Owners have filed 69 complaints
about the 2003 Mercedes Benz E Class with NHTSA between 2002 and 2014.
The largest single group is the brakes.
Across this model's run it ranks 1 of 12 worst.
The letter says how bad. This says what kind — whether this year drew
an unusual number of complaints, unusually dangerous
ones, or failures that arrived unusually early.
The dashed ring is 50 — the national norm. Further out is worse.
Complaint volume — 100
Against the median year of the Mercedes Benz E Class. 50 means typical for this
model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 60
11.6% of these complaints
involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of
9.7%.
Early failure — 100
78% of failures with a mileage on record happened under
36,000 miles, against a national rate of
29%.
How 2003 compares with every other Mercedes Benz E Class
Odometer readings owners gave when they filed. About half of all
complaints include one.
Under 1,000 miles
1529.4%
1,000 – 9,999 miles
1835.3%
10,000 – 24,999 miles
59.8%
25,000 – 49,999 miles
35.9%
50,000 – 74,999 miles
23.9%
75,000 – 99,999 miles
47.8%
100,000 – 149,999 miles
35.9%
150,000+ miles
12.0%
When owners complained
A spike years after the car went on sale usually means a part wearing
out on schedule across the whole fleet — the kind of pattern no single
owner can see from inside their own car.
Dec 2002peak 7Apr 2014
Recalls on the 2003 Mercedes Benz E Class
A complaint is one owner's allegation. A recall is the point at which
the manufacturer or a regulator agreed the defect is real and dangerous
enough to fix for free — however old the car is.
United States — NHTSA
08V303000
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
MERCEDES-BENZ IS RECALLING MY 2006-2008 M-CLASS, R-CLASS, MY 2005-2009 SLK-CLASS, MY 2005-2008 C-CLASS, MY 2003-2004 AND 2006-2008 CLK-CLASS, MY 2003-2008 E-CLASS, MY 2004 AND 2008 CL-CLASS, MY 2008 CLS-CLASS, MY 2004 AND 2007-2008 S-CLASS, MY 2003 G-CLASS, AND MY 2003-2004, 2006 AND 2009 SL-CLASS VEHICLES. A SOFTWARE CALIBRATION NUMBER (SCN) CODING RECEIVED ON THE AFFECTED VEHICLES DURING A RECENT WORKSHOP VISIT WAS INCORRECT. DEPENDING ON THE MODEL YEAR AND MODEL AFFECTED, THE RESULTS OF AN INCORRECT SCN CODING CAN AFFECT A NUMBER OF VEHICLE SAFETY AND EMISSION FUNCTIONS INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING TYPES OF FUNCTIONS: (1) THE FUEL GAUGE READINGS MAY BE INCORRECT; (2) A STUCK FUEL-LEVEL SENSOR MAY NOT BE DISPLAYED IN THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER; (3) THE OBD SYSTEM MAY CAUSE THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT TO ILLUMINATE INCORRECTLY; AND, (4) THE SPEEDOMETER MAY BE OUT OF TOLERANCE.
Risk: IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH, THE ELECTRICAL FUEL PUMP MAY NOT RECEIVE A CRASH SIGNAL THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE FUEL PUMP TO DISCONNECT AND PREVENT FUTURE FUEL DELIVERY AS DESIGNED.
05V133000
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, THE SENSOTRONIC BRAKE CONTROL (SBC) SYSTEM MAY PREMATURELY SHIFT TO THE HYDRAULIC BACK-UP FUNCTION MODE, DUE TO DETERIORATION OF THE WIRING HARNESS CONNECTION, OR DUE TO PREMATURE FAILURE OF THE HYDRAULIC PUMP.
Risk: IN THE HYDRAULIC BACK-UP MODE, THE DRIVER HAS BRAKING POWER SUFFICIENT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, ALTHOUGH GREATER BRAKE PEDAL PRESSURE IS REQUIRED AND THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL WILL BE NOTICEABLY LONGER.
04V296000
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING SYSTEM OF THE SENSOTRONIC BRAKE CONTROL (SBC) IS DESIGNED TO MONITOR THE PRESSURE GRADIENT WITHIN THE HIGH PRESSURE LINE OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM. IF AN UNACCEPTABLE PRESSURE GRADIENT IS DETECTED, THE SYSTEM WILL SWITCH, AS IT IS DESIGNED TO DO, INTO THE HYDRAULIC FUNCTION MODE.
