On October 6, 2024, I bought a used 2023 Nissan Leaf SV Plus. The car was previously declared a "buy back" but was supposedly "fully repaired." I drove the blue car for a few days and had the windows tinted.

On the morning of October 23, disaster struck. The car wouldn't power on and displayed the message “Warning: Service EV System No Power.” The car couldn't move under its own power. I made an appointment with the local dealer to have them look at the car. While figuring out how to get the car there, I checked the 12-volt battery with a multimeter and found it was very low, at only 10.5 volts. After hooking up a charger and getting it back to 13 volts, the car started, and I was able to take it to the dealer on the 29th.

The local dealer couldn't replicate the issue, so I went to pick it up on November 5th. As they were driving it from the back lot to the front, the car threw some codes, so they kept it and gave me a ride home. I then reached out to Nissan North America (NNA) and asked for a loaner car, but they said they couldn't provide one. They did, however, tell me that a recall on the rear backup camera would fix the issue, and I'd have the car back in a couple of days. I asked how a camera could cause a power failure, but they were confident it was the solution.

I followed up with the dealer several times, and they kept telling me they were working with NNA to figure out what was wrong. My local dealer's master technician then had a family emergency, so they moved my car to a nearby dealership an hour away.

I spent the month of November fighting with NNA. Corporate would tell me the car would be done in a few days but would never follow up. When I reached out directly to the dealer doing the repairs, they had no idea what I was talking about. They were waiting for NNA to send their expert to look at the car.

Finally, on December 13, I'd had enough. I told them the car had been out of service for over 30 days and they needed to start the buy-back process. The representative told me it would take 10 days to process the request. On December 23, they informed me they were still processing it, and we scheduled a follow-up for the 30th.

On December 30, I was informed that Nissan was not in a position to buy back or replace the vehicle and would continue to repair it. I called the dealer and found they had made no progress and were at the same point as in November.

During this time, I had been researching lemon laws, finding a lot of lawyers but not many do-it-yourself resources. I knew that the State of Washington required NNA to buy back or replace the car because it had been out of service for more than 15 calendar days, was under 2 years from its original retail sale, and had under 24,000 miles.

On December 31, I sent NNA a certified letter demanding they replace my car with an identical one. They then spent the next month not returning my calls or emails until an arbitration specialist reached out to me on January 24, 2025. They re-confirmed that Nissan would not buy back or replace the vehicle and would continue to repair it. During this very heated call, I discovered that NNA only reviews cases with closed work orders. My open work order of 69 days was not being considered.

The next day, I opened a case with the Washington State Attorney General's Office (ATG), and my case was accepted on January 30.

On February 5, a new representative from NNA contacted me. She informed me that NNA would "voluntarily repurchase" the vehicle under the terms of the WA Lemon Law. I knew this was a direct result of my legal action.

Because I had used the Washington State Department of Commerce's EV Instant Rebates Program, they would not refund that portion, putting me in a worse position than when I bought the car. I told NNA they needed to replace the car with an identical equivalent. They told me the only option was a new car and they couldn't do a used one. It was at this point I realized the law required them to replace my used car with a new one at no cost.

For the next 20 days, NNA kept insisting I had to pay the difference between what I paid for the used car and the cost of a new one, which is contrary to state law. The representative argued with me and the ATG about how the law works. At one point, they offered to pay me off to end the claim and continue repairing the car, but it came with a non-disclosure agreement that I refused. They then tried to get out of replacing the car by saying that I was aware that the car was previously bought back for this issue and I knowingly bought it, I countered their claim with their own paperwork they provided as proof I knew, it showed the car still had the full remaining warranty from its first retail sale.

On March 4, I requested that the ATG step in and provide an arbitration hearing since we were making no progress.

On May 7, we had the hearing. I presented my case, and NNA presented theirs. On the 15th, the arbitration decision was provided, and they sided with me, telling NNA they had 40 days to provide me with a new Nissan Leaf SV Plus in blue. By sheer luck, a new one was sitting at the same dealership where this whole journey began. I let NNA know on the 16th that the car was there, and they confirmed they were holding it for me.

NNA then sent me payoff documents that, once again, showed I would owe the difference between the used and new car. The ATG's office told the representative that this was not allowed and they had to provide a new car as stated in the arbitration ruling. NNA then tried to offer me used cars, claiming that the arbitration ruling and law supported it, but they were quoting the law out of context. I provided the full context and told them to stop being difficult and just provide what the arbitration decision required.

We went in circles again, with the ATG having to step in to explain the ruling. We then fought over the required paperwork, and at one point, they wanted me to insure both the new and old cars simultaneously. NNA finally got everything in place and gave me a rough estimate of July 11 for completion. They missed that deadline by 18 days.

Finally, on July 29, I went to get my new Nissan Leaf. Now of course this can’t go smoothly and the rep that NNA was sending to do the paperwork did not show up even after confirming with me and the dealership that they would be there. Fortunately, the dealership was able to process all the paperwork and get me in my new car but, only because I have a professional relationship with them since NNA did not send a rep the dealership did not have a check for the car and under normal circumstances, they would not release the car until it was fully paid for but since they know me, I was able to drive it off the lot.

For those keeping track, NNA was not able to meet the 40-day deadline. The State of Washington fines automotive companies $1,000 per calendar day for non-compliance, and they missed it by 34 days, totaling a $34,000 fine. Not only did they have to pay for a new Leaf, but they also had to pay the state a significant fine for their delays. During this entire process, I was consistently promised that the repairs would be done by "next week," but as far as I know, the car was still being "repaired" up to the day I got my new one.

I requested that NNA send my case to the complaints department so that I could figure out what went wrong with my case. I requested that I be contacted on July 30th it was not until October 8th and several requests for someone to contact me that someone finally contacted me. Come to find out that the first person that I delt with in November did not follow the proper procedures and I also found out that NNA has NEVER delt with a lemon buy back on a used car in the state of Washington before. I let them know that this was a horrid experience that I don’t wish on anyone else and they need to review my case and use it as a training example so that in the future cases get handled correctly.