2012 Mercedes-Benz E350

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

On April 10, 2020, NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition from Mr. Surjit Singh alleging premature corrosion of the rear brake lines in his 2013 Mercedes-Benz E350 sedan. The petitioner states that he was recently informed by a Mercedes dealer service department that his car had severely rusted brake lines that need[ed] to be replaced immediately at a cost of about $3300. He further stated that the dealer service advisor informed him that he had seen the issue on many cars like his. The petitioner requested ?that NHTSA launch an investigation into this serious issue of rusting brake lines on [his] 2013 Mercedes E350.? The brake line corrosion reported by the petitioner did not result in brake line leakage or any compromise in brake system performance before it was detected in a dealer vehicle inspection. The petitioner submitted a complaint to NHTSA documenting his experience (NHTSA ID 11319024).On April 24, 2020, ODI opened Defect Petition DP20-004 to evaluate the petitioner?s request. ODI conducted a search for all consumer complaints and Early Warning Reporting (EWR) data related to allegations of brake line corrosion or leakage in 2013 Mercedes-Benz E350 sedans and similarly equipped vehicles. The 2013 E350 is a fourth-generation Mercedes-Benz E-Class vehicle (W212 platform), which was first sold in the United States in 2009 as a 2010 model. Mercedes-Benz sold approximately 245 thousand model year 2010 through 2015 E-Class sedan and wagon vehicles in the United States with the same brake line design as the petitioner?s vehicle.ODI?s search for complaints and EWR data in 2013 Mercedes E350 vehicles found no additional records related to the alleged defect. Expanding the search to all W212 platform vehicles identified just one incident, a complaint alleging unspecified brake line corrosion and leakage in a 2011 Mercedes-Benz E550 (NHTSA ID 10902081). The complaint did not allege that the brake line leakage resulted in reduced brake performance, crash, or injury. The resulting failure rate of 0.4 failures per hundred thousand vehicles is extremely low for a population that includes vehicles that have been in service for over ten years. After reviewing the available data, ODI has not identified evidence of a defect trend in the subject E-Class vehicles that would support opening a defect investigation into premature brake line corrosion failure. NHTSA is authorized to issue an order requiring notification and remedy of a defect if the Agency?s investigation shows a defect in design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle that presents an unreasonable risk to safety. 49 U.S.C. ?? 30102(a)(9), 30118. Since the information before the Agency is not indicative of a vehicle-based defect, it is unlikely that any investigation opened because of granting this petition would result in an order concerning the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect. Therefore, upon full consideration of the information presented in the petition and the potential risks to safety, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action if warranted or the potential for a future finding that a safety-related defect exists based upon additional information the agency may receive.A Federal Register notice further detailing NHTSA?s reasons for denial of the petition will be forthcoming.

The contact owns a 2012 Mercedes-Benz E350. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, there was an abnormal odor coming from the inside of the vehicle. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed with a fuel leak. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact researched and was made aware of NHTSA Campaign Number: 12V557000 (Fuel System, Gasoline); however, the VIN was not included in the recall. A dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not yet diagnosed by the dealer. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 70,000.

NHTSA ID

11745590

Incident

Jun 22, 2026

Mileage

70,000 mi

Brake failure due to leaking brake fluid after dealership conducted rear sub frame extended warranty coverage replacement and recent brake fluid services and after two (2) multi point inspections including video and reported “no items failed” and “no items cautioned.” Vehicle was released to me both times Vehicle was inspected and is available for further inspections. My safety was jeopardized due to brake system failure while traveling at high speed on public highway. The problem was confirmed by two (2) dealerships. “ Please see below for recommended repairs on your 2012 E350, VIN - [XXX] Inspection by a different Mercedes Benz dealership reported the following: [XXX] Concern – vehicle is leaking brake fluid from behind the drivers front wheel / tire Cause – Confirmed concern, installed vehicle on lift and found brake fluid dripping from plastic side panel under the drivers door. Brake fluid flush recently completed on vehicle by Portsmouth MB, verified bleeding valves on calipers are tight and not leakingRemoved paneling and found fluid is dripping from wheel well area. Removed left front wheel well cover, and found rear brake lines are leaking due to heavy corrosion and bubbling (see attached photo). Correction – Rear brake lines need to be replaced to repair. Due to corrosion, will require brake hoses due to rotted connections. Lines are formed, fitted and secured by technician during repair (they do not come pre-formed to vehicle). Repair Estimate – Labor ($199.88 / hr) 9 hours (includes diagnostic time), $1798.92 Parts, estimate $690 if no further connections are needed (tax included) Shop supplies, $26.95 Estimate $2520 total repair **Tech notes there is a fuel line running in an area of the brake lines that is showing bubbling in the metal, not yet leaking. Additional $375 parts and labor to replace if we replace with the brake lines. MB parts states there are only 2 of these lines remaining globally.” INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)

NHTSA ID

11741227

Incident

May 26, 2026

The contact owns a 2012 Mercedes- Benz E350. The contact stated while operating the vehicle the odor of fuel was present coming from the vehicle. Upon inspection it was discovered that the fuel had leaked from the vehicle. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer who diagnosed that the fuel pump had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not yet repaired. Also, the contact indicated that the front driver seat heat element had overheated and cause melting to the seat cushion. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer who diagnosed that the front driver seat needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failures but no assistance was offered. The failure mileage was 35,000.

