A Dodge Ram tie-rod class-action lawsuit will be settled after Chrysler agreed to the settlement terms that allege Ram trucks were built with tie rods that can break and cause crashes and injuries.

However, Ram truck owners across the country shouldn't cheer because the settlement includes California owners only, about 7,100 to be exact.

The $3.1 million lawsuit includes Dodge Ram 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500 built between July 1, 2009 and November 6, 2013. Owners of the Ram 2500 and 3500 will be eligible to receive $195 and owners of the Ram 4500 and 5500 will receive $250.

The Ram tie-rod lawsuit, filed by Shaun Sater, alleges the left tie-rod ball stud can fracture and cause a loss of steering, or what some Ram owners call the "death wobble." It's something Chrysler is well aware of because more than 1 million trucks were recalled in 2013 to fix tie rods that could break and cause a complete loss of steering control.

At that time, the automaker said it knew of six crashes and two injuries caused when the tie rods broke. However, Chrysler said the wait for parts for some of the Ram trucks could take a year, something that caused Sater to file the tie-rod lawsuit.

The plaintiff says he tried to schedule appointments after receiving the 2013 recall notice but Chrysler didn't have the required parts, causing his truck to suffer a failure of the left tie-rod ball stud in March 2014.

Sater says the problem was so serious it caused the tires to turn in the opposite direction, and on top of that, he had to allegedly pay $1,000 for repairs that should have already been performed for free under the recall.

The Ram trucks were allegedly redesigned starting with the 2013 models, but the plaintiffs say many people who had recall repairs continued to complain about busted tie rods.

Chrysler tried to get the tie-rod lawsuit dismissed because the recall was ordered and because many of the Ram trucks had problems that occurred beyond the warranty periods. In addition, the automaker argued people who owned their trucks more than four years shouldn't have been included in the lawsuit because of the statute of limitations.

The judge, however, wasn't persuaded and allowed the class-action to proceed.

The Dodge Ram tie-rod lawsuit was filed in the the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California - Shaun Sater, et al. v. Chrysler Group LLC (FCA US LLC).

The plaintiffs are represented by Law Offices of Robert G. Loewy PC, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Premier Legal Center APC, Girard Gibbs LLP, and Greg Coleman Law PC.

CarComplaints.com has complaints about the Dodge Ram 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500.

A Ford Edge "door ajar light" recall won't happen after federal safety regulators closed their investigation after determining 2,000 complaints about door ajar lights aren't enough to justify a recall.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) says "an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety has not been identified" even with all the Ford Edge complaints, and no recall is necessary.

NHTSA opened the door ajar light investigation after complaints kept pouring in about 2011-2013 Ford Edge SUVs that suffered from warning lights that stayed on even when all the doors were properly closed and latched.

Ford Edge owners also say the interior dome lights can stay on and drain batteries, and the doors cannot be locked as long as the door ajar lights are illuminated. In addition, owners of the 2011, 2012 and 2013 Edge say they are tired of the huge expense to repair the SUVs, something Ford should pay for by ordering a recall.

"As if my driver door wasn't enough, now my passenger door light won't shut off. So, now I absolutely can't lock my doors and another light draining my battery. It is way to costly to get fixed and with over 100K miles, no warranty coverage. I just don't understand why this problem hasn't been recalled. Can't wait to get rid of this car." - 2011 Ford Edge owner

"Door ajar light will not turn off. Ford told me it would cost 450.00 dollars to fix. I have an extended warranty but it was not covered. Then they hit me with a 110 dollar diagnostic fee." - 2012 Ford Edge owner

"The problem with my door ajar light coming on was horrible!!! It took me 3-10 times closing my door EVERY time I closed it to turn the light off. It would keep telling me to put my car in park and close door when it was already closed. Brought vehicle to local Ford dealer and the cost was over $400 to fix!!!" - 2013 Ford Edge owner

The door ajar problem started with the 2011 Ford Edge because the automaker changed the workings of the body control module that caused a 75 percent loss of current sent out to clean the switch contacts, switches located within each door latch that tells the vehicle if the door is open or closed.

According to Ford, the body control module monitors the position of the switch and continuously samples it to detect any changes. Once a door is closed, a continuous current designed to keep the electrical contacts clean is sent from the body control module to the switches.

However, the automaker says this current is too low to keep the switch contacts clean, allowing contamination to build up and the door ajar lights to activate.

Out of 2,000 complaints, no accidents have been reported and only one injury occurred after the driver kept slamming the door to get the door ajar light to turn off.

NHTSA says 14 complaints indicate doors opened while driving, most of those caused by children opening doors because they weren't locked. Two other complaints involve doors that opened because they weren't latched as the drivers thought they were.

NHTSA says no recall is needed because there isn't a risk to safety and even with the door ajar lights activated, the door latches typically continue to work properly and the child safety locks on the rear doors continue to function properly.

Safety regulators also say crashworthiness is not affected and all safety systems continue to function normally even if the body control module believes a door is open.

The government says it will continue to monitor the door ajar light problems and take action if warranted, but if the agency won't ask for a recall after 2,000 complaints, don't hold your breath.

Have a complaint about your Ford Edge? Add your complaint here, about any vehicle.

CarComplaints.com has door ajar light complaints submitted by owners of the 2011 Ford Edge, 2012 Ford Edge and 2013 Ford Edge.

Daimler Vans is recalling more than 1,300 vans in two recalls, the largest recall ordered to fix vans at risk of catching on fire.

