Complain about a product or service

Nissan Lease

Nissan Cars • Altima • Infiniti • Maxima • Murano • Quest • Sentra --- Trucks • Frontier • Pathfinder • Titan • Xterra --- Other • Air Bags • Paint • NMAC • Nissan Lease --- News • Nissan Plans Clean Diesel for U.S. • Nissan Goes Country • NJ Sues Nissan

Sara of Thomasville GA writes (2/10/03):
I leased an Altima for my daughter in 2000. I had previously leased 3 other vehicles from Nissan. I always turned them in on time with less mileage than the lease required. I paid my bills on time and never had a late payment. The lease on the Altima was up on Jan 15, 2003. I received a call from Nissan saying they would send an inspector to my house to check the car and place damages. I told them that nowhere in my contract did any mention of inspectors occur outside a regular Nissan dealership. I thought it a fraud.

I turned my car into a dealership in Thomasville, Ga although I had leased the car in Ocala, Fl. I turned it in one week early. The sales manager told me the car was in tip-top shape. I left it in his care. Weeks later I get a bill for $900 for damages to the car. The bumper had been dislodged and I agree with that, but that was a factory default that I had tried to have fixed previously. My daughter who drove the car even sliced her forearm on a factory mistake underneath the seat. A sharp ridge on the driver's side tore a 4 inch gash in her arm. I called Nissan about that and never heard from them again. I do not plan to pay these excessive damages. The car had normal wear and tear like my cars had previously and there was never a complaint before.

Sara should have pursued a claim against Nissan at the time of her daughter's injury. As for the $900, she would be ahead to pay it now, then sue the company in Small Claims Court, seeking a refund plus her costs of pursuing the action.

Nicholette of Round Lake Beach IL (10/16/02):
After surrendering my leased Altima to a Nissan/Volkswagen dealer, one month later I received an invoice for $1800.00 Charges included mileage (which I did not exceed), replacement of four tires (because I purchased one new one), dent on bumper and paint wear and tear - how can I have any impact on what the paint job looks like after five years! I do agree that I owe $400 for the dent in the bumper and $150 for (3) cigarette burn holes in fabric - but the other charges are NOT legitimate. At the time of my transaction, when I turned the car into an authorized dealer, I should have had the opportunity to dispute these charges, which by the way were never put in writing when I originated the lease agreement. "Normal wear and tear" has a variety of interpretations.

It is now in collections, damaging my credit rating, which has been impeccable and because of this I am having to increase my down payment for a loan by 5%.

Simply refusing to pay is not the way to settle these disputes. Nicholette should have paid the invoice, then contested it in Small Claims Court. This would not have damaged her credit.

Jeff of Rye Brook NY (1/9/02):
Do not lease a Nissan unless you desire to further enrich NMAC at the end of your lease. I am adding my name to the growing list of unhappy NMAC customers. This was my first, and last, Nissan lease. Three months before lease expiration, I received a cordial letter from NMAC reminding me about the end of my lease, and encouraging me to visit a local dealer about leasing a new car, which I promptly did. This was in December 2001, a time of economic uncertainty for the auto industry. The dealer and I agreed on a price (a price which I thought was reasonable enough for me to absorb the final 3 payments due on my existing lease), and I was advised by the dealer to schedule an inspection for my existing car.

I then found out that a 3rd party performed the inspection, which could not take place for approximately 3 weeks, despite my offer to bring the vehicle to their location (apparently, there is no "location" to bring it to). In order to complete the transaction that I signed, the dealer said that I could turn the vehicle over to them, and the inspection would be performed there, which I did. This car was mostly driven modestly, was garaged, had 10,000 miles less than the maximum, included an entertainment center not part of the original leased vehicle and was generally in excellent condition. It so happened that on the day I returned the vehicle, a scratch and ding repair company (Dent Wizard) was at the dealership and told the repair cost for the minor scratches or dings on the car.

About a month later I received a certified letter advising me that I owed a $1000 for this 3rd party's (hired by NMAC) bloated repair estimate. After contacting NMAC (Rubin), I was told that I waived ny right to contest the estimate, but that as a returning customer, I was entitled to a $500 credit (a fact of which I was aware, but had to remind NMAC of), leaving a balance of approximately $500. I was told that it was my "impulse" to lease a new car before inspection that was the cause of my problem.

When I suggested to Rubin that I was urged by NMAC to visit the dealer and lease a new car, that I was unfamiliar with vehicle return procedures, that NMAC's reminder letter to me did not give the important details of this procedure, and that a 3 week delay to inspect a vehicle was unrealistic and, as confirmed by the dealer, bad business, all Rubin had to say was that a 3 week delay was about average FOR NMAC. When I suggested to Rubin that someone in upper level management ought to be more concerned about keeping life-long customers than espousing legalisms to extract another $500 out of an old lease, all I was met with was silence. It was then very clear to me that Nissan's priorities lie not with keeping good customers, but with nickel and diming on expiring leases.

The $500 credit is an illusion in the face of this process. If I knew then what I know now, I would never have signed a new lease, and would have paid the money and be rid of them. I know now what I have to look forward to at the end of my current lease, but maybe these histories can stand as a warning to others thinking about leasing with Nissan.

Cynthia of Austin (7/24/01):
I turned in my '98 Altima and paid ALL fees due after the finance manager called NMAC to verify the FINAL amount. Since that time I've been nickled-and-dimed for an additional $+/-1200.00 and a PAID in FULL letter. For the past week (starting 7/18/01) I have been getting harrassing phone calls from a collection agency for a tax bill. This was specifically addressed when I turned in the Altima for a 2001 Pathfinder. They have threatened me and my credit report. I NEVER received such a request until they called.

The first call was placed to me on 7/19/01. I told them I didn't know what they were talking about and wanted to know when these supposed letters were sent. The gentleman then, rather curtly told me the FIRST letter was mailed the day before. Yes, July 18, 2001. And he still had the nerve to ask why I hadn't paid it. I received this "intimidating" bill yesterday finally. I am livid.

The original bill was sent out July 9 and you sent me to collections on the 17th!!! That is ridiculous!!!! That is considerably less than 30 days and I have never received the bill from NMAC, only OSI. I want his matter handled.

John of Sarasota FL (2/12/03):
Same as many others, turn in looks good, a month later, after leasing another car, notified that the tires did not meet the inspected standards. Turned in early with no over miles, etc.

No chance to defend myself or have a second opinion. Would like to be able to contact the CEO of the Nissan Corp and tell him that the cars are just as advertised, however the Nissan Acceptence Corp should be taken a look at and find out where all of the penalty money is going.

David of Chicago (1/30/03):
After leasing 3 Nissan Maximas, I decided I needed a change. My dealership sells Nissans, Audis, Hondas and several other brands. I turned the car in with several very small "dings." My mileage was 8,000 miles under the limit. The Maxima was in excellent shape and my body shop said about $200 in damage to the car. I told the dealership that I would have it fixed myself. The dealership said they would do it.

Sixty days later, I received an invoice from Nissan for $650 for the car claiming damage to various parts of the auto. I called Nissan and went to the dealer. Nissan did not respond and the dealer said since I did not purchase/lease a new car from them, they said they would not help. Finally, a collection agencey representing Nissan called and said that they would NMAC would settle their claim for $350. I said OK, paid the check and never heard from them.

Several weeks ago as I redid my mortgage, I was notified that I had a $300 write off on my credit history. I have never been late with anyone and that was the ONLY black mark on my credit. Subsequently, I tried to write Nissan and the agency they use and got NO response. I am currently contemplating my next course of action which will be legal. Even if I wanted to pay the bill off, Nissan would not even respond so I can do pay it off and then there is not guarantee that they would make the effort to remove the matter from my credit history. All for $300. I will never lease or buy a Nissan/Infinity product again.

Robert of Danbury CT (9/11/02):
Nissan asked me to schedule an inspector to come to my home to inspect my Pathfinder at lease end. Inspector came, and noted over $700. worth of damage to vehicle. I had vehicle fixed for significantly less, had vehicle reinspected, damage now $387.00. This occurred AFTER lease agreement ended. Inspecting service, ITS, failed to show up on numerous occasions delaying the process. After second inspection I wanted to hire independent inspector as is my right under Connecticut Law. Nissan said instead of hiring independent inspector they would waive all damage charges. I agreed. By this time it was three months past lease end.

After returning vehicle and getting receipt from dealer stating that vehicle was in perfect condition Nissan sends me a bill for $2400 that included, the three months of lease payments that occurred because they failed to come to inspect vehicle in timely manner, $125 repossession fee, even though I brought vehicle back to dealer. $350 term fee, $201 late fee. tax on term fee, and property tax. This has now gone on my credit report and has kept me from purchasing any other vehicle.

Brian of Bradenton FL writes (4/3/01):
Approximately 35-40 days before having to turn in our leased Sentra, we went shopping for a new Nissan at a local dealership. We found a car we liked and decided to lease this new vehicle. Upon signing the papers for the new vehicle we were told by the dealership sales manager that we could leave our Sentra at the lot to get an estimate for wear-and-tear charges that would be due upon lease termination.

The estimate came to approximately $1500.00. Knowing we kept the car immaculate, were about 12,000 under the allowable mileage, and had kept up the routine maintenance, we knew this amount was way to high for normal wear-and-tear. Nissan informed us that we were obligated to pay this amount and our only other option was to take it to someplace else and repair the damages before lease termination.

I had a list of the so called "damages" faxed to me and found that it had front-end structural damage listed at a cost of $750. Never being in an accident or curb-hopping I asked how this damage could have occurred. I was informed that it was done when the car was put on a lift to have the oil changed. They said it happens to most of the Sentra's and were surprised we were never informed of this problem.

I still could not understand how an oil change would cause that much damage so I had my wife, who is an auto insurance claims adjuster, research their proposed damage. We found this damage was not possible to attain by the car being put on lifts. Becoming increasingly angry, I decided to pick up my car and take it to a mechanic where I could get the repairs done for a fraction of the cost that Nissan suggested.

When I arrived at the dealership I noticed my car was no longer there. My lease still had 15 days on it, they did not give me the opportunity to fix the "damages" elsewhere, and they shipped my car off to auction. I went off. As I was describing the car to one of the salespeople to find its whereabouts he replied, "Oh yeah, that's the one the truck hit."

Turns out one of their transport trucks had hit our Sentra in the parking lot causing the front end damage. There was even a signed form by the driver stating he had hit our vehicle. So our problems are finally over? Not even close. Nissan claims once the vehicle has been inspected by their "certified inspector" there's nothing they can do. They insisted I pay the full $1500. I contacted everyone from the dealership up to corporate and was railroaded at every level. Not one person in the organization cared about our problem or even suggested a course of action. The only response we could get is, "Deal with it."

Finally, I gathered up all the evidence, presented it to Nissan, and threatened legal action if they did not act. Four weeks later I get a billing statement in the mail saying they have waived all charges. No explanation. No apology. No one to contact w/ any questions. Just a statement. Then they quietly slip off into the darkness to take advantage of another consumer.

To sum up, Nissan did the following:

• Damaged my car
• Had the inspection done after they caused damage to make the estimate binding and force me to pay for it
• Lied about the cause of damage
• Shipped my car to auction while still under lease in my name
• Did not give me the opportunity to get "damages" repaired elsewhere
• Ignored my inquiries, complaints, and pleas for help at every level

My wife and I are 27 years old and we're already on our fifth lease. At this rate we'll lease approximately 20 more cars in our lifetimes. I guarantee none of them will be Nissan. This company has left a sour taste in our months and I'm appalled by the way they handled our situation. I can't think of another time I've ever been treated like that as a consumer. Nissan, your cars are average and your customer relations is garbage.

We're happy to put this mess behind us. We just wanted to share the story so others will be aware that these companies will do anything for a buck, including lies and deceit. I hope this letter gets other people to learn of their consumer rights and know that sometimes you need to shout instead of reason in order to be heard.

Dawn of Westland MI (3/13/01):
In July of 1999, I tried to return my 97 Nissan Altima to the leasing dealer. I had misunderstood the procedure for inspections and thought that they did them there. When I arrived at the dealer they explained that I need to contact an inspecting agency for an inspection of the vehicle before I could return it. I then contacted the agency (ITS) to schedule an inspection of my vehicle. This was on July 29, 1999 and my lease expired on August 1, 1999.

When I called ITS I explained to them that my lease expired on Sunday and I was told that it wasn't a problem, just get the inspection done and then return the car back to the dealer. My inspection was done on Tuesday afternoon August 3, 1999. Because of my work schedule I could only get back to the dealer (approx 20 miles away) on their late nights which are Monday or Thursday. I let Nissan know that the inspection was done and that I would be returning the car on Thursday evening August 5, 1999. They said all I needed to do was take them a copy of the inspection and the car and they would record the miles and that was it.

