RoadVitals

2019 Mercedes-Benz E 450 4MATIC Problems

Owner-reported complaints filed with NHTSA, grouped by component

Data refreshed

Owner complaintsComplaints are reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a complaint does not establish that a defect exists. Volume is influenced by how many of a vehicle were sold, how long it has been on the road, and how much attention an issue has received.
3
Latest Aug 31, 2026
Components namedHow many of our component categories appear on at least one report for this model year. One report can name several.
3
Crash or fire reportedComplaints whose submitter recorded that a crash or a fire occurred. These are the reporter's own answers on the NHTSA form, not verified findings.
0

What this page shows

Everything below is an owner-reported complaint submitted to NHTSA about the 2019 Mercedes-Benz E 450 4MATIC, grouped by the component NHTSA recorded on the report. These are not confirmed defects, and they are not recalls. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a category with more reports in it is not evidence that a part is defective.

Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.

Reports by component

Ranked by how many owner reports name each component category

  • Powertrain (other)250.0%
  • Driver assistance125.0%
  • Electrical125.0%

Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.

Each component in detail

What the reports in each category say, in the owners' own words

Powertrain (other)

Powertrain reports that are not specifically the engine or transmission — driveshafts, axles, transfer cases and differentials.

2
reports

From owner reports, verbatim

My vehicle is subject to NHTSA Recall 26V216 involving the drive shaft universal joint. In March 2025, before the recall was announced, Mercedes-Benz of Carlsbad diagnosed my vehicle with a front driveline/drive shaft problem. I later paid $2,575 to have the drive shaft replaced using genuine Mercedes-Benz parts. Mercedes-Benz later sent me a recall notice stating that customers who already paid to correct the recall condition may be eligible for reimbursement. On May 27, 2026, I started the reimbursement process through Mercedes-Benz of Carlsbad. I submitted everything Mercedes requested, including the repair invoice, proof of payment, and documentation showing genuine Mercedes-Benz parts were used. When additional documentation was requested, I provided it. I was told I had submitted all required documents. However, Mercedes-Benz will not enter my claim into the reimbursement review process because the recall campaign is not yet “open” and the remedy is not yet available. Mercedes-Benz Star Support told the dealer: “Reimbursement can be claimed after campaign is in open status.” I escalated the issue with Mercedes-Benz USA and received the same answer. My concern is that this prevents the 60-day review process from even starting. 49 C.F.R. §573.13(g)(1) states: “The manufacturer shall act upon a claim for reimbursement within 60 days of its receipt.” If a claim is incomplete, §573.13 also requires the manufacturer to identify the missing documentation within 60 days. I was told I submitted everything required. I am not asking NHTSA to determine whether I am entitled to reimbursement or the amount. I am asking NHTSA to review whether Mercedes-Benz can accept all required claim documents but refuse to process the claim until the campaign becomes “open,” effectively postponing the 60-day process indefinitely. I do not need a future recall repair. I already paid to have my drive shaft replaced. My concern is that Mercedes-Benz has all the requested reimbursement

NHTSA ID 11761158 · filed Aug 31, 2026

The contact owns a 2019 Mercedes-Benz E-450 4MATIC. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 26V216000 (Power Train). The local dealer was contacted and confirmed that parts were not yet available. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and referred the contact to the dealer for assistance. The contact had not experienced a failure.

NHTSA ID 11746416 · filed Jun 25, 2026

Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.

Driver assistance

Reports naming forward-collision avoidance, lane keeping, back-over prevention, cruise control and related electronic driver-assistance systems.

1
report

From owner reports, verbatim

Vehicle was exhibiting erratic indications in all safety systems. Was checked out by dealer told all was OK. Two weeks later vehicle indicated warnings in various safety system, instrument cluster went dark, speedometer and tach were inop, blinkers did not work. Car taken to dealer again where it was determined that water incursion into passenger side foot well as the result of clogged sunroof drains had resulted in water damage to the signal acquisition module and other modules regulating the CAN Bus which were mounted in a location susceptible to water incursion and damage. Routine service does not include assuring that sunroof drains are open. Given the nature of computer systems in this vehicle such water damage has the potential of serious safety issues. These modules must be relocated to an area not prone to flooding. MBNA was contacted and provided no customer support whatsoever. The repair was almost $2500.

NHTSA ID 11754329 · filed Aug 2, 2026

Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.

Electrical

Reports naming the electrical system — wiring, battery, charging, control modules, infotainment and electrical accessories.

1
report

From owner reports, verbatim

Vehicle was exhibiting erratic indications in all safety systems. Was checked out by dealer told all was OK. Two weeks later vehicle indicated warnings in various safety system, instrument cluster went dark, speedometer and tach were inop, blinkers did not work. Car taken to dealer again where it was determined that water incursion into passenger side foot well as the result of clogged sunroof drains had resulted in water damage to the signal acquisition module and other modules regulating the CAN Bus which were mounted in a location susceptible to water incursion and damage. Routine service does not include assuring that sunroof drains are open. Given the nature of computer systems in this vehicle such water damage has the potential of serious safety issues. These modules must be relocated to an area not prone to flooding. MBNA was contacted and provided no customer support whatsoever. The repair was almost $2500.

NHTSA ID 11754329 · filed Aug 2, 2026

Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.

Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers.

Elsewhere on this vehicle

Data sources

Data on this page last refreshed .