Mercedes-Benz Sprinter 2500/3500 and Freightliner Sprinter 2500/3500

About 1,250 model year 2016 Mercedes-Benz Sprinter 2500 and 3500 and Freightliner Sprinter 2500 and 3500 vans have serious problems that can cause damage to the fuel systems and result in fires.

Daimler determined the bracket bearing of the driveshaft may not have been welded correctly due to misprogrammed welding machines. Two of the seven welds may not hold and cause the bracket to come loose and allow the driveshaft to damage the fuel system, possibly leading to a leak.

Daimler says catch straps should prevent the driveshaft from hitting the road, but a driver will likely hear loud noises coming from under the vans.

There has been no recall date announced, but dealers will need to install three additional rivets to secure the driveshaft brackets.

Mercedes-Benz Metris

About 72 model year 2016-2017 Mercedes-Benz Metris vans are supposed to be equipped with a blind spot monitoring feature, but Mercedes says the instrument panels and steering wheels of the vans don't support blind spot monitoring.

Simply put, vans were sold that were supposed to contain blind spot monitoring systems, but owners didn't receive what they paid for.

Blind spot monitoring is a system that provides audio and visual warnings in the form of red triangular lights that will be activated in the driver or passenger side mirrors when trying to pull into a lane already occupied by another vehicle.

Mercedes didn't say much about what caused the mistakes, other than the documentation for the vans was flawed. Mercedes-Benz doesn't know when the 2017 Metris van recall will begin.

Owners of any of the recalled vans may call 877-762-8267 to learn more.

About 56,800 Nissan Murano SUVs are recalled to fix power steering hose leaks that could cause the 2013-2014 Muranos to catch on fire.

The automaker says it learned of an incident in 2016 that occurred outside the U.S. where a Murano owner had trouble with a leaking power steering hose.

Engineers for the supplier (LS-Mtron) looked into the issue and found the power steering hose separated due to abnormal usage in high temperatures, but they couldn't duplicate the problem and the parts didn't show anything abnormal.

Nissan kept receiving complaints from overseas and then one incident occurred in the U.S., something that made Nissan look at the U.S. market.

More power steering parts were collected and analyzed and by March 2017, Nissan learned the supplier made errors by using incorrect clamp diameters that may cause the power steering hoses to separate.

Not only can a loss of power steering fluid cause more effort to steer the Murano, but fluid that leaks onto an engine or exhaust may cause a fire.

Nissan doesn't know when the recall will begin but has plans for dealers to install new high pressure power steering hose kits to prevent the hoses from separating and leaking.

If you have questions about your 2013-2014 Nissan Murano, please contact the automaker at 800-647-7261.

CarComplaints.com has complaints about the 2013 Nissan Murano, 2014 Murano and other model years of Nissan Surano SUVs.

The Volkswagen Sedric may look like an evil lunchbox looking for trouble, but VW has high hopes for its autonomous driverless car of the future. The automaker created the car from scratch for the sole purpose of focusing on autonomous technology that will allegedly one day rule the roads.

Deploying Sedric on the roads is a goal of Volkswagen as the automaker continues to suffer the consequences of its emissions scandal that has cost the company billions of dollars. VW is taking autonomous technology seriously after investing in mobility service provider Gett and by establishing mobility service provider MOIA to handle various kinds of work on driverless car technology.

Sedric is the first car from Volkswagen that was created for level 5 autonomous driving that doesn't require a driver behind the steering wheel, primarily because there won't be a steering wheel.

Volkswagen has grand plans for Sedric where anyone will be able to use the car with a simple touch of a button that links the user and the car. By using the remote control button, the system will indicate Sedric’s arrival time with colored signals and a vibration signal that guides a person with impaired vision to the car.

VW says it wants to market its little self-driving lunchbox as a friend and companion of the family, a reliable friend available at the press of a button.

The automaker is pushing the coming benefits of using Sedric to send the car to pick up groceries or drop off kids at school by using voice controls or applications from smartphones.

Occupants will also be able to talk to Sedric such as when a passenger enters the car and the passenger tells Sedric where to go and how to get there and the driving time and current traffic conditions. Once the car is moving, passengers can take a nap or watch the windshield that is really an entertainment center.

The build of the car will allegedly give occupants a feeling of safety with reinforced roof pillars and a two-part swing door that extends into the roof, allowing passengers and their supplies plenty of room.

VW says the basic body style (a box) comes from a new engineering structure that contains a flat battery pack located between the axles, with the electric motor located at the level of the wheels. In addition, systems like air conditioning or the electronic intelligence of the self-driving system are positioned in the overhangs at the front and rear.

According to VW, the interior of Sedric will feel like a wide-open space considering a driver, steering wheel and pedals are not needed in the cars. The way Volkswagen sees it, the missing steering wheel, pedals and driver will give occupants a "sense of wellbeing in the vehicle – a welcome home feeling" surrounded by birch leather used to upholster the interior.

The automaker says the inside will be like a garden, with live air-purifying plants placed in front of the rear windshield to "enhance the effect of generously dimensioned bamboo charcoal air filters."

Volkswagen didn't throw out any ideas about what the little chauffeur on wheels will cost.

The testing of self-driving car technology continues on American roads, and as 10 proving ground locations have been picked by the Department of Transportation (DOT), the question of money to pay for those 10 sites hasn't been included in the 2018 federal budget.

But four members of Congress are trying to do something about that as they joined forces to request $200 million be set aside for the facilities designated by the DOT as driverless car proving grounds.

