2007 Chrysler Pacifica

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 CHRYSLER PACIFICA EQUIPPED WITH ACHILLES DESERT HAWK A/P TIRES, SIZE: 235/65/R17 (NA). WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50-55 MPH, THE REAR PASSENGER TIRE BLEW OUT. THERE WAS NO INJURY. THE TIRES WERE REPLACEMENT TIRES. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SIDEWALL WAS SHREDDED AND THE TIRE WAS FRACTURED INTO THREE SEPARATE PIECES. MR. TIRE IN BEXLEY, OHIO WAS CONTACTED AND ARRANGED TO REPLACE THE SET OF TIRES. THE TIRE WAS REPLACED WITH THE SPARE TIRE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE VEHICLE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 200,570. THE APPROXIMATE TIRE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 24.

WHILE COMING TO A STOP IN A PARKING LOT THE TIRE VALVE STEM BLEW OFF, COMPLETELY DEFLATING THE TIRE. SIX WEEKS LATER THE SAME THING OCCURRED TO ANOTHER WHEEL. IT APPEARS THAT VALVE STEM CORRODED JUST BELOW THE CAP. THE PRESSURE INSIDE THE TIRE THEN BLEW OUT THE SCHROEDER VALVE RESULTING IN A QUICK DEFLATE OF THE TIRE. IF THIS HAD HAPPENED AT HIGHWAY SPEED IT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN LOSS OF STEERING AND POSSIBLE ACCIDENT OR PERSONAL INJURY. BOTH TIRE VALVE STEMS HAVE BEEN REPLACED, BUT NOW WONDERING IF THE REMAINING TWO NEED TO BE REPLACED. SUCH A DESIGN OF THIS PRODUCT IS A POTENTIAL FATAL ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. *TR

WE OWNED A 2007 CHRYSLER PACIFICA CAR FOR 3 MONTHS, 46000 MILES APPROX, WHEN PURCHASED. AFTER THE FIRST 3 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP, THE REAR TIRES WENT COMPLETELY BALD , WIRES POKING OUT, THE CAR WAS BOTTOMING OUT ON EVERY BUMP. THE SPRINGS WERE WEAK WE WERE TOLD. THE SHOCKS WERE BROKEN, THE TIRES WERE COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE AND THE DEALER DID FIX AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. 2 NEW TIRES REPLACED , WHEEL ALIGNMENT, TWO NEW SHOCKS, AND SUPPOSEDLY SPRINGS FIXED. AT APPROX. 8 MONTHS LATER THE VEHICLE WAS AGAIN BOTTOMING OUT. ONCE AGAIN WE WERE TOLD SHOCKS BROKEN. CHRYSLER WAS CONTACTED AND REPLACED SHOCKS, DEALER DID WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND A TIE ROD END WAS REPLACED. IN APPROXIMATELY 10 MONTHS WE AGAIN NOTICED THE CAR WAS MAKING NOISE AND BOTTOMING OUT. ONCE AGAIN SHOCKS WERE BROKEN AND THE OTHER TIE ROD END NEEDED REPLACING. CHRYSLER CUSTOMER CARE WAS NOTIFIED FROM THE FIRST INCIDENT AND SUBSEQUENTLY AT EACH ADDITIONAL OCCURENCE. THE DEALER PAID AT THE FIRST OCCURENCE, CHRYSLER PROVIDED SHOCKS AT SECOND OCCURENCE, ON THE LAST OCCURENCE CHRYSLER REQUIRED AN INSPECTION BY A CHRYSLER DEALER. ANOTHER TIE ROD WAS REPLACED. WE WERE TOLD BY DEALER CAR WAS GOOD TO GO. WE TOOK TRIP TO PICK UP FAMILY AT AIRPORT AND HAD TO BE TOWED. UPON REINSPECTION 2 DAYS LATER, WE WERE TOLD 2 STUDS HAD COMPLETELY BROKEN OFF LEFT REAR TIRE, AND TIRE COULD HAVE COME OFF ON FREEWAY AT SPEEDS OF 65 MPH. THEY ALSO DISCOVERED TWO LUGS ON RIGHT REAR TIRE WERE LOOSE. THIS WAS THE SECOND INCIDENT WHERE OUR SAFETY WAS AT RISK. 4 SETS OF SHOCKS 2 TIRES 2 TIE ROD ENDS AND 3 WHEEL ALIGNMENTS LATER. VERY UNSATISFIED. THE CAR IS A SAFETY HAZARD ON THE ROAD. SUSPENSION DESIGN FLAW??? *TR