NHTSA ID

11738080

Incident

Mar 1, 2026

Mileage

35,000 mi

The failed component is a fuel pump, and it is available for inspection upon request. My safety and the safety of others was put at risk due to the following: 1) Sudden engine stalling 2) Dangerous power loss while accelerating 3) Potential fire risks; a damaged fuel pump assembley can cause fuel leaks and overheating due to insufficient fuel supply can increase the risk of explosion or fire. 4) Gas fumes from a fuel leak are highly harmful and dangerous. They are toxic to inhale causing dizziness, headaches, nausea or respitory issues.

NHTSA ID

11735613

Incident

Apr 17, 2026

Rear camera fails unexpectedly when placing car in reverse

NHTSA ID

11727005

Incident

Mar 6, 2026

The brake lines on my car rusted out from the brake booster all of way to the rear calipers. This is the third time it’s happened to me as I’ve owned multiple E classes. If Mercedes-Benz covers the subframe, why is the brake lines which are located right above said subframe not covered?

NHTSA ID

11725790

Incident

Mar 20, 2026

The rear subframe got separated from chassis. I was driving to work and had to hard brake to void a collision with another vehicle all of a sudden vehicle shifted to the left and I ended up on a curb. Further inspection vehicle`s rear subframe rotted out due to rust. Also, both rear brake lines from abs module to calipers are damaged due to corrosion. I ended up replacing both brake lines and did not think too much of it and now I see a lot of people complaining about both brake line corrosion and subframe separation or excessive rust, casing rear subframe to fail. It is a very serios safety issue and Mercedes should hold accountable for these failures. My vehicle is 2012 Mercedes E350 and only has 118k miles on odometer. I have attached pictures for the rear subframe for your review, but I did not take any pictures of the brake lines due to limited space to get my camera between the body and the rear subframe.

NHTSA ID

11702962

Incident

Nov 26, 2025

Brake line is thoroughly corroded, went to a repair shop, when they brought it back down, the Subframe collapsed. Mercedes has a 20 yr warranty on the subframe so they will cover that but want another $3K to fix the brake line that was obviously tied to the same mfr issue that the sub frame was in regards to rusting. Dealer won't take any responsibility for anything but the subframe.

NHTSA ID

11683155

Incident

Aug 22, 2025

Single throttle lift-off clunking noise from the side shaft when moving off (audible at the outboard end). The noise is heard once in each instance when changing direction of travel. Note: Sound file in attachment Cause If the complaint is eliminated by experimentally loosening the outboard collar nut (by 1 turn), the problem is due to cracking of the microweld between the wheel bearing inner race and the joint housing of the side shaft. Note: The collar nut must always be replaced after being loosened. See also LI33.20-P-078406 Remedy Coat contact surface of side shaft with wheel bearing with Molykote paint. To do this, proceed as follows: 1. Remove side shafts 2. Clean contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing before") before coating with Molykote, using "spirit" (free of dust and grease) 3. Coat contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing after") with Molykote and leave to dry for "one hour" in removed condition 4. Reinstall side shafts Note: Before using the antifriction coating (Molykote), stir it or shake it thoroughly for (at least 1 minute).

Dear Mercedes-Benz USA Dealers, The part numbers listed in the chart below should no longer be installed, and any existing stock must be returned to your facing PDC. The deadline for all dealer returns is no later than Thursday, July 2, 2026. After July 2nd, returns of these parts will no longer be accepted. These parts should be returned via ZSR Special Return, using item category SCM Authorized Part Return. Please include a copy of this NCU as your authorization to return these parts. This procedure will not affect your return allowance. All returned parts will be replaced in accordance with the chart provided below.

Complaint The underfloor paneling is loose or sags (picture 1). Cause Mounting clips broken or not correctly engaged. Remedy Replace all mounting clips with collar nuts with shims (picture 2): Adapter set (203 589 02 31 00) is required to perform the work. The underfloor paneling does not have to be removed. 1. Loosen all mounting clips. Use a 13 mm socket for this (picture 3). 2. Unscrew all mounting clips. • During spraying, the underfloor paneling must be pressed upwards against the vehicle underfloor. 4. Install a spacer washer on each threaded pin between underbody and underbody paneling. • Each time, carefully lift the underfloor paneling from the underfloor (picture 5). • During installation, ensure that the side with the engagement lobes points downwards. • After installation, the spacer washer must be in full contact with the underfloor (picture 6). Information: The spacer washers prevent the underbody paneling from coming into contact with the vehicle underbody, thus preventing possible corrosion effects 5. Install collar nuts. Information: The threaded pin does not extend beyond the collar nut due to its length (picture 7).