Those facilities picked for testing of autonomous car technology include the following:

• City of Pittsburgh and the Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute
• Texas AV Proving Grounds Partnership
• U.S. Army Aberdeen Test Center
• American Center for Mobility (ACM) at Willow Run
• Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) & GoMentum Station
• San Diego Association of Governments
• Iowa City Area Development Group
• University of Wisconsin-Madison
• Central Florida Automated Vehicle Partners
• North Carolina Turnpike Authority

U.S. Senators Gary Peters and Debbie Stabenow, and U.S. Representatives Fred Upton and Debbie Dingell, say the money must be part of the 2018 budget as the subject of self-driving cars takes the auto industry into the "midst of a seismic technological shift that will revolutionize the transportation of people and goods in our lifetime."

Choosing the 10 testing locations won't mean much without the money to support the tests and build the facilities to perform those tests on a technology that many see as the answer to drastically reduce the 35,000 lives lost on America's roads and highways.

With much of the public questioning the safety of turning self-driving cars loose on the roads, the members of Congress say the only way to convince consumers of any safety benefits is with testing, and lots of it.

The proving grounds will be locations where all types of autonomous car technology companies can not only test their products, but also share ideas as those products are developed.

Research shows the idea of a fully autonomous car without a steering wheel scares most drivers, with 80 percent of consumers wanting to always retain the option of taking control of the cars. However, those numbers are expected to change as 73 percent of kids now in middle and high school say they will be fine with owning a car without a steering wheel or pedals.

Then again, those young drivers who eventually have their own young children may not be so quick to trust fully automated buses to get their kids to school.

A Toyota "tire savings event" lawsuit alleges consumers get ripped off from an offer to buy three tires at regular price and get a fourth tire for one dollar.

According to the Toyota tire savings event lawsuit, the promotion expressly said consumers could “buy 3 tires, get the 4th for $1.” However, plaintiff Joseph Presti says the “regular price” of the tires offered for the promotion was increased above the normal selling price.

The plaintiff claims he was offered three tires at $173 each, plus one tire at $1, when in fact the tires had been regularly sold at $149.30 per tire prior to the Toyota tire savings event.

According to the lawsuit, Presti complained and received a $35 “loyalty” discount, but still had to pay more than $149.30 per tire for the three tires. Additionally, the Toyota lawsuit alleges the price of the tires was less than $150 each after the promotion ended.

The plaintiff says the Federal Trade Commission and the courts have long held that a seller cannot refer in advertising to a “usual” or “regular” price unless it's a price at which the seller ordinarily sells the thing that is advertised.

The Toyota tire savings event lawsuit alleges the automaker engaged in unfair and deceptive practices by advertising a consumer could buy 3 tires and get the 4th for $1, all while selling the three tires at prices in excess of those for which they normally sell.

The proposed class-action lawsuit includes all consumers who made tire purchases from dealers in California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New York and who bought tires during the Toyota tire savings event that advertised three tires at regular price and a fourth tire for one dollar.

In addition, the consumer must have paid a price for the three tires in excess of the price of which they were regularly sold by the dealer and not as part of the discount tire savings event at any time during a period beginning three years prior to February 27, 2017.

The Toyota tire savings event lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts - Joseph Presti, et al, v. Toyota Motor Sales Inc., and Colonial Imports Corp.

Presti is represented by the Family and Consumer Law Center of Claude Lefebvre, Christopher Lefebvre, P.C.

A Toyota and Lexus melting dashboard lawsuit alleges millions of owners have waited two years for replacement dashboards that Toyota and Lexus promised to replace after a different dashboard lawsuit was dismissed.

The lawsuit comes two years after Toyota and Lexus announced a "customer support program" (ZE6) to replace about 3.5 million dashboards that melt in heat and humidity.

Toyota announced the program only after the automaker had been sued in 2014 over dashboards that crack, melt, get sticky, shiny and emit odors that make some people sick.

The lawsuit was dismissed with the announcement of the customer support program, but now owners regret dropping the suit because many dashboards still haven't been replaced.

The plaintiffs claim Toyota and Lexus made promises they couldn't keep concerning dashboard replacements in the following vehicles:

• 2006-2008 Lexus ES 350
• 2003-2008 Lexus GX 470
• 2006-2008 Lexus IS 250 and 350
• 2007 Lexus LS 460
• 2004-2006 Lexus RX 330
• 2007-2009 Lexus RX 350
• 2005-2008 Lexus RX 400h
• 2003-2005 Toyota 4Runner
• 2005-2010 Toyota Avalon
• 2007-2011 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid
• 2004-2010 Toyota Sienna
• 2004-2008 Toyota Solara

The melting dashboard replacement lawsuit alleges Lexus issued a technical service bulletin to dealers in 2011 that provided instructions about what to do if a customer complained about dashboards on 2006-2008 Lexus IS 250 and IS 350 vehicles.

Lexus dealers were told the vehicles “may exhibit sticky interior panels that have a shiny/degraded appearance. These conditions may be present on the Instrument Panel Pad and/or the Door Panel Trim. Revised interior panels have been developed to address this condition.”

However, as a service bulletin and not a recall, the automaker didn't have to notify owners and although Toyota vehicles use similar dashboards, Toyota didn't issue a comparable bulletin to its dealerships.

Owners have complained over the years about trying to adjust to driving while blinded by the glare and in some cases, dealing with feeling sick from the smell of melted plastic.

"The dashboard is awful and creates a glare that makes driving unsafe. Please help me!" - 2007 Lexus ES 350 owner / Florence, Mississippi

"Can someone please help me. I have been complaint [complaining] about my melting dashboard for so long until it's becoming a hazard to my health. I cough and wheeze al [sic] the time especially when I am in my car. I know that this sticky tarry liquid is making me sick but no one helping me. I am so frustrated with this that I want leave my car at the dealer and walk away." - 2008 Lexus IS 250 owner / Coral Springs, Florida

The dashboard customer support program involves reimbursement and repair components available for about 3.5 million vehicles.

Under the reimbursement component, Toyota is offering full reimbursement to Lexus and Toyota owners who previously paid to repair cracked, sticky and melting dashboards (or interior side and rear panels for certain Lexus vehicles) as a result of heat and/or humidity, regardless of whether the vehicles are within the warranty period.

The reimbursement component has been available since the program was formally announced in December 2014.

Under the repair component, the automaker is extending the warranty for owners of affected vehicles so owners can have an authorized Toyota or Lexus dealer repair any cracked, sticky and melting dashboards (or interior door panels for certain Lexus vehicles) at no cost to the owner.

The repair component extends the warranty for covered Lexus and Toyota vehicles through at least May 2017, regardless of mileage or the date of first use of the vehicle.

The warranty enhancement will involve primary and secondary coverage. The primary coverage extends the warranty for affected dashboards for all covered Lexus and Toyota vehicles (and interior door panels for certain Lexus vehicles) through approximately May 2017, regardless of mileage or date of first use of the vehicle.

The secondary coverage supplements the primary coverage by extending the warranty coverage for the covered condition for 10 years from the date of the vehicle’s first use, regardless of mileage.

The plaintiffs say while they and others continue to wait for repairs and replacement parts, Toyota was able to shut down any related lawsuits filed before the customer service program was announced, and the automaker has controlled the pace and cost of the allegedly small number of repairs made so far.

"Toyota has failed to meet its obligations under the Program, thereby breaching its promise to owners of Subject Vehicles. In fact, Toyota has been unable to provide consumers with any realistic timeline for effectuating repairs for the Program set to end in May 2017. As a result, Toyota has breached its warranties under its Original Warranty and under its Program, leaving millions of consumers that own Subject Vehicles without an adequate remedy." - Toyota/Lexus melting dashboard lawsuit

Since the primary coverage of the program expires at the end of May 2017, millions of customers are still driving Toyota and Lexus cars that remain unrepaired with no concrete timeline for those repairs.

In addition, the secondary coverage that applies to some owners for 10 years from date of first use of the vehicle, those owners will likely see the program expire before the dashboards are replaced. This, according to the plaintiffs, is how Toyota is avoiding its responsibilities and how the automaker avoided previous dashboard lawsuits.

The Toyota and Lexus melting dashboard lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina Florence Division - Wanda E. Jeffers and Jill J. Gibson, et al, vs. Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc., and Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.

The plaintiffs are represented by Richardson, Patrick, Westbrook & Brickman LLC, the Law Offices of Mark C. Tanenbaum, and the Jebaily Law Firm.

TOP TIER gas is advertised as a better way to keep your engine clean for just a few pennies more per gallon.

But talk is cheap, so researchers decided to put the marketing slogans to the test and determine if TOP TIER fuel really can improve engine performance by removing carbon deposits that build up in the engine.

Automakers are always concerned about deposits because of how those deposits cause problems with emissions, performance and fuel economy.

In 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) forced all gasoline suppliers to add minimum levels of detergent due to carbon deposits gumming up engines, but some automakers didn't think the EPA minimum was high enough.

TOP TIER gas contains detergent additives that go beyond minimum levels mandated by the EPA to help cars achieve better performance and fuel economy by keeping the engines clean.

But convincing consumers to pay a few cents extra per gallon hasn't always been easy because research shows 73 percent of drivers choose gasoline based on price. Additionally, about 75 percent of drivers choose a gas station based on location and not every station sells TOP TIER fuel.

The study was conducted by a certified engine testing lab hired by the American Automobile Association (AAA) to measure how TOP TIER gas influences intake valve and combustion chamber deposits compared to typical gasoline.

After just 4,000 miles of driving, non-TOP TIER gas caused 19 times more engine deposits than TOP TIER fuel, something that surprised researchers who saw first-hand what extra detergent additives can do to keep an engine clean.

Breaking down the numbers, TOP TIER gas left 34 milligrams of deposits on each intake valve compared to 660 milligrams when using non-TOP TIER fuel. In addition, TOP TIER gas helped to reduce carbon deposits throughout the entire engine.

Researchers also wanted to know if switching to TOP TIER will reverse damage caused by carbon deposits and found that switching gas does help reverse engine deposits. Even if all the deposits aren't erased, running a car a few thousands miles on TOP TIER gas will help with hesitation and idling problems.

As for the cost, owners would pay 3 cents more per gallon on average based on using TOP TIER gas over the course of a year, a small price to pay to maintain an engine.

Consumers also shouldn't confuse "premium" fuel with TOP TIER gas as TOP TIER relates to the amount of detergents, not octane levels. If a station sells TOP TIER, it will be available in all three octane levels: Regular, mid-grade and premium.

So where can you buy TOP TIER gas? To date, these licensed brands offer the fuel at most locations:

• 76
• Aloha
• ARCO
• Beacon
• BP/Amoco Ultimate
• BP Regular
• BP Silver
• Break Time
• Cenex
• Chevron
• CITGO
• Conoco
• Co-op
• Costco Gasoline
• CountryMark
• Diamond Shamrock
• Esso
• Express
• Exxon
• Hele
• Holiday
• Kwik Star
• Kwik Trip
• Kwik Trip Express
• Mahalo
• Marathon
• Metro Petro
• MFA
• Mobil
• OAAI
• Ohana Fuels
• Petro-Canada
• Phillips 66
• PUMA Energy Caribe
• QT
• QuikTrip
• Road Ranger
• Shamrock
• Shell
• Sinclair
• Standard
• Sunoco Ultratech
• SuperAmerica
• SuperFuels
• Tempo
• Texaco
• Tri-Par Qwik Stop
• Valero

A Ford F-150 door latch lawsuit alleges cold weather and freezing temperatures prevent the doors from being closed or locked, especially in the cold state of New York.

