2019 Nissan Leaf Electrical Problems

Update to complaint XXX— XXX I am updating my complaint regarding Nissan LEAF recall R24B2 and the dealer’s handling of the recall remedy. On XXX I brought my 2019 Nissan LEAF to Ken Garff Nissan Salt Lake to have recall R24B2 performed. The dealer told me that performing the recall remedy could cause the vehicle to enter reduced-power mode or become non-drivable, and that replacement batteries were backordered or unavailable. The dealer therefore declined to perform the recall remedy at that time. A representative of Ken Garff Nissan Salt Lake also advised me that I could ignore the safety warnings, not have the recall remedy performed, and drive the vehicle through the desert anyway. This was particularly concerning because the recall restricted the vehicle’s use of Level 3/CHAdeMO quick charging pending completion of the remedy, affecting my ability to safely use the vehicle for a planned interstate relocation. After I escalated the matter to Nissan Consumer Affairs, Nissan told me that Ken Garff Nissan Salt Lake had said it declined to perform the remedy because of a time constraint. That account conflicts with what the dealer told me directly. I asked the dealer to perform the remedy before I mentioned my move or any timeline, and the dealer instead explained that it did not want to perform the remedy because it could leave the vehicle in reduced-power mode or non-drivable while replacement batteries were backordered or unavailable. I then obtained an appointment at [XXX] Nissan of Murray on XXX, for the R24B2 recall remedy. I will provide the final repair order, diagnostic codes, and outcome when available. My safety concern is not solely that an open recall exists. An authorized dealer declined to perform the prescribed recall remedy because it said the procedure could immobilize the vehicle, while Nissan later relayed a materially different explanation for the dealer’s refusal. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11766737

Incident

Sep 21, 2026

My 2019 Nissan Leaf's battery stopped charging due to a manufacturer defect. Nissan North America confirmed this is covered under NHTSA Recall 24V-700 and agreed to repurchase the vehicle (case #1163589). However, Nissan's repurchase process has been severely delayed by issues connected to the recall remedy itself: Nissan requires a physical title to complete the repurchase, but their own financing arm (NMAC) failed to release a lien for six years after payoff--despite the law requiring them to--and then provided a defective release letter, stalling the process for over a month. Separately, Nissan's own repurchase letter promised a courtesy rental vehicle for up to 30 days during the process, which was never provided despite requesting. They are also refusing to lock in their repurchase price so every day of their delay is benefiting them while costing me. I am raising this because the recall remedy process itself — not just the underlying defect — has been mishandled, leaving an affected consumer without a resolution or a functioning vehicle for an extended period.

NHTSA ID

11766513

Incident

Aug 23, 2026

I own a 2019 Nissan Leaf (recall R24B2/NHTSA 24V-700), 70,000 km, battery State of Health 97% per LeafSpy (OBD-based BMS health reading, not the dash gauge). I support the recall's intent and have stopped Level 3 fast charging entirely, using only home Level 1/2 charging. I'm raising a structural concern, relevant beyond my own vehicle: for cars that trip the SOC-fluctuation fault, the only remedy offered is full battery replacement or buyback — scrapping/replacing packs that are often barely degraded, at real environmental cost (mining, manufacturing, disposal) for a risk tied specifically to Level 3 charging, not to driving the car. I'd ask the agency to consider whether the remedy framework (repair/replace/refund-less-depreciation under 49 U.S.C. §30120, or Canada's equivalent) should allow a fourth, owner-consented option: permanent, verifiable disabling of DC fast-charging (physical connector removal, tamper-evident hardware, disclosed on the vehicle's title/history) in exchange for a smaller cash settlement — no battery replacement, no buyback, for owners who accept this in writing. There's precedent for this working in the used-vehicle market already: lemon-law and flood-damage titles both flag a documented condition change so future buyers can price it in, without requiring the vehicle be destroyed. This would function the same way — a documented manufacturer-owner agreement at a middle ground, rather than a binary full-remedy-or-buyback choice. This would let owners with healthy batteries keep driving, reduce prematurely retired EV packs, and likely cost manufacturers less than replacement or repurchase, while still eliminating the defect condition. I'd ask this be considered for Nissan's remedy program here, and as a standing option for future mode-specific recalls.

