HAVE THE PARTS TO REPLACE THE BALL JOINTS AND THEY DID NOT HAVE A LOANER CAR TO GIVE ME SO THAT I COULD LEAVE THE CAR. NOT UNTIL I READ THE RECALL NOTICE AFTER THE REPAIR THAT 124,875 CARS WERE RECALLED THAT I REALIZED THAT I SHOULD NOT HAVE DRIVEN THAT CAR HOME BECAUSE THE BALL JOINT COULD HAVE SEPARATED CAUSING THE FRONT SUSPENSION TO COLLAPSE AND STEERING CONTROLLABILITY TO BE REDUCED. THE DEALERSHIP SHOULD HAVE INFORMED ME OF THIS.*AK UPDATED 07/30/2012 *JS INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I OWN A 1996 ACURA 2.5TL. A COUPLE DAYS AGO WHILE DRIVING MY PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL COLLAPSED DUE TO THE LOWER BALL JOINT BREAKING. I CONDUCTED RESEARCH TO SEE IF THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL ON THAT PART ,AND IN FACT THERE WAS. THE PROBLEM IM FACING IS THAT IT ONLY COVERED CERTAIN VEHICLES WITH CERTAIN VIN NUMBERS([XXX].... THROUGH [XXX]...)MY VIN # IS [XXX]. I UNDERSTAND THAT MY VEHICLE DOESN'T FALL WITHIN THOSE NUMBERS BUT I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM AND DON'T THINK I SHOULD HAVE TO PAY IF IN FACT THIS IS THE SAME DEFECT THAT HAPPENED TO ALL THOSE OTHER VEHICLES. *NLM INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR