1999 Isuzu Amigo

DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE ABS ACTIVATED AT LOW SPEEDS. WHILE DRIVING AT 5 MPH ON SLIPPERY ROADS THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE REAR ENDED ANOTHER VEHICLE DURING EMERGENCY BRAKING. THE ABS ACTIVATION RESULTED IN EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE. THERE WAS STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. THE ABS CONTINUED TO ACTIVATE AT LOW SPEEDS. ON OCTOBER 14, 2005 THE CONTACT RECEIVED NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN 02I002000. THE PARTS NEEDED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE WERE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP. THE MANUFACTURER CONFIRMED THE PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE. *AK

CONSUMER RECEIVED RECALL 021-002-000, CONCERNING ABS CONTROL UNIT/MODULE FAILURE. THE RECALLED PART NEEDED TO BE REPLACED SINCE THE RECALL WAS DONE. VEHICLE DID NOT STOP IN TIME, AND THERE WAS A GRINDING NOISE EVERY TIME BRAKES WERE PRESSED.*AK GRINDING NOISE WHEN BRAKING IN GRAVEL BUMPS ON THE ROAD OR WHEN THE ROAD IS SLIPPERY. ALSO, STOPPING DISTANCE WAS EXTENDED. *LA

MY 99 ISUZU AMIGO WAS IN A CRASH IN 6/03 WHEN A DRIVER TURNED LEFT AT AN INTERSECTION IN FRONT OF MY ISUZU. BRAKES WERE FORCIBLY APPLIED ON THE ISUZU, BUT IT DIDN'T STOP. A 16-MTH OLD IN THE TURNING CAR WAS FATALLY INJURED & LATER DIED. OTHERS WERE HURT & MY ISUZU WAS TOTALED. ISUZU SENT ME A NOTE 7/03 THAT STATED THE BRAKES REQUIRE LONGER THAN NORMAL STOPPING DISTANCE & SHOULD BE REPLACED. I RESEARCHED & FOUND ISUZU KNEW OF THE DEFECTIVE BRAKES IN 6/02, WHEN THEY ANNOUNCED THEY WERE UPGRADING THEM. NEITHER ISUZU NOR GE CAPITAL (THE FINANCING COMPANY) EVER NOTIFIED ME UNTIL THE 7/03 NOTE FROM ISUZU. INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THIS, AND THE RISK I MAY BE SUED BY THE OTHER CARS DRIVERGE & THEIR ATTORNEY IS DEMANDING I PAY $18M ON TOP OF $11M THEY ALREADY GOT FROM MY INSURER. GE IGNORES AN AGREEMENT WE REACHED IN 2002 WHENDUE TO DECEPTIVE SALES TACTICS BY ISUZUS SALESMANTHEY ACCEPTED A DEPOSIT STOLEN FROM ME BY THE SALESMAN & PAYMENTS I MADE UNDER DURESS AS PAYMENT IN FULL. THIS WAS REACHED WHEN GE LEARNED THE DEALERSHIP FIRED THE SALESMAN AFTER THEY INVESTIGATED AND CONFIRMED MY REPORT OF THE DECEPTIVE/FAKED CONTRACT. PER OUR AGREEMENT, GE WAS TO SEND ME THE TITLE & WAS TO REPORT THE CONTRACT PAID IN FULL TO CREDIT BUREAUS. GE REPORTED FULL PAYMENT TO THE BUREAUS, BUT NEVER SENT ME THE TITLE. BY KEEPING THE TITLE, GE WAS ABLE TO MISREPRESENT THEMSELVES AS LIENHOLDER & GOT MY INSURER TO PAY THEMINSTEAD OF ME$11M IN FUNDS & SALVAGE FOR MY ISUZU. AND NOW GE IS DEMANDING $18M FROM MEALL IN SPITE OF OUR 2002 AGREEMENT. I WROTE GE & AMERICAN ISUZU MOTORS ADVISING THAT THEIR NEGLIGENCE IN THE DEFECTIVE BRAKES KILLED A BABY & INJURED OTHERS. I ALSO REQUESTED REIMBURSEMENT OF $11M, VEHICLE REPLACEMENT & DAMAGE COSTS. GE & ISUZU IGNORED MY LETTER. GE CONTINUES, WITH THEIR ATTORNEY, PURSUING ME FOR $18M. PLEASE RECALL 98/99 ISUZUS TO PREVENT MORE PEOPLE FROM BEING KILLED BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF ISUZU & GE.

THE ABS LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON 6/24/2003. AFTER SHUTTING THE VEHICLE OFF A HUMMING NOISE WAS HEARD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT VEHICLE WAS ON RECALL, BUT THE RECALL WAS DONE IS STAGES. THE CONSUMER WAS NOT TO BE NOTIFIED UNTIL AUGUST 2003. THE DEALER REQUIRED THE CONSUMER TO PAY FOR THE RECALL REPAIR.*AK