RoadVitals

2011 Nissan Leaf

Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data

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.
95
Latest Apr 17, 2025
Safety recallsA safety recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle has a safety-related defect or does not comply with a federal motor vehicle safety standard. Recall repairs are free. Whether a specific vehicle is covered depends on its VIN — a recall listed for a model year does not necessarily apply to every vehicle of that year.
0
InvestigationsNHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.
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.
5
5 injuries, 0 deaths reported

Overview

Our database contains 95 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2011 Nissan Leaf, most frequently naming the airbags, electrical and brakes categories. 3 NHTSA investigations name it; and 131 manufacturer communications are on file.

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

What owners report

Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded

  • Airbags3531.0%
  • Electrical2925.7%
  • Brakes2219.5%
  • Interior & seats76.2%
  • Driver assistance54.4%
  • Fuel system54.4%
  • Body & structure32.7%
  • Powertrain (other)32.7%

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

Safety recalls

No recalls in our database for this model year

That does not guarantee a specific vehicle is unaffected — recalls are issued against VINs, and new campaigns are announced regularly. Check a VIN on NHTSA.gov.

Safety investigations

NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.

DP22005ClosedDefect Petition

Pedestrian alert sounds

Opened Jan 27, 2023
Closed Aug 7, 2023

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:PROPULSION SYSTEMLed to recall 22V063000
PE19015ClosedPreliminary Evaluation

Front Occupant Classification System Mat

Opened Oct 9, 2019
Closed Jun 1, 2020

Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 19-015 was opened as a result of Defect Petition (DP) 19-002 which alleged that model year (MY) 2011 and 2012 Nissan Leaf were affected by the same defect addressed in an earlier recall, NHTSA Safety Recall 16V-244, but were not included in the scope of that recall.NHTSA 16V-244 involved a defect in the Occupant Classification System, a system intended to suppress deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag under certain specific conditions. Although the DP19-002 analysis determined the allegation that earlier MY Leaf vehicles should have been included in 16V-244 was not founded, the Office of Defects Investigation nonetheless granted the petition and commenced this investigation into the 2011 and 2012 Leaf since OCS failures were reportedly occurring in these vehicles. Further details on DP19-002 can be found at NHTSA.gov.On October 25, 2019, ODI sent an information request letter to Nissan North America (Nissan) requesting pertinent information on the subject 2011 and 2012 Leaf. Nissan provided its response on December 13, 2019. ODI has reviewed the information Nissan provided as well as new reports submitted to NHTSA's Vehicle Owner Questionnaire database. Based on review of all available information, and at this time, ODI has identified evidence supporting that a total of 76 subject vehicles likely experienced a failure of the subject passenger seat OCS mat. The count represents an incidence rate of about 0.4% on subject vehicles that average 8 to 9 years in service.Consistent with Nissan's explanation of how the subject OCS was intended to function, ODI's review of the reports indicates that when an OCS mat failure occurs, two different warning indicators appear on the instrument panel. The warnings provide clear and unambiguous notice to occupants that an OCS problem has been detected, and the owner's manual provides further information regarding the meaning and consequences of the detected failure, as well as advice to seek service. Additionally the OCS will store a diagnostic trouble code to aid service technician diagnosis, and the occupant warnings remain present until the underlying failure has been corrected.In its responses to ODI, Nissan also provided its assessment of the alleged defect in the subject vehicles, stating that it does not believe that an unreasonable risk to safety exists. Nissan states that its assessment of failed OCS mats recently collected from the field showed that external factors (e.g., damage from foreign objects) were responsible for the failures, rather than a design or manufacturing defect. Nissan also cited clear visual warnings and low incidence rates occurring in comparatively older vehicles as factors in its determination that a recall was not warranted. Lastly Nissan noted that most of the complaints received for this issue involved a high customer expense for the cost of repair for the OCS system, which is consistent with ODI's observations. Nissan is apparently considering a reduction in repair part cost as a means to address the customer satisfaction aspect of these complaints.Based on the analysis conducted, this investigation will be closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. NHTSA reserves the right take additional actions if warranted by future circumstances.The 20 ODI numbers cited above can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under the following identification (ODI) numbers:11176324, 11193091, 11286687, 11290303, 11152569, 11207486, 11180021(duplicate of 11103556), 11103556, 11196006, 11287002, 11101830, 11193208, 11256669, 11172159, 11282156, 11102456, 11123812,