NHTSA ID

11765861

Incident

Sep 20, 2026

The contact owned a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System). The local dealer was contacted and declined to perform the recall repair, stating that the recall repair would place the vehicle in LIMP Mode, and advised the contact to disregard any warning lights illuminated. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue and informed the contact to reach out to the dealer for assistance. The contact had not experienced a failure.

NHTSA ID

11765811

Incident

Sep 21, 2026

[XXX] of [XXX] sold me this vehicle as a certified pre owned vehicle with an unrepairable recall on XXX. This vehical had been diagnosed with this recall prior to sale and nissan issued a stop sale of this vehicle prior to me purchasing this vehicle. I am unable to fast charge due to potential fire risk. This has hindered my ability to travel and is very dishonest practice. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11765709

Incident

Jan 26, 2026

My vehicle is subject to open NHTSA Recall 24V-700 (Nissan internal R24B2), for excessive lithium deposits in HV battery cells causing rapid heating during Level 3 DC fast charging, with a stated fire risk. At approximately 112,000 miles, my vehicle displayed the warning "Service EV System. Unable to restart after power off." I brought the vehicle to Dublin Nissan Service Department on July 2, 2026, where the dealer diagnosed a leak in the HV battery cells consistent with the defect described in Recall 24V-700. On July 20, 2026, I received a diagnostic estimate quoting me $5,162.23 for battery and $2,999.99 for the accessory/parts — charged to me as a customer-pay repair — along with a stated wait of 3-4 months for battery availability. This directly contradicts Nissan's own published remedy for Recall 24V-700, which states: "If a particular DTC for the EV battery is generated, the vehicle cannot be operated without a battery replacement... this repair will be performed free of charge for parts and labor... Nissan will provide a complimentary rental vehicle." The recall further states that if the dealer cannot obtain a battery, Nissan will contact the customer within 3 business days to offer repurchase above Kelley Blue Book private-party value. I contacted Nissan Consumer Affairs, who refused to authorize a free battery replacement and refused to consider repurchase, stating I did not qualify because I purchased the vehicle from a third-party dealer rather than a Nissan dealer. Nothing in the official recall remedy language conditions the free replacement or repurchase offer on where the vehicle was purchased. I am requesting NHTSA's assistance in ensuring Nissan honors the free-of-charge battery replacement and/or repurchase remedy as stated in its own recall documentation for Recall 24V-700.

NHTSA ID

11763493

Incident

Jul 2, 2026

The vehicle failed on XXX ("Service EV System / Unable to restart") and was towed to ABC Nissan, [XXX], where it has remained since (18 days as of this filing). On XXX dealer confirmed HV battery requires warranty replacement, stated that replacement batteries are backordered approx six months, with no loaner was available, and directed us to Nissan's repurchase process. Nissan's filed recall remedy promises a free replacement battery or, where unavailable, a repurchase offer above KBB private-party value initiated within three business days plus complimentary rental vehicle in either situation. No rental has been provided. Dealer confirmed non-availability in writing on 8/8, and we have self-funded a rental ($712 so far as of XXX) after Nissan's own representative recommended on XXX that we keep it. On XXX, Nissan verbally indicated the repurchase was declined because the dealership is "repairing" the vehicle. On XXX, dealership's service dept confirmed that the replacement battery has no arrival estimate and that it has discontinued providing rentals entirely and advised that the resolution must come from Nissan. Nissan's position appears to be that it will not repair on any known schedule, will not repurchase, and will not provide the rental its own filed remedy promises. We have requested reimbursement for incurred rental expenses and a "make whole" buyback at $18,000 which covers the full cost of an equivalent replacement vehicle including tax and licenses. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11757052

Incident

Jul 27, 2026

My 2019 Nissan Leaf is currently grounded at Dublin Nissan with leaking battery cells caused by thermal distress from open Safety Recall R24B2. Nissan Consumer Affairs has refused to buy back or repair the vehicle because it has past the 100,000-mile mark, leaving me with an unresolvable, hazardous vehicle that has no available manufacturer remedy.

NHTSA ID

11756040

Incident

Jul 2, 2026

The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notifications of NHTSA Campaign Numbers: 24V700000 (Electrical System), 24V071000 (Back Over Prevention), and 23V494000 (Vehicle Speed Control); however, the parts to do the recall repairs were not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The contact stated that while her husband was driving at an undisclosed speed, the battery level dropped from 100% to zero, causing the vehicle to lose motive power. There were several unknown warning lights illuminated. The vehicle was towed to the residence, where the battery was replaced; however, the failure recurred, and the vehicle was towed back to the residence. The dealer was made aware of the failure but confirmed that parts were not yet available. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 30,000.

NHTSA ID

11749388

Incident

Oct 1, 2022

Mileage

30,000 mi

I have two safety recalls from Nissan that says to schedule the appointment with the dealer - Daytona Nissan. The dealer cancelled the appointment without any reason and unable to reach the dealer. Screenshot of email as proof.

NHTSA ID

11748956

Incident

Jul 1, 2026

The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received a notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that while attempting to start the vehicle by pressing the Push-To-Start button, the engine failed to turn over, and no electrical features were available. The vehicle was towed to the local dealer, where it was diagnosed with needing a battery module replacement. The vehicle was not repaired due to the out-of-pocket cost. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 90,000.

NHTSA ID

11748504

Incident

Jan 15, 2024

Mileage

90,000 mi

This vehicle experienced an EV system power failure and low battery message. The manufacturer has diagnosed a covered warranty battery defect but has refused to repair the vehicle citing supply constraints. They are using their parts shortage to pressure a [XXX] senior citizen on a fixed income in an inadequate cash buyback that leaves her stranded without transportation. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11746800

Incident

Jun 10, 2026

My 2019 Nissan Leaf SL Plus is subject to NHTSA Recall 24V-700 for a battery defect that poses a fire risk during DC fast charging. The recall was issued in September 2024 with a fix promised by November 2024. Nissan repeatedly delayed the remedy, first to Spring 2025, then Q3 2025, then March 2026, then an indefinite date in 2026. During this time I was instructed not to use Level 3 DC fast charging. I was without this capability for approximately 18 months. I purchased the SL Plus specifically for the extended range provided by the 62 kWh battery, which depends on fast charging for longer trips. Without fast charging the vehicle was reduced to short-range local use only. The remedy Nissan eventually provided was a software update only. It does not repair the underlying battery defect; excessive lithium deposits within battery cells causing increased electrical resistance. The software monitors for conditions that could lead to a thermal event and shuts down charging if detected. The physical defect remains in the battery. Nissan included a letter with the software update stating that if the vehicle triggers a specific error code within one year of the update, they would replace the battery or buy back the vehicle. This suggests Nissan acknowledges the software update does not adequately address the defect. I am filing this complaint because the recall remedy does not fix the root cause of the safety defect, and because Nissan took 18 months to provide even this inadequate remedy. The component is the lithium-ion battery pack and it is available for inspection.

NHTSA ID

11746072

Incident

Sep 19, 2024

I am filing a complaint regarding NHTSA Recall 24V-700 (R24B2) for my 2019 Nissan LEAF S Plus, VIN: [XXX], Nissan Case No. XXX. I complied fully with Nissan's recall instructions, avoiding Level 3 fast charging for my entire ownership. On or about April 23, I filed a complaint with Nissan Consumer Affairs (Case #XXX) regarding the impact of the charging restriction on my vehicle's usability and requested a buyback. Nissan denied my claim approximately two months ago. I then surrendered my vehicle for the recall repair. The dealer returned it, stating the recall was remedied. Over the following three days, I drove only short local trips with minimal driving — no fast charging. The vehicle lurched violently on a public road, entered turtle mode, and displayed multiple dashboard warning lights. I drove it slowly to the dealership. My dealer confirmed full battery replacement is required and submitted a Goodwill Warranty claim on my behalf — acknowledging this failure was not due to owner misuse. Nissan North America (Case No. XXX) has since informed me in writing that battery replacement cannot be provided and is now offering repurchase. The battery failure occurred directly after Nissan's purported recall repair with minimal driving. Nissan claimed the defect was fixed — it was not. I am concerned the KBB value Nissan intends to use may be artificially suppressed by five open safety recalls, including 24V-700, and the vehicle's current non-operational status — caused entirely by Nissan's defective repair. I request NHTSA scrutinize Nissan's repurchase valuation methodology for affected owners. I request NHTSA investigate Nissan's failure to remedy this recall. My preferred remedy remains battery replacement. I should not bear the financial consequences of a repair Nissan certified as complete. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11744060