Risk: IF VEHICLES ARE NOT ROUTINELY SERVICED AND HAVE EXTREMELY HIGH MILEAGE COMBINED WITH A HIGH NUMBER OF BRAKE ACTUATIONS, OR A HIGH BRAKE ACTUATION FREQUENCY, THE PUMP MOTOR OF THE SBC MAY RUN OUT OF PERMISSIBLE TOLERANCES, THEREBY TRIGGERING THE HYDRAULIC FUNCTION MODE.
03V289000
STEERING
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, THE NUT ON THE BOLT WHICH CONNECTS THE STEERING GEAR TO THE STEERING COUPLING MAY NOT BE TIGHTENED CORRECTLY.
Risk: THE LOOSENING OF THE NUT COULD RESULT IN A SLIPPING OF THE CONNECTION OVER TIME, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Canada — Transport Canada
Canada runs its own recall programme, and its campaigns do not
always mirror the American ones.
Recall 202274010,460 units in Canada
Structure
Issue: On certain vehicles, the sunroof glass may not be properly attached to the sliding roof frame. Over time, the glass can become loose and could separate from the vehicle. Note: Vehicles that were inspected under Transport Canada recalls 2019-668 and 2021-478 also require this inspection. Safety Risk: A sunroof that detaches from the vehicle could create a road hazard for others and increase the risk of a crash. Corrective Actions: Mercedes-Benz will notify owners by mail and instruct you to take your vehicle to a dealer to inspect the bonding of the sunroof glass. Dealers will replace the sliding roof, if necessary.
Recall 2021478432 units in Canada
Structure
Issue: This recall is for certain vehicles inspected under Mercedes-Benz recall 7891003 (Transport Canada recall 2019-668) that require a second inspection. On certain vehicles, the sunroof glass may not be properly attached to the sliding roof frame. Over time, the glass can become loose and could separate from the vehicle. Note: This recall affects 2006 and 2007 models originally equipped with a sunroof. Additionally, some 2001-2011 models may have had an affected sunroof installed during a repair. Safety Risk: A sunroof that detaches from the vehicle could create a road hazard for others and increase the risk of a crash. Corrective Actions: Mercedes-Benz will notify owners by mail and instruct you to take your vehicle to a dealer to inspect the bonding of the sunroof glass. Dealers will replace the sliding roof, if necessary.
Recall 201966830,219 units in Canada
Structure
Issue: On certain vehicles, the sunroof glass may not be properly attached to the sliding roof frame. Over time, the glass can become loose and could separate from the vehicle. Note: This recall affects 2006 and 2007 models originally equipped with a sunroof. Additionally, some 2001-2011 models may have had an affected sunroof installed during a repair. Safety Risk: A sunroof that detaches from the vehicle could create a road hazard for others and increase the risk of a crash. Corrective Actions: Mercedes-Benz will notify owners by mail and instruct you to take your vehicle to a dealer to inspect the bonding of the sunroof glass. Dealers will replace the sliding roof, if necessary.
Recall 200824233 units in Canada
Other
Certain vehicles may have been programmed with incorrect software calibration data during the manufacturing process. This could affect various functions such as: The electric fuel pump may not receive a signal which, in case of a crash, may prevent the fuel pump from disconnecting as designed; The maximum speed limiter may not be activated; The fuel gauge readings may be incorrect; A stuck fuel-level sensor may not be displayed in the instrument cluster; The speedometer may be out of tolerance which, as a result, may indicate inaccurate vehicle speed; The On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) system may reduce the emission level applicable to the vehicle, causing the Check Engine Light to illuminate incorrectly. Correction: Dealers will reprogram the electronic control module.
Recall 20050949,256 units in Canada
Brakes
On certain vehicles, the Sensotronic Brake Control (SBC) unit may contain a pump piston which is out of permissible tolerances. Also, vibrations within the electrical connector may cause a loss of electrical continuity. Both conditions may result in the system reverting to hydraulic function mode. A loss of brake power assist would result in increased pedal effort and extended stopping distance. Correction: Dealers will inspect and, if required, replace the SBC pump unit.
Recall 20042106,579 units in Canada
Brakes
The electronic monitoring system of the Sensotronic Brake Control (SBC) is designed to monitor the pressure gradient within the high pressure line of the brake system. If an unacceptable pressure gradient is detected, the system will switch, as it is designed to do, into the hydraulic function mode. DaimlerChrysler AG has determined that in certain instances, if vehicles are not routinely serviced and have extremely high mileage combined with a high number of brake actuations or a high brake actuation frequency, the pump motor of the SBC may run out of permissible tolerances, thereby triggering the hydraulic function mode. Correction: Dealers will re-program the SBC hydraulic unit. A software update will provide a clear maintenance notice on the vehicle display and assure continuous pump speed operation within tolerances.
Reports where the owner recorded a crash, a fire, an injury or a death.
Santa Monica, CACrash
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST:HYDRAULIC
I WAS INVOLVED IN A REAR-END COLLISION IN 9-04 WHERE MY 2003 MERCEDES (MB) WAS UNABLE TO STOP IN TIME. MY CAR WAS NOT ABLE TO STOP IN TIME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS TRAVELING ONLY ABOUT 20 MPH AND THAT I APPLIED QUICK, MAXIMUM PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES. THERE WAS ONE OTHER "CLOSE-CALL" A FEW WEEKS PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT. WHEN I CALLED THE MERCEDES CUSTOMER SERVICE 800 # AND THE MERCEDES DEALER, BOTH OF THEM DENIED THAT THERE WERE ANY REPORTS OR RECALLS OF BRAKE FAILURE. THEREFORE I WAS DEEMED TO BE AT FAULT FOR THE ACCIDENT AT THAT TIME. WHEN I TOOK MY MB FOR ROUTINE SERVICE IN 2-05, THE TECH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A BRAKE RECALL AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE REPAIR. NOW IN 2-06, I RECEIVED YET ANOTHER BRAKE RECALL (CAMPAIGN # 2005-110001). ONE STATEMENT IN THE RECALL WAS "THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL WILL BE NOTICEABLY LONGER WHICH COULD LEAD TO A VEHICLE CRASH." MY PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS AT CONTACTING MB RESULTED IN THEIR REPEATED DENIAL THAT THEY WERE AT FAULT FOR THE BRAKE FAILURE AND THE ACCIDENT. WITH THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AND THE REPEATED NATURE OF THE BRAKE RECALLS, I FEEL THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND SHOULD REIMBURSE MYSELF AND OTHERS LIKE ME FOR THE INCREASES IN THE INSURANCE PREMIUM AS WELL AS THE INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLE. IT IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY FOR THE INTEGRITY OF A RENOWNED CAR COMPANY.
NHTSA complaint #10151160 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Santa Monica, CACrash
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
I WAS INVOLVED IN A REAR-END COLLISION IN 9-04 WHERE MY 2003 MERCEDES (MB) WAS UNABLE TO STOP IN TIME. MY CAR WAS NOT ABLE TO STOP IN TIME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS TRAVELING ONLY ABOUT 20 MPH AND THAT I APPLIED QUICK, MAXIMUM PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES. THERE WAS ONE OTHER "CLOSE-CALL" A FEW WEEKS PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT. WHEN I CALLED THE MERCEDES CUSTOMER SERVICE 800 # AND THE MERCEDES DEALER, BOTH OF THEM DENIED THAT THERE WERE ANY REPORTS OR RECALLS OF BRAKE FAILURE. THEREFORE I WAS DEEMED TO BE AT FAULT FOR THE ACCIDENT AT THAT TIME. WHEN I TOOK MY MB FOR ROUTINE SERVICE IN 2-05, THE TECH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A BRAKE RECALL AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE REPAIR. NOW IN 2-06, I RECEIVED YET ANOTHER BRAKE RECALL (CAMPAIGN # 2005-110001). ONE STATEMENT IN THE RECALL WAS "THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL WILL BE NOTICEABLY LONGER WHICH COULD LEAD TO A VEHICLE CRASH." MY PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS AT CONTACTING MB RESULTED IN THEIR REPEATED DENIAL THAT THEY WERE AT FAULT FOR THE BRAKE FAILURE AND THE ACCIDENT. WITH THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AND THE REPEATED NATURE OF THE BRAKE RECALLS, I FEEL THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND SHOULD REIMBURSE MYSELF AND OTHERS LIKE ME FOR THE INCREASES IN THE INSURANCE PREMIUM AS WELL AS THE INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLE. IT IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY FOR THE INTEGRITY OF A RENOWNED CAR COMPANY.