AIR BAGS:FRONTAL
DP19002ClosedDefect Petition

Front Occupant Classification System Mat

Opened Aug 16, 2019
Closed Oct 16, 2019

A defect petition (see DP19-002) was received July 23, 2019 alleging that the occupant classification system (OCS) sensor (mat) in model year (MY) 2011 Nissan Leaf vehicles is defective and affects the proper deployment of the passenger front air bag. The petitioner provided a list of potentially related NHTSA reports and noted a Nissan recall involving later MY Leaf vehicles with OCS defect. NHTSA is granting the petition and opening a preliminary evaluation in response, please see PE19-015.Since receiving the defect petition, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has determined that the MY 2011 and 2012 Leaf share a common OCS design, both using the same sensor mat for passenger presence sensing. Starting in MY 2013, Leaf OCS was changed to a design using a different sensing system, one that did not use the mat present in prior model year, Nissan Leaf. While MY 2013-2016 Leaf vehicles were recalled for an OCS defect under recall 16V-244, a recall influenced by ODI investigation EA15-004, earlier MY Leaf vehicles were not included because they were not affected by the particular defect involved in that recall.ODI identified and reviewed 13 vehicle owner questionnaire (VOQ) reports in its database, one of which is a duplicate, involving MY 2011 and 2012 Leaf vehicles that allege a problem with the OCS. The VOQs indicate that an OCS warning light illuminated at which point the vehicle was diagnosed and it was determined the sensor mat was the cause of the OCS problem. Most of the VOQs also noted the high cost of repair, which apparently involves replacement of the passenger front seat, according to complainants. None of the VOQs allege a problem with the performance of the passenger air bag, an injury, or a fatality due to the failure of the OCS.During the evaluation of this petition, ODI did not request information from Nissan regarding the complaint data in its possession, and accordingly the manufacturer complaint counts shown above are marked as not applicable. ODI will request this information during the upcoming investigation.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under the following identification (VOQ) numbers: 11234415, 11207486, 11196006, 11193208, 11180021, 11176324, 11172159, 11152569, 11123812, 11103556 (duplicate of 11180021), 11102456, 11101830, 11052546.

AIR BAGS:SENSOR:OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION

Recent owner complaints

Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words

AirbagsInterior & seats
Filed Apr 17, 2025

Car throws a B1018 DTC, which is for the passenger seat occupancy sensor. The seat occupancy sensor failing poses a major safety risk, as it causes the airbags to not deploy properly in the event of a crash. This is a very well known issue for the 2011-2012 LEAF, and the only option Nissan gives to fix this is a full seat replacement, which is cost prohibitive at over $3000. Previously, a recall was issued for 2013-2016 LEAFs for a similar issue, but the 2011-2012 was not included in that recall.

NHTSA ID
11655282
Incident
Apr 17, 2025
Airbags
Filed Mar 25, 2025

Air bag sensor fault, passenger seat warning on dashboard. Confirmed sensor failure at repair shop. Notified by Nissan that sensors are DISCONTINUED parts. No alternative solution suggested. This means all airbags in this vehicle are disabled. Car has less than 40,000 miles and has years of service life left. How is Nissan allowed to discontinue supply of an essential safety component?

NHTSA ID
11650398
Incident
Aug 30, 2024
AirbagsInterior & seats
Filed Jul 17, 2024

Please see thread: [XXX] My 2011 Nissan Leaf's OCS has failed randomly. I pulled the code via an Bluetooth OBD reader and the LeafSpy Pro app installed on my phone: B1018-00 09 AIR BAG Occupant Sens [Unit Fail] SRC-41. I took the car to a local dealership and was quoted over $4k for a full seat replacement with no ETA as the part is on back order. There is no option to simply replace the OCS alone and there is no workaround from Nissan to re-enable the passenger airbag without paying the $4k for the new seat. Opened a case with Nissan Consumer Affairs who advised they could do nothing for me. The repair is more expensive than the value of the vehicle. Because Nissan offers no workaround other than paying $4k for a new seat, consumers are incentivized to bypass the airbag sensor using a 3rd-party box (see here [XXX] rather than properly repair it. This is a safety issue and Nissan should do the right thing in making the repair affordable or making an official way to bypass the sensor/enable the airbags. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID
11602884
Incident
Jun 25, 2024
BrakesElectrical
Filed May 31, 2024

When applying brakes, at a point in the pedal travel the vehicle deceleration goes from too little to vastly too much. This makes the vehicle challenging to drive in traffic without colliding into the vehicle in front and not stopping so quickly as to cause the trailing vehicle to collide. The dealer has confirmed the behavior. There is a TSB to supposedly address the problem, and a receipt is attached of that TSB software update being applied. However, this has not changed the behavior. This is at least partially a software issue, since the vehicle blends physical brakes with EV regenerative braking.