Incident

May 24, 2026

The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System). The contact stated that while driving approximately 60 MPH, the message that the "Battery was Low" was displayed, and while the vehicle was slowing down, the vehicle regained charge back up to 80%. The contact stated that on another occasion, after the vehicle was parked and charging with a Level 2 charger, the vehicle failed to start the next day. The contact stated that the battery only charged to 61% and the vehicle failed to start up. The message "Service EV System" and the battery warning light were illuminated. A battery tester was connected to the vehicle and indicated that the battery was fully charged. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 56,408.

NHTSA ID

11742304

Incident

Mar 15, 2026

Mileage

56,408 mi

There was a recall issued Sept of 2024 and there is still not a timeframe for remedy.

NHTSA ID

11739956

Incident

Sep 24, 2024

There is a recall on the level 3 charger that has been outstanding for more than 2 years and they still do not have a remedy. We have to rent a car if we need to drive more than 200 miles.

NHTSA ID

11739684

Incident

May 22, 2026

Nissan issued a recall notice well over a year ago about batteries catching fire when using the DC fast charging port. They still have not offered a fix. I can't travel long distances with the car since slower level 2 charging is impractical (8 hrs to full recharge). If I sell the vehicle with this limitation, I will have do to so at a substantial loss, so I cannot replace the car. I want a fix, compensation. or a buy-back. I called the local dealership today and they can't even offer a timeline for a fix.

NHTSA ID

11737941

Incident

May 14, 2026

Manufacturer Recall NumberR24B2 NHTSA Recall Number24V-700 Recall StatusRecall Incomplete, remedy not yet available Summary AFFECTED VEHICLES MAY EXPERIENCE EXCESSIVE LITHIUM DEPOSITS WITHIN BATTERY CELLS, INCREASING THE ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE AND POTENTIALLY CAUSING A FLUCTUATION IN THE STATE OF CHARGE. WHILE AN AFFECTED VEHICLE IS LEVEL 3 QUICK CHARGING, THE INCREASED ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE COULD RESULT IN RAPID HEATING OF THE BATTERY. Safety Risk WHILE AN AFFECTED VEHICLE IS LEVEL 3 QUICK CHARGING, THE INCREASED ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE COULD RESULT IN RAPID HEATING OF THE BATTERY. IF QUICK CHARGING CONTINUES, A BATTERY FIRE MAY OCCUR INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY. CUSTOMERS ARE INSTRUCTED NOT TO USE LEVEL 3 QUICK CHARGING VIA THE CHADEMO CONNECTOR UNTIL THE REMEDY IS COMPLETED

NHTSA ID

11737379

Incident

May 12, 2026

I am filing a formal complaint regarding Recall R24B2 (NHTSA 24V-700000) affecting my 2019 Nissan LEAF. Nissan instructed owners not to use Level 3/DC fast charging due to risk of battery overheating and fire. This removes a major advertised feature and substantially reduces the usability and value of the vehicle. Despite the recall being announced in 2024, no timely remedy has been provided. I have experienced the following impacts: Loss of fast charging capability Reduced travel usability Additional charging inconvenience and expenses Diminished vehicle value Ongoing concern regarding battery safety I request one or more of the following: Immediate permanent repair Battery replacement Buyback/repurchase assistance Compensation for loss of vehicle functionality