WHEN CORNERING AT LOW SPEEDS THERE IS A LOUD RUBBING NOISE (LIKE A TIRE RUBBING IN THE WHEEL WELL) COMING FROM THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. I CAN FEEL IT BOTH IN THE STEERING WHEEL AND BRAKE PEDAL. WHEN I GOT NEW TIRES, I HAD THE MECHANIC CHECK THE WHEEL WELLS FOR RUB MARKS AND HE DID NOT FIND ANY. HE STATED THAT THE TIRES WERE NOT RUBBING ANYWHERE. *TR

WARRANT OF MERCHANTABILITY- IMPLIED WARRANTY THAT STATES A VEHICLE WILL RUN LIKE IT'S SUPPOSED TO RUN, APPLYING TO THE BASIC FUNCTIONS OF THE CAR. THE BUYER MUST PROVE A DEFECT WAS PRESENT AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE. 'CAR DID NOT START X2 AT DEALER AND REQUIRED A JUMP START- I WAS INFORMED IT WAS A RESULT OF BEING LOW ON GAS AND HAVING SAT OUT IN THE HOT SUN. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE- DEALER DISCLAIMED A WARRANT OF MECHANIC ABILITY, GIVING THE CONSUMER THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THE DISCLAIMER USING THE FEDERAL UNIFORM COMMERCIAL (UCC). THE UCC CAN BE USED TO CANCEL THE SALE OF A USED CAR. UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE ACTS AND PRACTICES (UDAP LAW) - THESE LAWS CAN BE USED EVEN IF THE CAR IS SOLD AS IS, AS LONG AS THE DEALER IS GUILTY OF A VERBAL DECEPTION OR FAILURE TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION ABOUT THE VEHICLE. '2007 CHRYSLER PACIFICA 'I PURCHASED THE CAR LESS THAN 1 MONTH AGO AND HAVE DRIVEN LESS THAN 2000 MILES. I AM EXTREMELY UPSET BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT HERITAGE KNOWINGLY SOLD ME AN UNSOUND CAR. THE DEALER IS GUILTY OF VERBAL DECEPTION AND FAILURE TO VERBALLY DISCLOSE INFORMATION ABOUT THE VEHICLE. 'THIS CAR WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT AND I WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE SEVERITY OF THE ACCIDENT OR THE ISSUES THE CAR HAD AS A RESULT. ' I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO GET THE CAR SERVICED AND REPAIRED TO LITTLE AVAIL. THE CAR CONTINUES TO HAVE SERIOUS MECHANICAL ISSUES( INDICATING A FRAME ISSUE OR DRIVE TRAIN ISSUE) ' I BELIEVE THE DEALER KNOWINGLY SOLD THE CAR TO ME AND PURPOSELY WITHHELD THE EXTENT OF DAMAGE THE CAR HAD IN THE PRIOR ACCIDENT, AS WELL AS THE CAR'S IMPROPER BASIC FUNCTIONING. THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES: FALSELY REPRESENTED THE CAR AS A SAFE, CAR WITHOUT MAJOR DEFECTS, AND NO PROBLEMS WITH ANY PARTS OF THE CAR- PRESENTED THE CAR AS BEING SOUND AND ABLE TO ADHERE TO BASIC FUNCTIONING (BATTERY ISSUES, ELECTRICAL ISSUES, BRAKE ISSUES, DRIVE TRAIN ISSUES, INVOLVED A MVC) AND DID NOT DISCLOSE HISTORY OF PART. *TR