The Ford F-150 door latch lawsuit currently includes New York consumers, but just as with many vehicle lawsuits, what starts in one area can easily spread across the country.

The proposed class-action lawsuit includes current and former owners and lessees of 2015-2017 Ford F-150 trucks.

Plaintiff Brandon Kommer says Ford sells the large number of trucks it does only because of deceptive and misleading advertising that says the F-150 is "Ford Tough" and equipped with "Rock-Solid Durability."

Kommer says there is nothing "tough" about a truck equipped with doors that won't latch or lock when the temperature falls below freezing, something that no amount of global warming will fix.

Kommer says he purchased a 2015 Ford F-150 XLT SuperCrew truck in October 2015 believing his truck was "Ford Tough," only to immediately notice several issues with the truck's doors and locks. The lawsuit alleges the front, rear, driver and passenger side doors would not latch close and the electric locks would not open.

In addition, the door handles wouldn't move, the locks wouldn't release and Kommer says he had to use the door’s exterior electronic keypad to lock the doors.

The F-150 door latch lawsuit alleges the automaker knew about problems as early as April 8, 2015, because Ford issued a technical service bulletin (TSB) to dealers that said:

“2015 F-150 SuperCab and SuperCrew Cab vehicles built on or before 3/25/2015 may exhibit inoperative door latches during or after freezing temperatures.” - TSB 15-0052

This door latch TSB described the action needed to be taken by Ford dealers and the specific service procedures allegedly to fix the defective latches. However, as a TSB and not a recall, Ford wasn't required to notify F-150 truck owners.

The TSB’s recommended actions include:

• Removing all interior door panels
• Removing all the center door latch assemblies
• Using compressed air to blow dry all of the center door latch assemblies after removal
• Using compressed air to blow dry all of the handle assemblies
• Installing new door latch assemblies on SuperCab vehicles
• Using grease or lubricant on the steel cable and all moving components of the center latch assemblies
• Using grease or lubricant and spraying the inside of all front and rear door exterior handles
• Reinstalling all center door latch assemblies and reinstalling all of the interior door panels

Ford then issued a second more detailed TSB (16-0155) in November 2016 concerning door latches, but this second TSB wasn't limited to the 2015 F-150 SuperCab and SuperCrew models built before March 25, 2015, but was expanded to include all 2015-2017 F-150 trucks.

The second TSB sent to Ford dealers included more details about "fixing" the door latch problems:

• Removing both front door interior door panels on all vehicles and both rear door interior door panels only on SuperCrew vehicles
• Removing door water shields
• Verifying the latch release cable is properly seated and the cable end is properly installed on to the outer handle
• If improper installation is found and the cable has become kinked, replacing the cable
• Removing both front door latch assemblies on all vehicles and both rear door latch assemblies on the SuperCrew vehicles
• Using compressed air to blow dry all the door latch assemblies after removal and all interior handle assemblies
• Replacing the door latch retaining brackets
• Installing the rain shield on the door latch brackets opposite the latch using Ford supplied hardware
• Potentially installing new door lock rods on all door latch assemblies
• Greasing or lubricating the steel cable and all moving exterior handle components while cycling the handle, all moving components of the latch assemblies, latch lock rod and all attachment points, and the inside of all front and rear door exterior handles
• Reinstalling all door latch assemblies and reinstalling all of the interior door panels

Despite issuing two TSBs, one in March 2015 and the second in November 2016, Ford customers continue to experience the same problems.

"My 2015 Ford F150 truck has inoperative frozen door latches.I have waited 6-8 weeks for the parts to come in. Ive had many occasions ive had to bungee my door somewhat closed to get my family home. I cannot get into my truck and when I do I cannot get the door to shut because of the inoperative door latches. I had it at a Ford dealership for a frozen door latch, inoperative tsb (16-0155) on 1/6/17. On 1/7/17 I went out to my truck and I cannot get into it even with the tsb work done the day before." - 2015 Ford F-150 owner / Springville, New York

Another 2015 truck owner says the doors opened while the truck was in motion.

"When cold, doors do not latch securely and door will appear a jar in gauge cluster as well as being a jar. In addition doors have popped open while in motion because they are not securely closed." - 2015 Ford F-150 owner / Bloomingdale, New York

And another New York customer said they must hold the door shut just to drive.

"Door locks froze in cold weather, not allowing the driver or rear doors to latch. Unable to drive car without holding door shut, not safe, especially with children in back seat. Occurred after sitting in parking lot for 20 mins in 20 degree F temperature, dry day, no water/wash." - 2016 Ford F-150 owner / Williamsville, New York

The Ford F-150 door latch lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court Northern District of New York - Brandon Kommer, et al, v. Ford Motor Company.

The plaintiff is represented by Denlea & Carton LLP.

CarComplaints.com has complaints about the 2015 Ford F-150, 2016 F-150, 2017 F-150 and many other model years of Ford F-150 trucks.

A Ford transmission lawsuit settlement is on the way as the automaker agreed to settle the class-action lawsuit concerning Ford Focus and Fiesta dual-clutch "PowerShift" transmissions that jerk, hesitate and shudder.

The settlement, once approved by a federal judge, will include about 1.5 million model year 2011-2016 Ford Fiesta and 2012-2016 Ford Focus cars with automatic transmissions that caused Ford to issue two customer satisfaction programs.