NHTSA ID

11736299

Incident

Sep 30, 2024

* NHTSA Recall Number: 24V-700 * Nissan Campaign Numbers: R24B2, P4A38, P5A22 * Defect: Excessive lithium deposits within battery cells, increasing electrical resistance and creating risk of rapid battery heating and fire during Level 3 quick charging. * Vehicles Affected: Certain 2019-2020 Nissan LEAF vehicles equipped with the CHAdeMO Level 3 quick charging port. Nissan's instruction not to use Level 3 quick charging has the following direct effects on my vehicle and on public safety: * My vehicle has lost a core advertised capability — DC fast charging — for over 19 months and counting. * The vehicle's effective use is limited to short-range, in-town driving. Any trip beyond the practical range of Level 1 or Level 2 charging is foreclosed because there is no safe way to recharge en route. * The market value of the vehicle has been measurably diminished by the open, unremedied recall. * If I were to ignore Nissan's warning and use a CHAdeMO charger, Nissan itself acknowledges the vehicle could catch fire — placing me, my passengers, and bystanders at risk.

NHTSA ID

11734847

Incident

Sep 1, 2024

April 20, 2026 NHTSA Safety Complaint I am reporting an unresolved safety issue involving my 2019 Nissan LEAF subject to NHTSA Recall 24V-700. This recall identifies a battery defect that presents a fire risk and requires avoidance of Level 3 (CHAdeMO) charging. There is currently no remedy available and no repair timeline. This restriction significantly limits the usability of the vehicle, which I rely on for daily transportation and work. The vehicle is also subject to a separate HVAC/defrost-related safety issue that may impact visibility and safe operation, also without an available fix. I made multiple documented attempts to resolve this directly with Nissan Consumer Affairs, including a formal escalation sent via certified mail. Nissan has failed to respond. Additionally, prior written correspondence from Nissan referenced an incorrect vehicle model (“Rogue”) despite having my correct VIN on file, raising serious concerns regarding the accuracy of the review conducted on my case. I am continuing to incur financial hardship for a vehicle I cannot safely or practically use. NHTSA records confirm this recall remains incomplete with no available remedy, and that continued use of Level 3 charging presents a risk of battery fire. I am requesting investigation into the lack of remedy and manufacturer response

NHTSA ID

11732449

Incident

Oct 24, 2024

We have a 2019 Nissan Leaf that I believe is covered under California's Lemon Law. We were unable to properly use the vehicle due to the fast charge DC capabilities being falsely reported by the dealership when we purchased it. We were told to stop using the DC chargers as a fire might break out, thus making the vehicle unsafe to charge at home and unsustainable for our work/life use. Several of the R24B2 recall milestones were missed in rectifying this charging issue and there is seemingly no solution to this dangerous battery issue. Since, the vehicle will also inexplicably drop in battery performance from 70+% to 9% when the vehicle is cold and driving uphill with the defroster on. Looking this up on google has shown us that it is the signs of a weak battery, although the dealership says that it's running optimally. We've taken it to the dealership and they cannot replicate the problem and will not help us replace the battery. And since taking it in, the driver's side door now inexplicably won't lock or unlock with a push of a button or key fob. It has to be manually locked or unlocked. Extremely dangerous when walking to my car alone at night and having to now get in through the passenger side to unlock the driver's side door before entering my car. I do not feel safe with this car in the least. The Leaf is only 7 years old but acts like it's 17. A nightmarish purchase on our end that did not live up to the promise of what the dealer sold us. And apparently, it was fully known that the fast-charging DC capability did not work properly when sold to us. We would like to trigger a buy back from Nissan Consumer Affairs to the date when the recall was first announced. Thank you.

NHTSA ID

11731243

Incident

Sep 18, 2024

The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (Electrical System); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The local dealer was contacted. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure.

NHTSA ID

11731219

Incident

Apr 14, 2026

The contact owns a 2019 Nissan Leaf. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V700000 (ELECTRICAL SYSTEM); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The local dealer was contacted. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure.

NHTSA ID

11730464

Incident

Nov 15, 2024