2014 Hyundai Tucson

The contact owns a 2014 Hyundai Tucson. The contact stated that while driving 40 MPH, the vehicle started making an abnormal ticking sound. While accelerating, the sound level increased. The contact stated that the failure was related to the engine warranty extension TXXM. An independent mechanic was contacted and determined that there was an internal failure with the engine. The fluid levels were topped off; however, the sound continued while driving. The vehicle was towed to the local dealer and the dealer declined to replace the engine due to incomplete updates. The warranty was not transferred. The vehicle was not repaired. The vehicle was purchased from Enterprise Rental Car, and the warranty was not transferred to the owner. The manufacturer was contacted and opened a case. The failure mileage was approximately 134,000.

I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THIS 2014 HYUNDAI TUCSON. IN AUGUST 2025 I NOTICED THAT THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR LOCKS SEIZED. THIS MEANT THE DOOR COULD NOT BE OPENED FROM THE INSIDE, OUTSIDE OR REMOTELY. THIS PRESENTED A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION , OVERTURN , FIRE OR FLOOD. nO PASSENGER COULD EXIT, AND NO RESCUER COULD OPEN THE DOOR. I NOTIFIED HYUNDAI CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY GAVE ME A CASE #[XXX], BUT SAID THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COUD DO AS NO RECALL HAD BEEN MADE. HOWEVER THEY DID RECALL THE 2015 HYUNDAI TUCSON FOR THE SAME DEFECTIVE PART. SO THEY ARE AWARE OF THIS DEFECT AND HAZARD. SINCE HUNDAI REFUSED TO FIX THIS, I INSTRUCTED MY LOCLA MECHANIC TO REPLACE THE LOCKING MECHANISM AT A COST OF $649.80. BILL ATTACHED. I ASK THAT H;YUNDAI REIMBURSE ME AS THIS WAS A LIFE THREATENING DEFECT. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

The contact owns a 2014 Hyundai Tucson. While the contact's wife was driving at an undisclosed speed, several unknown warning lights illuminated, and the vehicle lost motive power. The contact's wife was able to coast the vehicle to the shoulder of the roadway. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed with engine failure. The contact was informed that the engine needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact was advised to have the vehicle towed to the dealer. In addition, the contact was informed of Campaign 953 (Extended Warranty on the Engine). The vehicle was later towed to the dealer, where it was diagnosed with engine failure. The contact was informed that the engine needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. In addition, the contact was informed of Campaign 953 (Extended Warranty on the Engine). The manufacturer was made aware of the failure by the dealer. The manufacturer initially agreed to a good-faith repair. The manufacturer declined the good-faith repair because the Campaign 953 requirement was not performed. The contact had not received information on Campaign 953. The failure mileage was approximately 130,000.

On 10/13/25, I was driving on a state hwy & lost all power. All of my warning lights came on. I managed to pull into a driveway & when I tried to start it, puffs of smoke were coming from under the hood. I got it to my mechanic & he said my starter was burnt up. He replaced the starter & discovered that my engine is seized up. It was a scary incident especially driving on a busy state highway. It put my life & others lives in danger. There were no warning lights on prior to this. I acquired the vehicle in February from a car lot. I have had it serviced regularly.

The contact owns a 2014 Hyundai Tucson. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle inadvertently lost motive power. The contact was able to coast to the shoulder of the roadway, where the vehicle was able to be restarted. The vehicle returned to normal functionality, but the failure became a regular occurrence. The low oil warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, and an oil consumption test was performed. The contact stated that after performing the oil consumption test, the contact was informed that the vehicle was consuming over 1 quart of oil per 1,000 miles driven. The contact was advised by the dealer to continue driving the vehicle for another 1,000 for further evaluation. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, and a case was filed. The failure mileage was 110,000.

The engine experienced catastrophic failure. A piston punctured the engine block, likely due to failure of the connecting rods, an issue known to be associated with the recalled Theta II engine. The engine is still in the vehicle and available for inspection upon request. We were scared and felt seriously endangered during the incident. The engine failed suddenly while we were driving on a busy highway. After a loud clunk, the vehicle immediately lost acceleration and would not respond to throttle input. We had to quickly pull over onto the shoulder while traffic sped past us at high speeds. The sudden loss of power in fast-moving traffic put us at serious risk of being rear-ended or causing an accident. It was a frightening experience that could have resulted in injury or worse. An independent mechanic inspected the vehicle and confirmed there is a hole in the engine block caused by a piston. We brought the vehicle to a Hyundai dealership for further inspection. Still, their communication has been poor, and they have not yet confirmed whether they acknowledge the issue or its relation to the Theta II engine recall. Our independent mechanic has inspected the vehicle and is currently with a Hyundai dealership for inspection. It has not been checked by police or insurance representatives. No third-party inspector has been involved beyond the dealer and mechanic. There were no warning lights, error messages, noises, or performance symptoms before the failure. The engine failure was sudden and occurred without any prior indication of a problem.

I purchased a 2014 Hyundai Tucson with the 2.4L Theta II engine, which has since experienced complete engine failure due to bearing wear. The Hyundai dealership diagnosed this as the same defect covered under Recall 20V-520 and the Kinnick & Coats v. Hyundai class-action settlement (Case No. 8:17-cv-00838-JLS-JDE). Under the terms of that class action, this defect — specifically premature bearing wear leading to engine seizure — should be covered. However, Hyundai Corporate denied my repair, stating that my vehicle did not qualify under the 953 recall. I was never notified of this recall, as I had recently purchased the vehicle used and was unaware of the outstanding recall eligibility or class-action timelines. I maintain my vehicles meticulously, including regular oil changes every 3,000 miles, and this failure occurred under normal driving conditions. Given that the dealership confirmed the defect is exactly what’s outlined in the recall and lawsuit, and the fact that the recall should have applied to my engine based on symptoms and model, I am requesting an expansion of recall coverage or support through warranty or settlement coverage. I have already contacted Hyundai and was denied support. I am requesting investigation into why my VIN is not included and believe the recall scope should be extended.