Customer satisfaction program 14M01 extended the warranty coverage for the transmission’s input shafts, clutch and software calibration in Fiesta and Focus cars manufactured prior to June 5, 2013.

Then the 14M02 program extended the warranty on the transmission control module to 10 years or 150,000 miles for specific 2011-2015 Fiesta and 2012-2016 Focus cars, but the plaintiffs say neither program fixed the shuddering and jerking.

Lead plaintiff Omar Vargas filed the initial transmission lawsuit after complaining about the PowerShift transmission lunging or jerking forward when attempting to decelerate. The plaintiff says the transmission also hesitated and jerked when attempting to accelerate.

Ford marketed the Focus and Fiesta transmissions as combining the best features of automatic and standard transmissions, but Vargas said he started having problems with his 2011 Ford Fiesta soon after his lease began and made multiple visits to Ford dealers to have the transmission repaired.

The lawsuit alleges Ford knew the PowerShift transmission was defective and a safety hazard but concealed that knowledge from consumers. However, Ford denies there are problems with the dual-clutch transmissions and has agreed to settle the class-action lawsuit to save on the time and expense of additional litigation because the automaker had already dealt with other similar lawsuits.

Another suit alleging the same claims, (Klipfel v. Ford Motor Company), was first filed in San Luis Obispo Superior Court in 2015, then that suit was moved to the Central District of California and Ford promptly filed a motion to dismiss. Ford’s motion to dismiss was denied and the parties later agreed to consolidate the Vargas and Klipfel lawsuits.

Ford Fiesta and Focus Transmission Lawsuit Settlement Terms

Owners and lessees of 2011-2016 Ford Fiesta and 2012-2016 Ford Focus cars will have options such as cash payments and reimbursements, credits towards the purchase of new vehicles and the repurchase of affected cars through an arbitration process that allows claims to be submitted for up to six years from the date of original sale.

The settlement, once finalized, entitles affected owners to cash payments from Ford for the hassle of taking their cars to dealers for repairs that didn't work, even where owners have incurred no out-of-pocket costs. In addition, the transmission settlement provides affected Fiesta and Focus owners two types of repairs.

Owners who have three or more service visits for a replacement of one of the primary transmission parts will receive $200 for the third service visit, with increasing payments for each additional visit. Instead of cash, an owner may receive a discount certificate toward the purchase of a Ford vehicle for twice the cash value.

All total, owners may collect up to $2,325 in total cash payments or $4,650 in discount certificate value.

Affected owners who have had at least three software flashes performed by Ford dealers will receive $50 starting with the third software flash, with an additional $50 for each subsequent software flash, up to $600.

The settlement also provides owners a way for Ford to repurchase or replace their defective Fiesta or Focus through a settlement-created private dispute resolution (arbitration) program paid for by Ford. This program will allegedly resolve the claims of each qualifying owner based on his or her state’s lemon law and do it in one or two months, compared to a typical lemon law action in court that would take a year or longer.

And finally, the transmission lawsuit settlement provides owners who believe they were either improperly charged for repairs or denied repairs that should have been covered under Ford’s New Vehicle Limited Warranty a way to pursue these warranty claims in a more limited arbitration.

Ford will also cover the cost of the arbitration and the arbitrator is authorized to award an owner reimbursement for out-of-pocket costs and complimentary repairs or warranty extensions by Ford.

Additionally, the settlement provides full reimbursement to owners who replaced a third clutch after having had two clutches replaced within the 5-year/60,000 mile powertrain warranty for certain vehicles. The replacement clutch will come with a 2-year warranty.

Although Ford has agreed to the settlement terms, a judge still must make the settlement final. Fiesta and Focus owners with questions should contact one of the law firms that represent the plaintiffs, or wait for mailed notifications.

The plaintiffs are represented by Capstone Law APC, Berger & Montague P.C., and Zimmerman Law Offices P.C.

The Ford transmission lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California - Omar Vargas, Robert Bertone, Michelle Harris and Sharon Heberling, et al, vs. Ford Motor Company.

Nissan EVAP canisters and emissions vapor vent tubes will be covered under an extended warranty after owners kept complaining about gas spilling out while trying to pump fuel into the tanks.

Nissan is calling it the "EVAP Emission Warranty Policy Enhancement" that will extend the evaporative emission vapor vent tube warranty to 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first, if the tube is clogged.

Nissan says many 2003-2017 models can develop clogs in the evaporative (EVAP) emission vapor vent tubes located between the fuel tanks and vapor canisters, and the software in the cars may not be able to accurately pinpoint the problem.

Nissan estimates there are more than 11 million Nissan models and 1.5 million Infiniti models affected by the warranty program, although the automaker didn't name specific models.

Owners of Nissan vehicles have spent years complaining about trying to fill the gas tanks in Nissan cars, including the 2005 Nissan Sentra.

"The contact stated that gasoline spilled onto the ground before the fuel tank was filled to its capacity. The failure recurred on several occasions."

"While adding fuel to the vehicle it began to spill out of the vehicle. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic. The mechanic stated that the vapor canister needed to be replaced."

"While attempting to refuel the vehicle, fuel spilled from the filler neck and onto the passenger. "

"The contact was refueling the vehicle as gasoline began to spill onto the ground. The contact stated that it would take approximately 20 to 30 minutes to fill the fuel tank."

Nissan will mail owner notifications about the program and included with the letters are peel-off labels used to remind owners of the program. Nissan emphasizes the vehicles are perfectly safe to drive and there is no need to bring a vehicle to a dealer unless problems are noticed.