NHTSA complaint #10151160 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Albertson, NYCrash1 injured
AIR BAGS
SUDDEN ACCELERATION
NHTSA complaint #10120484 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Albertson, NYCrash1 injured
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL
SUDDEN ACCELERATION
NHTSA complaint #10120484 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 1,440 milesParkersburg, WVCrash1 injured
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
DEFECTIVE BRAKES.
NHTSA complaint #10017030 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The most recent complaints
In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.
at 80,000 milesScottsdale, AZ
FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE
MY WHOLE GARAGE SMELLS LIKE GASOLINE WHENEVER WE FILL UP THE GAS TANK. THE SMELL WILL REMAIN UNTIL WE DRIVE THE CAR FOR A FEW DAYS, CONSUMING PERHAPS 1/4 OF THE TANK. THIS HAS BEEN ON-GOING ONLY FOR THE LAST YEAR.
NHTSA complaint #10585406 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 88,900 milesGrand Prairie, TX
SERVICE BRAKES
I STARTED SMELLING GAS IN THE CAR CABIN. THERE WAS GAS ON MY DRIVEWAY AS WELL. THE GAS SIGN STARTED TO FLASH ON MY DASH AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID THERE WAS A MAJOR LEAK IN THE PURGE SYSTEM. THEY QUOTED ME $3066.88. THEY SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND NOT PASS IT ON TO ME.
NHTSA complaint #10556255 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 88,900 milesGrand Prairie, TX
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
I STARTED SMELLING GAS IN THE CAR CABIN. THERE WAS GAS ON MY DRIVEWAY AS WELL. THE GAS SIGN STARTED TO FLASH ON MY DASH AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID THERE WAS A MAJOR LEAK IN THE PURGE SYSTEM. THEY QUOTED ME $3066.88. THEY SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND NOT PASS IT ON TO ME.
NHTSA complaint #10556255 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 53,000 milesPhoenix, AZ
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
STRONG ODOR OF GASOLINE EVIDENT AFTER FILL UP. THIS COINCIDED WITH ACCURACY ISSUES OF THE FUEL GAUGE, WHERE VEHICLE NOW RUNS OUT OF GAS WHEN GAUGE INDICATES 1/4 TANK. THE STRONG SMELL OF GAS HAPPENS NOW REPEATEDLY WITH EVERY FILL UP, WHICH SEEMS TO INDICATE SOME FORM OF LEAKAGE AT OR NEAR THE TOP OF THE TANK.
NHTSA complaint #10550379 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Houston, TX
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
I PURCHASED THE MERCEDES IN APRIL 2013 OF THIS YEAR AND LESS THAN 30 DAYS OF PURCHASING THE CAR I HAD MAJOR REPAIRS DONE TO THE CAR. I SLIGHTLY SMELLED FUEL VAPORS WHEN I PURCHASED THE CAR HOWEVER I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS JUST A POSSIBLE AFTER EFFECT OF ME REFUELING THE CAR. OVER THE COURSE OF TWO MONTHS THE FUMES BECAME WORSE AND WORSE AND I STAY WITH A MIGRAINE EVERYDAY. TODAY WAS UNBEARABLE AS IT IS HOT OUTSIDE AND IT IS BECOMING HARD TO CONCENTRATE AND IT FEELS LIKE MY HEAD IS ABOUT TO BURST. I AM GOING TO TAKE IT INTO THE DEALER AS THIS IS THE WORST EXPERIENCE IN MY LIFE! THE PEOPLE I PURCHASED THE CAR FROM REFUSED TO PAY FOR ANYTHING AND I WANTED TO RETURN THE CALL ALTOGETHER! I PLAN ON GOING TO THE DEALER, AND TO THE DOCTOR.
NHTSA complaint #10535366 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 120,000 milesRichmond, TX
SERVICE BRAKES
THE WARNING LIGHT OF BRAKES FAILURE CAME ON AT HIGHWAY EXIT AT 65MPH AND THE BRAKE PADDLE HIT THE FLOOR WITH NO BRAKES. PULLED OVER AND TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER IN MID MARCH AND WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THIS IS THE SBC PUMP THAT FAILED WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED BY MERCEDES BENZ UNDER SERVICE BULLETIN NO.: 484656 BUT THE WARRANTY EXPIRED ON 02/28/13 AND SINCE I WAS 15 DAYS OVER THIS WILL NOT BE COVERED. CONTACTED MERCEDES BENZ OF NA AND ASKED THEM THAT I BOUGHT THE CAR USED AND WAS NOT TOLD BY ANYONE ABOUT THIS TSB AND THEY SHOULD COVER THE REPAIRS SINCE THE PUMP ACTUALLY FAILED WHEN THE CAR STILL UNDER EXTENDED 10 YEAR WARRANTY (SERVICE BULLETIN NO.: 484656 ). THEY FLATLY REFUSED. I THAN ASKED THAT IF THIS WAS A KNOWN ISSUE THAT THE BRAKES COULD FAIL COMPLETELY THAN ITS MERCEDES DUTY TO TELL THE OWNERS EVEN IF THEY BUY USED, THE PERSON JUST KEPT QUIET. PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY GET HURT OR DIE WHEN THIS FAILURE HAPPENS. AT THE END I WAS CHARGED $2309 FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS A KNOWN ISSUE BY MERCEDES.
NHTSA complaint #10504889 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 210,000 milesMillsboro, DE
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
EACH TIME I FILL UP THE GAS TANK TO CAPACITY, THE FUEL TANK EMITS VAPORS. IT SEEMED SOMEWHAT TOLERABLE IN THE PAST, THOUGH THIS PAST WEEK, IT WAS ENOUGH TO GO THROUGH WALLS AND UP 2 STORIES. IT'S PAST TOLERABLE AND JUST DOWNRIGHT UNACCEPTABLE NOW. I KNOW I'M NOT THE ONLY OWNER TO HAVE THIS PROBLEM. FRANKLY I'M AMAZED A COMPANY WITH THE "PEDIGREE" OF MERCEDES BENZ HAS ALLOWED THIS TO GO UNSOLVED ACROSS THE MARKET.
NHTSA complaint #10476883 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 103,000 milesMiami, FL
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCEDES E CLASS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A FUEL ODOR WAS PRESENT INSIDE OF THE VEHICLE AND THE FUEL TANK WAS LEAKING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED AND STATED THAT THEY WERE UNAWARE OF THIS TYPE OF FAILURE. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS ADDRESSING THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND REPEATED THE DEALER'S SENTIMENTS. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 103,000.
NHTSA complaint #10468261 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 78,000 milesBurligame, CA
FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE
FUEL LEAKING FROM VEHICLE NEAR REAR LEFT TIRE. FOUND FUEL AROUND FUEL SENSOR UNDER REAR PASSENGER SEAT. MOST EVIDENT AFTER FILLING FUEL TANK. FIRST DISCOVERED LEAK AT 70K MILEAGE AND AGAIN ON 128K.
NHTSA complaint #10456826 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 4 milesNorthridge, CA
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
I STARTED THE CAR IN THE MORNING, AND IT GAVE ME A MALFUNCTION MESSAGE STATING THAT THE DISPLAY IS DEFECTIVE. THE FUEL GAUGE DISPLAY DOESN'T READ THE PROPER LEVEL, THE BACKUP LIGHTS DO NOT WORK, THE SIGNALS AND HAZARD LIGHTS DO NOT OPERATE, THE WIPERS DO NOT WORK. THE FEATURES OF AUTO ADJUSTING THE STEERING WHEEL TILT, THE MIRRORS, AND THE SEATS ARE NOT WORKING. CHECKED FOR RECALLS, FOUND A SIMILAR RECALL IN JULY OF 2008, BUT THE SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE DEALERSHIP SAID MY VIN NUMBER WASN'T INCLUDED!
NHTSA complaint #10436746 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 107,000 milesAustin, TX
FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE
VERY STRONG GAS FUMES WHEN GAS TANK IS FULL. FUMES COMPLETELY PERMEATE MY TWO CAR GARAGE AND ALSO ENTER PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. THE FUMES DISAPPEAR WHEN TANK LEVEL REACHES 7/8 FULL. THERE ARE SEVERAL POSTINGS ON DIFFERENT WEBSITES ON THE WEB REGARDING STRONG GAS ODOR WHEN THE TANK IS FULL ON E MODEL MERCEDES YEARS 2003 TO 2006. THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE WITH POTENTIAL FOR EXPLOSIVELY AND/OR FIRE. I CONTACTED MERCEDES REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE RECALLED BASED ON THE APPARENT HIGH INCIDENCE. THE COMPANY DOES NOT SEEM INTERESTED IN TAKING ANY ACTION.
NHTSA complaint #10433530 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 57,000 milesAustin, TX
FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE
THE CAR HAS A VERY STRONG GASOLINE ODOR WHEN THE FUEL TANK IS FULL. THE GASOLINE ODOR PERMEATES THE CABIN AND, WHEN PARKED IN AN ENCLOSED GARAGE, CAUSES A HIGH CONCENTRATION OF GAS FUMES THAT OVERWHELMS A THREE CAR GARAGE AS WELL AS THE 1000 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ABOVE THE GARAGE (EVEN WITH ALL ADJOINING DOORS CLOSED). SHOULD THE GASOLINE CONCENTRATION REACH THE PROPER LEVEL, IT MAY CREATE A FIRE OR EXPLOSION HAZARD. ONCE THE TANK IS 1/8 EMPTY, THE FUEL ODOR GOES AWAY AND DOES NOT RETURN UNTIL THE GAS TANK IS ONCE AGAIN FULL. HAD AUTO CHECKED BY THE LOCAL MERCEDES DEALER AND THEY STATED PROBLEM COULD NOT BE LOCATED BUT I NEEDED TO REPLACE ENTIRE FUEL TANK ASSEMBLY TO RESOLVE ISSUE. TOOK CAR TO INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO FOUND SIGNS OF GASOLINE LEAKAGE COMING FROM THE TOP OF THE TANK AND RUNNING DOWN THE DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE TANK. BASED ON RESEARCH CONDUCTED ON THE WEB, IT APPEARS THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM WITH E CLASS MERCEDES YEARS 2003 TO 2006. THE POSTINGS FOUND ON SEVERAL MERCEDES BENZ OWNER SITES INDICATES THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN DETECTED SINCE THE CARS WERE NEW. A PERSONAL FRIEND, WITH THE SAME YEAR AND MODEL, HAS EXACTLY THE SAME PROBLEM. THE PREVALENCE OF THE ISSUE INDICATES A DESIGN/ ENGINEERING FAILURE THAT RESULTS IN GASOLINE LEAKING FROM 'SOMEWHERE' IN THE FUEL SYSTEM IN THE VICINITY OF THE FUEL TANK. I REQUEST AN INVESTIGATION INTO THIS ISSUE WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF ORDERING A RECALL TO ADDRESS AN OBVIOUS UNDERDESIGN FUEL SYSTEM COMPONENT.
NHTSA complaint #10433494 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 31,690 milesRYE, NY
SUSPENSION:FRONT
I OWN A MERCEDES BENZ E-500, 2003, WITH ONLY 31,700 MILES ON IT. ON FRIDAY, JULY 16, I HAD IT SERVICED AT MY LOCAL MB DEALER IN LARCHMONT, NY. ON SUNDAY, JULY 18, AS I STARTED THE CAR IN MY GARAGE, A WARNING MESSAGE APPEARED SAYING "STOP. CAR TOO LOW". I HAVE CONTACTED THE DEALER AND THEY WILL LOOK AT IT BUT, I BELIEVE IT IS A FAILURE OF THE FRONT RIGHT (PASSENGER SIDE) AIRMATIC SUSPENSION, THE CAR IS OBVIOUSLY OUT OF WARRANTY BUT I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT, AFTER ONLY 31,700 MILES, THAT SUCH A PART CAN FAIL. I'M RATHER HESITANT TO DRIVE IT TO THE DEALER BUT THEY ARE ASSURING ME THAT IT IS SAFE TO DRIVE. IN MY RESEARCH I FOUND THAT MB HAS HAD SIMILAR COMPLAINTS ON THIS TYPE OF PART AND I WISH FOR THE NHTSA TO TAKE SOME SORT OF ACTION TO FORCE MB TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU
NHTSA complaint #10344140 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 10,490 milesPismo Beach, CA
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
DEFECTIVE 2003 MERCEDES BENZ MODEL E320. CONSUMER IS SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT FROM MERCEDES BENZ. *
NHTSA complaint #10181643 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 30,001 milesCary, NC
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED TWO RECALL LETTERS WERE RECEIVED REGARDING THE BRAKES, #05V133000 AND #04V296000. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION AND IT WAS DETERMINED THE REPAIR WORK DID NOT NEED TO BE COMPLETED. THE CONTACT THEN ALERTED THE MANUFACTURER THAT THE WORK WAS NOT DONE, AND THE MANUFACTURER DETERMINED IT WAS AT THE DEALERSHIPS DISCRETION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE WORK NEEDED TO BE PERFORMED.