NHTSA ID
11591749
Incident
Dec 16, 2023
AirbagsInterior & seats
Filed Sep 25, 2023

Supplemental air bag warning light started blinking on 9/24/2023. It blinks regardless of whether the front passenger seat is occupied. The OCS sensor for the passenger seat failed. This should have been covered by a recall. The dealer wants over $3,000.00 to replace the seat cushion. I declined the repair. Dealer assured me that driver air bag isn't affected, so I'll operate the car without a front passenger. Dealer Estimate: Denied Repair Step Step Total: $3,687.14 Correction: inspected system, dtc b1018 for occupant sensor unit failure is present. Cleared dtc, when sitting in passenger seat, dtc came back on. Inspected continuity to passenger seat occupant sensor and found ok at this time. Diagnosis says replacement of passenger occupant sensor assembly (lower seat assembly) Labor: $588.00

NHTSA ID
11546502
Incident
Sep 24, 2023
Driver assistance
Filed Jul 14, 2023

Vehicle doesn't slow down when taking foot of the acceleration pedal. Same both power settings. It will continue to move at slow speed on level ground. It behaves as though the minimum pedal.motor speed is too fast. My concern.is that it might get very fast without any pedal. Thank you.

NHTSA ID
11532380
Incident
Jul 14, 2023
Airbags
Filed Jun 20, 2023

My airbag sensor light went off for no reason. I took it into the dealership and was told that it would cost $3,700 to get it repaired/replaced since the seat needs to be removed. I am concerned that this safety issue is not taken care of and have read that many 2011 Leaf's are having this same issue.

NHTSA ID
11528019
Incident
Jun 14, 2023
Driver assistance
Filed Jun 4, 2023
Crash reported

On 05/28/23 while i was trying to park my 2011 Nissan Leaf in a parking lot, the car accelerated unexpectedly and hit a pole and fence and scratched an already parked car. Applying break did not slow down my car. I own this car since 2011 and never had an experience like this.

NHTSA ID
11525249
Incident
May 28, 2023

Manufacturer communications

A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.

NTB09-131C

STRUCTURE:BODY

CERTIFICATION LABEL AND VIN PLATE REPLACEMENT SERVICE INFORMATION Because of collision damage or other vehicle repair, a replacement “Certification Label” or “VIN Plate/Label” may be needed. HINT: Certification Label = FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) label. These items may be available from Nissan by request if certain criteria are met. This bulletin lists the criteria and provides an application form for such replacements. · The “VIN Plate/Label” (metal plate or vinyl label) is attached to the instrument panel or body on the driver side at the base of the windshield (see Figure 1). · The “Certification Label” (vinyl adhesive label) is located on the lower area of the driver side B-Pillar (see Figure 1).

NTB09-131C

STRUCTURE:BODY

CERTIFICATION LABEL AND VIN PLATE REPLACEMENT SERVICE INFORMATION Because of collision damage or other vehicle repair, a replacement “Certification Label” or “VIN Plate/Label” may be needed. HINT: Certification Label = FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) label. These items may be available from Nissan by request if certain criteria are met. This bulletin lists the criteria and provides an application form for such replacements. · The “VIN Plate/Label” (metal plate or vinyl label) is attached to the instrument panel or body on the driver side at the base of the windshield (see Figure 1). · The “Certification Label” (vinyl adhesive label) is located on the lower area of the driver side B-Pillar (see Figure 1).

NTB19-071D

AIR BAGS

DTC B00A0-00 STORED This bulletin has been amended. See AMENDMENT HISTORY on the last page. Please discard previous versions of this bulletin. IF YOU CONFIRM DTC B00A0-00 (OCCUPANT DETECTION SENSOR UNIT) is stored, AND OCS zero point reset cannot be performed, (continued on the next page)

NTB13-027D

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

CAN COMMUNICATION – NETWORK DIAGNOSTIC FLOW CHART This bulletin has been amended. See AMENDMENT HISTORY on the last page. Please discard previous versions of this bulletin.

NTB13-107G

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

VEHICLE KEY NOT DETECTED / AUTHENTICATED, ENGINE WILL NOT START This bulletin has been amended. See AMENDMENT HISTORY on the last page. Please discard previous versions of this bulletin.

NTB10-066C

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

CAN COMMUNICATION CODES – DIAGNOSTIC TIPS AND GUIDELINES This bulletin has been amended. See AMENDMENT HISTORY on the last page. Please discard previous versions of this bulletin.

Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.

Compare model years

Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model

Nissan Leaf by model year
YearComplaintsRecallsInvestigationsIssue Index
2026220
2025700
2024500
2023193064.0
2022894170.0
2021524171.9
20201606166.5
20192525167.9
2018664167.5
2017172164.6
2016364153.5
20151084159.9
2014346363.3
2013815362.5
2012570349.3
2011Viewing950342.2
2010100

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. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.