Nissan and Infiniti owners who have previously paid to have the EVAP emissions vapor vent tubes replaced prior to 15 years or 150,000 miles (whichever occurs first) may be eligible for reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses.

Nissan and Infiniti owners who have questions or want to learn more about the EVAP canister extended warranty program, please call 800-647-7261.

Fiat Chrysler is recalling about 280 model year 2017 Fiat 500X compact SUVs to repair tire pressure monitoring system warning lights that may not illuminate.

This means a person who can't check their tires by looking at them or using a tire pressure gauge may not know the tire is underinflated.

Nevertheless, the government requires tire pressure monitoring systems to work, so dealers will need to update the instrument panel software.

Fiat didn't say much more about the 2017 Fiat 500X recall other than it's scheduled to begin on April 21, 2017.

Affected owners with questions should call Fiat Chrysler at 800-853-1403 and ask about recall number T16.

CarComplaints.com has complaints about many models of Fiat vehicles.

Jaguar Land Rover is recalling 205 model year 2016 Land Rover Range Rover and Range Rover Sport SUVs because the passenger frontal airbag inflator initiators may fail to ignite during a crash, causing the airbag to fail.

The recall is expected to begin May 1, 2017. Land Rover dealers will need to replace the front passenger airbags, but until then, owners with questions should call Land Rover at 800-637-6837 and use recall number N026.

In a separate recall, Jaguar says 25 model year 2017 Jaguar F-PACE vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions.

The automaker says the vehicles may have been built with rear driveshafts that are too short and can separate from the vehicles. The F-PACE won't do much driving if the driveshaft separates, so dealers will need to replace the driveshafts that are too short.

The Jaguar F-PACE recall will begin May 1, 2017, but owners with questions may call the automaker at 800-452-4827 and refer to recall number H009.

The 2017 Ford Edge is recalled because about 111 SUVs may have been built without welds in the windshield header portions of the sheet metal.

Those welds are important because the structural integrity can be compromised in a side-impact crash. However, Ford says it doesn't know of any accidents or injuries related to the missing welds.

The Edge SUVs were built February 21 and 22, 2017, with about 84 of those SUVs located in the U.S., 26 in Canada and just one Edge in Mexico.

The automaker didn't say when the 2017 Ford Edge recall will begin, but dealers will repair the windshield headers to help protect occupants in a side crash.

Owners who have questions should call 866-436-7332 and refer to recall number 17C05.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration hasn't released details about the Edge recall, but CarComplaints.com will update this page when the info is released.

Read complaints about the Ford Edge.

Ford is recalling nearly 550 model year 2017 Ford F-450 and 550 trucks to replace the driveshafts, not a good sign for brand new trucks. In fact, the problem is so serious that all kinds of components can break, including the transmission and driveshaft components.

The automaker says the F-450 and F-550 trucks can experience driveshaft vibrations caused by a condition that occurs in the powertrain systems at speeds above 75 mph.

The problem is caused by a "resonance frequency" that occurs at speeds above 75 mph and continued operation causes the transmission and driveshaft components to fracture.

The driver may not know of a problem until it hits them and they quickly experience a truck that quits moving while driving. And the truck can roll away if something breaks when the truck is parked without the parking brake engaged.

Although the problem is severe, Ford says it doesn't know of any accidents or injuries related to the driveshaft and transmission problems.

The trucks were built in different locations at different times, with some of the F-450 and F-550 trucks built in Kentucky from June 6, 2016, to February 21, 2017, and other trucks built in Ohio from February 16, 2016, to February 21, 2017.

About 509 F-450 and F-550 trucks are located in the U.S. and 39 are in Canada.

Dealers will need to replace the two-piece driveshafts with new three-piece driveshafts and two center bearing brackets, but Ford didn't say when that will happen.

If you own a 2017 Ford F-450 or F-550 and are concerned, call the automaker at 866-436-7332 and ask about recall number 17S08.

CarComplaints.com will update this page when the government releases additional recall details, but until then, feel free to read what owners say about their Ford F-450 and Ford F-550 trucks.

Ford door latch problems have caused another recall, this time for about 211,000 model year 2014 Ford Fiesta, 2013-2014 Ford Fusion and 2013-2014 Lincoln MKZ vehicles.

The recall is part of an ongoing problem with Ford vehicles that have already caused the recalls of millions of vehicles.

Ford door latch problems are caused by pawl spring tabs that can break in the side door latches. A busted pawl spring tab will prevent a door from being closed or possibly cause the door to open while the vehicle is moving. However, the automaker says it doesn't know of any accidents or injuries related to the door latches.

About 191,432 of the vehicles are in the U.S., nearly 11,000 are in Canada and another 8,191 are in Mexico.

Ford dealers will replace all four side door latches with better latches, but the automaker doesn't have a schedule of when the recall will begin.

If you have concerns about owning a 2014 Ford Fiesta, 2013-2014 Ford Fusion or 2013-2014 Lincoln MKZ, contact Ford at 866-436-7332 and request information about recall number 15S16.

Ford has experienced door latch problems for years that have caused investigations, recalls and lawsuits. Check out any of the below examples.

• Ford Fiesta Door Latch Problems Turn Into Huge Recall
• Ford Door Latch Recall Closes Ford Focus Investigation
• Ford Fiesta Door Latch Investigation Underway
• Ford Focus Door Latch Problems Earn Investigation
• Ford Recalls 2.3 Million Vehicles Over Door Latches
• Ford Recalls 830,000 Vehicles to Keep the Doors Closed
• Ford F-150 Door Latch Lawsuit Says Latches Freeze
• Ford Edge 'Door Ajar' Lights Investigated by Feds
• Ford Edge Door Ajar Light Recall Not Necessary, Say Feds

Ford is recalling 230,000 1.6-liter GTDI vehicles because they could catch on fire under the hoods, something that has occurred at least 29 times.