NHTSA complaint #10173848 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Santa Monica, CACrash
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST:HYDRAULIC
I WAS INVOLVED IN A REAR-END COLLISION IN 9-04 WHERE MY 2003 MERCEDES (MB) WAS UNABLE TO STOP IN TIME. MY CAR WAS NOT ABLE TO STOP IN TIME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS TRAVELING ONLY ABOUT 20 MPH AND THAT I APPLIED QUICK, MAXIMUM PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES. THERE WAS ONE OTHER "CLOSE-CALL" A FEW WEEKS PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT. WHEN I CALLED THE MERCEDES CUSTOMER SERVICE 800 # AND THE MERCEDES DEALER, BOTH OF THEM DENIED THAT THERE WERE ANY REPORTS OR RECALLS OF BRAKE FAILURE. THEREFORE I WAS DEEMED TO BE AT FAULT FOR THE ACCIDENT AT THAT TIME. WHEN I TOOK MY MB FOR ROUTINE SERVICE IN 2-05, THE TECH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A BRAKE RECALL AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE REPAIR. NOW IN 2-06, I RECEIVED YET ANOTHER BRAKE RECALL (CAMPAIGN # 2005-110001). ONE STATEMENT IN THE RECALL WAS "THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL WILL BE NOTICEABLY LONGER WHICH COULD LEAD TO A VEHICLE CRASH." MY PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS AT CONTACTING MB RESULTED IN THEIR REPEATED DENIAL THAT THEY WERE AT FAULT FOR THE BRAKE FAILURE AND THE ACCIDENT. WITH THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AND THE REPEATED NATURE OF THE BRAKE RECALLS, I FEEL THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND SHOULD REIMBURSE MYSELF AND OTHERS LIKE ME FOR THE INCREASES IN THE INSURANCE PREMIUM AS WELL AS THE INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLE. IT IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY FOR THE INTEGRITY OF A RENOWNED CAR COMPANY.
NHTSA complaint #10151160 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Santa Monica, CACrash
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
I WAS INVOLVED IN A REAR-END COLLISION IN 9-04 WHERE MY 2003 MERCEDES (MB) WAS UNABLE TO STOP IN TIME. MY CAR WAS NOT ABLE TO STOP IN TIME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS TRAVELING ONLY ABOUT 20 MPH AND THAT I APPLIED QUICK, MAXIMUM PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES. THERE WAS ONE OTHER "CLOSE-CALL" A FEW WEEKS PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT. WHEN I CALLED THE MERCEDES CUSTOMER SERVICE 800 # AND THE MERCEDES DEALER, BOTH OF THEM DENIED THAT THERE WERE ANY REPORTS OR RECALLS OF BRAKE FAILURE. THEREFORE I WAS DEEMED TO BE AT FAULT FOR THE ACCIDENT AT THAT TIME. WHEN I TOOK MY MB FOR ROUTINE SERVICE IN 2-05, THE TECH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A BRAKE RECALL AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE REPAIR. NOW IN 2-06, I RECEIVED YET ANOTHER BRAKE RECALL (CAMPAIGN # 2005-110001). ONE STATEMENT IN THE RECALL WAS "THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL WILL BE NOTICEABLY LONGER WHICH COULD LEAD TO A VEHICLE CRASH." MY PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS AT CONTACTING MB RESULTED IN THEIR REPEATED DENIAL THAT THEY WERE AT FAULT FOR THE BRAKE FAILURE AND THE ACCIDENT. WITH THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AND THE REPEATED NATURE OF THE BRAKE RECALLS, I FEEL THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND SHOULD REIMBURSE MYSELF AND OTHERS LIKE ME FOR THE INCREASES IN THE INSURANCE PREMIUM AS WELL AS THE INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLE. IT IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY FOR THE INTEGRITY OF A RENOWNED CAR COMPANY.