Complaint After successful commissioning of the HERMES control unit (N112/9) with XENTRY Diagnosis DVD 03/2026, the message "SOS - service not activated" appears on the instrument cluster. In addition, the following two conditions are also met: • HERMES (N112/9) control unit: event code B15CE00 is ACTIVE and STORED (A+S) • Vehicle Documentation System: For the HERMES control unit, the EID1, EID2, ICCID, IMEI, IMSI, TELNR fields in the "Identification/Serial number" column have the value "-" Cause Still under analysis Remedy Recommission the HERMES control unit (N112/9) with XENTRY Diagnosis 03/2026 and add-on 33399 installed or carry out the procedure with a newer version of XENTRY Diagnosis: XENTRY→ "N112/9 - Control unit for telematics services (HERMES)" -> "Adaptations" -> "Control unit commissioning" -> "Commissioning of previously installed control unit"

Complaint There are several types of complaint about noises or poor windshield wiper wiping performance: A: Wiper blades squeaking, chattering, shuddering B: The windshield is not wiped completely (streaking) C: During the downward movement water is pulled back onto the windshield from the A-pillar (Figure 1) D: After windshield cleaning, water keeps spraying onto the windshield for several wipe cycles (Figure 2) A1: The windshield and wiper blades are contaminated with residues from car washing facilities, identifiable by the water beading. The resulting differences in the friction values between the wiper blades and the windshield can excite the wiper blades to vibrate. Note: It is mostly wax residue from the washer system, but also water-repellent nano-particle coating for paint and/or silicone-based washer fluid, that could cause this problem. A partially dry windshield also has different friction values, which can likewise result in squeaking of the wiper blades A2: The wiper blades are worn by mechanical damage (wiper lip damaged by ice or insect debris, or deformed by long periods of disuse). A3: Incorrect angle of incidence of the wiper arms to the windshield. Because of this, the rubber lip of the wiper blade may not flip over at the reversal point. Cause B: B1: Wax/ dirt residues on the windshield B2: Wiper blades deformed or worn B3: Downforce of wiper arm not OK (Figure 3) Cause C: Water is pulled back onto the windshield by the differential pressure created as the wiper arm moves downwards. Cause D: Washer water collects in the fastening of the wiper blade and is blown onto the windshield by the airstream over several wipe cycles. Note and supporting information: Wiper blades are wear parts which, even when "not used" for long periods (kept in park position), may become permanently deformed and damaged. Further stresses on the rubber wiper blade arise due to various environmental influences which progressively change the effectiveness of the rubber wiper blade and accelerate the aging process. Due to the natural aging process and wear, the wiper blades should be replaced twice a year, preferably in Spring and Fall (see operator's manual). Remedy Remedy A: A1: Cleaning entire windshield with A 000 986 40 71. A2: Checking water's flow behavior after windshield has been cleaned (see Video 1). If, after cleaning, there are still areas with water beading, then the cleaning process must be carried out again until a rejection reaction is no longer present. • Note: On the vehicle in the video (Video 1), water still beads on the bottom left of the windshield. The windshield is still not properly clean, even though it appears to be clean. The windshield is only properly clean when there are no more areas on the windshield where water beads. A3: Replace wiper blades with genuine wiper blades. Important: Only exchange wiper blades if windshield no longer has water-repellent areas Note: Replacement of wiper blades is not covered under warranty and can be replaced at the expense of the customer. Remedy B: B1: Clean windshield with intensive cleaner A 000 986 40 71. Important: Do not clean the wiper blades otherwise the graphite coating will be damaged. B2: Replace wiper blades with genuine wiper blades • Note: Replacement of wiper blades is not covered under warranty and can be replaced at the expense of the customer. B3: Check the wiper arm for excessive resistance in the bearing. Restore mobility or replace wiper arm if necessary. Remedy C: Problem inherent in design for which there is no technical remedy. Exception: X204 up to 02/2014. In these vehicles, it is possible to install the design configuration of vehicles as of 02/2014. This includes wiper arms (styled arms) with improved behavior in this respect. It is also necessary to replace the wiper blades because the styled arms feature a Top Lock connection (previously Side Lock).

Complaint Potential corrosion on the rear axle carrier Cause Due to market-specific conditions such as moisture, ingress of dirt and/or environmental influences, corrosion can occur on the rear axle carrier Remedy In the event of a complaint, the optimized repair method must be used when replacing the rear axle carrier. The repair method for the respective model series can be found in the attachment. Repair packages are available in Xentry Repair Packages for the special processing of rear axle carriers Note: Please utilize flexible wand (319-SAT1058826) along with the Cavity Preservation Gun (W 000 588 03 72 00) for cavity wax application to improve coverage and reduces labor efforts. The flexible wand may be obtained through the Mercedes-Benz Standard Service Equipment Program website.