2002 Cadillac Seville

TL* THE CONTACT WAS A PASSENGER IN A 2002 CADILLAC SEVILLE. THE CONTACT WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH WHILE TRAVELING 65 MPH. THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A DITCH AND THE AIR BAG DID NOT PROPERLY DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED A CONCUSSION TO THE HEAD. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT DID NOT INFORM THE DEALER OR THE MANUFACTURER OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 55,000. UPDATED 05/24/11*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT WAS DELAYED. UPDATED 05/25/11

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 CADILLAC SEVILLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT FAILED. THE DEALER MADE REPAIRS TO THE AIR CONDITIONER BUT TO NO AVAIL. IN ADDITION, THE WHEELS LOCKED WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED. THE DEALER REPLACED THE CALIPERS TO CORRECT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 93,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 95,000.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 CADILLAC SEVILLE. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. SHE RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND WITHIN A FEW MINUTES IT BEGAN TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC FIVE TIMES WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY. THE FAILURE HAD BEEN ONGOING FOR MORE THAN A YEAR WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 92,416. UPDATED 10/05/10 *BF UPDATED 10/07/10*JB

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 CADILLAC SEVILLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE LOW BEAMS ARE INADEQUATE. THE RANGE IS OFF AND LIMITS THE VISIBILITY ON THE ROAD. HE HAS NOTIFIED THE DEALER ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS; HOWEVER, THEY ONLY INSTALL BETTER BULBS THAT DO NOT CORRECT THE FAILURE. CADILLAC HAS YET TO OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 32,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 68,505.

I HAVE MAJOR PROBLEMS WITH VIBRATION ON CADILLAC SEVILLE STS WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN BETWEEN 50 AND 75 MPH AND NO GM DEALER COULD FIX THIS PROBLEM. THIS IS A MAJOR DEFECT WITH THE CAR AND GM HAS NOT DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT, I STARTED HAVING BACKACHE BECAUSE OF THIS PROBLEM ALSO CHECK THIS WEBSITE A LOT OF CADILLAC OWNERS ARE COMPLAINING OF THE SAME PROBLEM. HTTP://WWW.CARSURVEY.ORG/VIEWCOMMENTS_REVIEW_19040.HTML *TR

I WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT ON JULY 16, 2007. I HAD MY CAR TOWED . I WAS TOLD IT WOULD TAKE 1-11/2 WEEKS TO REPAIR. I LATER CALLED TO CHECK ON MY 2002 CADILLAC SEVILLE. I WAS TOLD THEY COULD NOT REPAIR MY CAR BECAUSE THE HEADLIGHT WAS ON A NATIONAL BACKORDER. THEY SAID THERE WERE NO HEADLIGHTS AVAILABLE. MY INSURANCE COVERED A RENTAL CAR FOR 30 DAYS. I WAS THEN TOLD I WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A CAR. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT I CALL CADILLAC CUSTOMER SERVICE. I DID SO. I SPOKE WITH PATRICIA PAQUETTE AND WAS GIVEN A SERV. REQ. # OF 71-562847807. SHE SAID SHE WOULD CHECK ON MY PROBLEM AND RETURN MY CALL IN 24 TO 72 HRS. SHE CALLED BACK AND SAID SHE WAS REFERRING MY CALL TO THE NEXT LEVEL AND NKEMDILIM NWANKWO WOULD HANDLE IT.. SHE SAID I SHOULD GET A CALL IN 24 RO 72 HOURS. THIS PERSON NEVER CALLED. I CALLED BACK AND LEFT A MESSAGE ON VOICE MAIL AT EXT. 11310. I DID NOT RECEIVE A CALL. I WAS PUT IN CONTACT WITH MS. GARCIA. EXT 11442. SHE SAID SHE WOULD CHECK AND CALL BACK. . SHE DID NOT CALL. I CALLED AGAIN SEVERAL TIMES AND DID NOT GET A CALL BACK. I ASKED TO SPEAK TO HER SUPV.. THE SERV. REP. SAID I COULD NOT SPEAK TO ANY SUPV.R, BUT THAT SHE WOULD ASK HER SUPV. TO CONTACT MS. GARCIA'S SUPV. AND ASK THEM TO CALL ME. I HAVE NOT YET SPOKEN TO A SUPV. I GOT A MESSAGE ON MY ANSWERING MACHINE AT HOME ( AFTER ASKING EVERYONE TO CALL MY CELL #) THAT SAID THE PERSON WAS CALLING FOR MS. GARCIA AND T THE PART MAY BE AVAILABLE AT THE END OF NOVEMBER. DURING THIS TIME, I HAVE BEEN GIVEN SEVERAL POSSIBLE DATES. I THOUGHT CAR COMPANIES WERE TO PROVIDE SAFETY EQUIPMENT FOR THEIR CARS. I HAVE BEEN WITHOUT MY CAR FOR OVER 4 MONTHS. I CAN NOT GET SATISFACTORY INFORMATION OR SERVICE FROM CADILLAC. I AM SURE THERE MUST BE SOME RECOURSE. I CANNOT SAFELY OPERATIVE MY CAR WITHOUT THIS PART. . MY ATTORNEY SUGGESTED I CONTACT THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD. YOU WERE THE CHOICE FROM THEM TO FILE A VEHICLE COMPLAINT. *TR