NHTSA complaint #10151160 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Albertson, NYCrash1 injured
AIR BAGS
SUDDEN ACCELERATION
NHTSA complaint #10120484 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Albertson, NYCrash1 injured
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL
SUDDEN ACCELERATION
NHTSA complaint #10120484 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 3,905 milesOrland Park, IL
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:ANTILOCK/TRACTION CONTROL/ELECTRONIC LIMITED SLIP
INTERMITTENTLY WHEN LIFTING FOOT OFF THE BRAKE PEDAL AND COMMENCE TO DEPRESS THE BRAKE PEDAL AGAIN IT CAUSES A LACK OF BRAKING. VEHICLE HAD BEEN TO THE DEALER, WHO INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT THEY COULD NOT LOCATE A PROBLEM.
NHTSA complaint #10109036 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 15,000 milesHartselle, AL
TIRES:TREAD/BELT
GOODYEAR TIRE DEFECT GOODYEAR LS TIRE. TIREES ARE CUPPING STARTING AT APPROX.15000 MILES. TIRES MUST BE REPLACED AT 20000 MILES. NO RESPONSE BY GOODYEAR. GOODYEAR HAS HAD 294 ON-LINE COMPLAINTS FOR THIS TIRE WITH APPROX. 85% FOR THIS OR SIMULAR PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE WAS CHECKED OKAY. SEE WWW.GOODYEAR.COM.
NHTSA complaint #10105682 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 18,000 milesGreat Neck, NY
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST:VACUUM:HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS
AFTER RECEIVING NHTSA RECALL 04V296000 MADE CONTACT WITH THE DEALER. CONSUMER WAS TOLD THAT VEHICLE COULD NOT BE SERVICED UNTIL JANUARY 2005.
NHTSA complaint #10101163 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Coral Gables, FL
VISIBILITY:WINDSHIELD WIPER/WASHER
I OWN A MERCEDES E 500 ,YEAR 2004.I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE RECALL FOR THE BRAKE PROBLEM AFTER I ALMOST KILL MYSELF WHEN THE BRAKE SYSTEM FAILED YESTERDAY. THE MERCEDES FAILED TO INFORM THE CONSUMER ESP. THIS KIND OF DEFECT. I FOUND OUT THAT THIS RECALL WAS SINCE MAY AND HAD TO EXPERIENCE MYSELF BEFORE RECEIVING THE RECALL LETTER. THIS IS NOT A GOOD BUSSINESS PRACTICE AND IN FACT A NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE COMPANY. THIS CAN CAUSE MY LIFE AND MAY OTHERS WHO OWN THE SAME MODEL OF CAR IN WHOM I KNOW A FEW AND THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RECALL LETTER.
NHTSA complaint #10097992 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Coral Gables, FL
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
I OWN A MERCEDES E 500 ,YEAR 2004.I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE RECALL FOR THE BRAKE PROBLEM AFTER I ALMOST KILL MYSELF WHEN THE BRAKE SYSTEM FAILED YESTERDAY. THE MERCEDES FAILED TO INFORM THE CONSUMER ESP. THIS KIND OF DEFECT. I FOUND OUT THAT THIS RECALL WAS SINCE MAY AND HAD TO EXPERIENCE MYSELF BEFORE RECEIVING THE RECALL LETTER. THIS IS NOT A GOOD BUSSINESS PRACTICE AND IN FACT A NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE COMPANY. THIS CAN CAUSE MY LIFE AND MAY OTHERS WHO OWN THE SAME MODEL OF CAR IN WHOM I KNOW A FEW AND THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RECALL LETTER.
NHTSA complaint #10097992 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Coral Gables, FL
FUEL SYSTEM, OTHER
I OWN A MERCEDES E 500 ,YEAR 2004.I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE RECALL FOR THE BRAKE PROBLEM AFTER I ALMOST KILL MYSELF WHEN THE BRAKE SYSTEM FAILED YESTERDAY. THE MERCEDES FAILED TO INFORM THE CONSUMER ESP. THIS KIND OF DEFECT. I FOUND OUT THAT THIS RECALL WAS SINCE MAY AND HAD TO EXPERIENCE MYSELF BEFORE RECEIVING THE RECALL LETTER. THIS IS NOT A GOOD BUSSINESS PRACTICE AND IN FACT A NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE COMPANY. THIS CAN CAUSE MY LIFE AND MAY OTHERS WHO OWN THE SAME MODEL OF CAR IN WHOM I KNOW A FEW AND THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RECALL LETTER.
NHTSA complaint #10097992 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.