Recalled are 2014 Ford Escape, 2014-2015 Ford Fiesta ST, 2013-2014 Ford Fusion and 2013-2015 Ford Transit Connect vehicles that can overheat due to a lack of antifreeze.

Ford says a lack of coolant circulation could cause the engine to overheat and experience a crack in the cylinder head. A cracked head can cause pressurized oil leaks, oil that can leak onto hot engines.

The automaker says the 29 reported fires occurred in the U.S. and Canada, but no injuries have been reported.

The 2014 Escape was built February 12, 2013, to September 2, 2014, the 2014-2015 Fiesta ST was manufactured from January 22, 2013, to May 27, 2014, the 2013-2014 Fusion was produced between February 15, 2012, to June 6, 2014, and finally the 2013-2015 Transit Connect was built between June 13, 2013, to December 14, 2014.

The number of recalled vehicles with 1.6-liter GTDI engines include 208,584 in the U.S., 21,854 in Canada and about 318 in Mexico.

Ford doesn't know when the recall will begin, but for now owners will be mailed instructions that talk about how to check the coolant levels. Ford says an owner can continue to drive the vehicle but should talk to a dealer if an antifreeze leak is noticed or if the engine is overheating.

The automaker says it will eventually install service kits that include coolant level sensors, plus new software and hardware.

Ford didn't say more about the recall, but owners of the Escape, Fiesta ST, Fusion and Transit Connect vehicles may call 866-436-7332 and use recall number 17S09.

CarComplaints.com will update this page when safety regulators release more details about the recall.

Fiat Chrysler (FCA US) is recalling nearly 30,000 model year 2014 Fiat 500L cars with problems related to the gas pedals. The Fiat 500L can hesitate when the driver eases off the accelerator pedal and then pushes the pedal.

The automaker says the hesitation only occurs momentarily and can be resolved by completely releasing the gas pedal, then pressing on the pedal. FCA says it found the problem during a review of data received from the field.

"Twice driving on freeway we push gas pedal down to accelerate and car does nothing, wasn't sure if it was going to stop or ?? same thing happens when we're driving and want to speed up and for example pass a car or go through an intersection. The problem has been intermittent but the longer I drive the car the more frequently it's been happening." - 2014 Fiat 500L owner / Los Angeles, California

Hesitation problems in traffic can be trouble, but Chrysler says its data shows no related accidents or injuries.

About 25,600 recalled Fiat 500L cars are in the U.S. and another 4,080 are located in Canada.

Fiat dealers say they can fix the hesitation problems by updating the software calibration that helps control how the gas pedals function.

Chrysler didn't say when the recall will begin and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration hasn't said a word, but CarComplaints.com will update this page when a recall date is announced.

Until then, owners of 2014 Fiat 500L cars should watch their mailboxes or call FCA at 800-853-1403.

Read complaints about the Fiat 500L and other Fiat models.

Mercedes-Benz has ordered four recalls involving about 2,300 vehicles for four different safety defects.

The largest recall involves about 2,213 model year 2016 smart fortwo minicars to adjust the headlights. Mercedes says the horizontal headlight adjustment mechanism may not have been sealed to prevent consumers from adjusting the headlights.

Owners are not legally able to adjust the horizontal headlights because the lights could be adjusted in a way that blinds oncoming drivers.

The automaker doesn't know when the recall will begin, but dealers will install sealing caps so the headlights cannot be adjusted horizontally.

Another 65 vehicles are recalled, specifically 2017 E300 and E300 4Matic vehicles with front passenger airbags that may not deploy properly.

Mercedes-Benz says the airbag can fail if the front seat passenger is sitting on the edge of the seat or laying in the seat in the reclined position.

The airbag recall will begin in April 2017 when dealers will update the airbag control module software.

Separately, Mercedes says 51 vehicles are recalled for airbag problems caused by incorrect software. Recalled are the following:

• 2016 AMG GT-S
• 2016 GLC300
• 2016 CLA250
• 2016 GLE300d 4MATIC
• 2013 C250
• 2013 E350 BlueTec
• 2013 G63 AMG
• 2008-2014 C300
• 2013-2014 C300 4MATIC and ML350 4MATIC
• 2009 C350
• 2014 CLS550
• 2014 E350 4MATIC
• 2014 E350 Coupe 4MATIC
• 2014 E350 Wagon 4MATIC
• 2014 GLK350
• 2014 SL550
• 2012 CLS550 4MATIC
• 2012-2016 E350
• 2016-2017 GL450 4MATIC
• 2012-2014 ML350 4MATIC BlueTec
• 2015 S550, S550 4MATIC
• 2015 C300 4MATIC Sedan
• 2015-2016 C300 Sedan
• 2017 SL63 AMG

The automaker says various control units were updated with the wrong software that can keep the airbags from deploying correctly.

The recall should begin in April 2017. Mercedes dealers will update the control units with the correct software.

Finally, Mercedes is recalling 26 model year 2016 G550 4MATIC and G63 AMG vehicles because the cables that unlatch the doors when the inner door handle is pulled may break if the door is hard to release.

If the cable breaks and the door cannot be opened from inside the vehicle after a crash, the problem could cause a delay in reaching injured occupants.

The recall will begin in April 2017 when dealers will replace the cables that connect the inner door handles and the locks on all four doors.

For answers about any of the above Mercedes-Benz recalls, please call 800-367-6372.