VARIOUS CHECK ENGINE CODES BECAME PRESENT. DEALERSHIP REPAIRED ITEMS DEALING WITH CODES, BUT CODES WOULD LATER REAPPEAR. FOUND THAT THE FRONT ENGINE MOUNT WAS BROKEN. ENGINE WAS MOVING AROUND IN ENGINE COMPARTMENT, DISTURBING THE ELECTRICAL HARNESS CONNECTIONS AND BUMPING AND DAMAGING PARTS. THIS WAS AN EXPENSIVE REPAIR PROCESS, BECAUSE ACCESS TO ENGINE MOUNT IS COMPLICATED. WE ARE STILL SHAKING DOWN THE ENGINE IN FINDING ADDITIONAL PARTS THAT WERE DAMAGED. *NM

THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT BINDING/RATCHETING FEEDBACK THROUGH THE STEERING WHEEL WHENEVER IT IS TURNED. CADILLAC HAS ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS FOR THIS PROBLEM. AT 45,000 MILES (FEB 2004), PER THE SB, THE DEALER LUBRICATED THE SPLINES OF THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT. AT 75,000 MILES THE PROBLEM RETURNED. PER THE DEALER, CADILLAC REDESIGNED THE SHAFT AND BEGAN REPLACING THE ORIGINAL PART PER A NEW SB. THE NEW PART HOWEVER ALSO FAILED TO CORRECT THE BINDING/RATCHETING. CADILLAC THEN ISSUED ANOTHER SB AND RETURNED TO LUBRICATING THE SPLINES WHETHER THE OLD OR NEW DESIGN SHAFT IS INSTALLED. CADILLAC CUSTOMER SERVICE WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISES THE CAR OWNER MUST TAKE "OWNERSHIP" OF THIS PROBLEM, NO ASSISTANCE OR PERMANENT SOLUTION IS AVAILABLE. THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT WAS LUBRICATED BY THE DEALER A SECOND TIME AT THE OWNER'S COST. THE LUBRICATION OF THE SHAFT IS NOT IDENTIFIED AS A REGULAR MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT. CADILLAC HAS REPEATEDLY FAILED TO PROVIDE A PROPER RESOLUTION, PROVIDING ONLY A BAND AID FIX AND NOW PASSES THE RESPONSIBILITY TO THE INDIVIDUAL OWNER. THE PROBLEM WILL BE EXACERBATED AS THESE VEHICLES AGE AND CADILLAC HAS REPEATEDLY FAILED TO RESPONSIBLY ADDRESS THE PROBLEM. *JB

CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW IN 2002. THOUGH IT HAS NEVER BEEN WRECKED, THERE ARE NON-OEM PARTS ON THE CAR. ONE OF THESE PARTS WAS INTENDED FOR THE EXPORT MARKET. SO MY AMERICAN MADE CAR HAS A PART THAT WAS INTENDED FOR THE EXPORT VERSION. THE PART IN QUESTION IS THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY. MY CONCERN IS THAT IF OTHER BODY PARTS WERE SUBSTITUTED THE CAR MIGHT NOT BE AS CRASH WORTHY AS IT OTHERWISE MIGHT HAVE BEEN.*JB