Well, when I arrived at the dealer (Dearborn Pontiac-Nissan) in Dearborn, Mich. The Nissan Sales Manager said that he was too busy to take the car back that evening and that I would have to return. The next available day for me to return the car was on Monday evening August 9, 1999. I arrived at the dealer at about 7 p.m. after finding a sitter and arranging for someone to meet me there to drive me home. This time the Manager again said that he was too busy to deal with me. I then became angry and told him that I could not afford to keep coming back out there and that the lease was already 8 days past due and that I needed to return it that evening. I left the inspection report, all my paper work (signed) and the keys on his desk. I then went outside and removed my plate from the vehicle.

As I was sitting in my sister's vehicle, I called Nissan customer service to let then know that the dealer now had the vehicle. Just then the Manager walked out of the building and laid the paperwork and the keys on the hood of the car, turned, looked at me and went back inside. As I already had Nissan on the phone I asked the woman on the other end what to do. She asked to speak with the Sales Manager, so I took my cell phone inside and told the Manager. His response was that he did not have time to speak with her.

I then walked outside and she told me not to leave the vehicle there. She told me to take it home. I asked if Nissan could send someone to pick up the car and they said that they didn't do that and she would contact me the following day to give me the name of another dealer that it could return the car at.

The following day, I worked until 6 p.m. When I arrived home there was a message on the machine that I was to return the car to the SAME dealer at 5 p.m. Well obviously I had already missed that appointment, so I decided to contact NMAC again the following day to make other arrangements.

That night approximately 11:30 p.m. there was a knock on my door. when I answered the door there were three young men there. They told me they were there to pick up the car. I said GREAT! I have been trying to give this thing back for two weeks now. One of the young men remarked that he had never seen anyone that happy about them taking their car before. I explained that the lease was up and that the dealer had been refusing to accept it. I gave them the inspection report, and both sets of keys and then I removed my plate.

The next day I contacted Nissan to thank them for sending someone to pick up the car. I asked them to send me a bill for the last 2 payments that were due (I had lost my job in June 99 and didn't start my new job until mid July 99) and the $88.00 that the inspector said that I owed for a few dings.

I finally received a bill from them in Sept. 1999, and it included a tow bill for them picking up the car. I called NMAC and complained about the $190.00 tow bill but the said that was what they had to pay for someone to pick up the car, so I unwillingly agreed to pay the bill which totalled $787.98 I sent them a check for the full amount on Sept. 26, 1999.

That was my last contact with them. I never received another bill and approx. 4 months later I had to close that account, assuming that the check had cleared by then. (I am not in the habit of balancing my checkbook). Then in January 2001 I received a bill from an attorney's office stating that I owed NMAC $7,870.00. I frantically called the attorney's office regarding this and was told that they would have to request documentation of the debt from NMAC and they would forward it to me. Today is March 13, 2001 and I still do not have those papers.

According to NMAC they never received my final payment and as far as the bank can tell the check never cleared that account but because it has been closed for so long it is hard to get any info. On top of all this I received a copy of my credit report from my refinance company and NMAC is showing this lease as an UNPAID REPO on my report for $7,870.00. I contacted NMAC and after speaking with several people and several different departments (which I had to take time off work to do) I tried to explain the circumstances to the loss dept. but they say that they are not going to remove the amount from my credit report and I even offer to pay them directly over the phone the amount of the check that the never received and they refused. They state that my only option is to pay the entire balance due or they will work out a settlement with me but the UNPAID REPO charge still stays on my credit report.

Michael of Palmetto GA (2/21/01):
I leased a 1998 Nissan Altima GXE from a dealership in Atlanta, GA 38 mmonths ago. The vehicle has received normal driving over the last 38+ months and the lease ends March 20, 2001. All lease payments have been made on time.

About three weeks ago I received a call from NMAC asking what I intended to do with the vehicle and I indicated I would return it as I was unhappy with their dealership personnel and would secure a different vehicle. I was told that I could arrange an appraisal inspection with ITS and/or return the vehicle to the closest Nissan Dealership to where I am currently residing.

Last night I went to Nissan of Union City and was met by a Salesman who asked if he could help me. I said yes I was there to turn in a leased vehicle that was at its lease end, all payments had been made. He asked my wife and I to sit at a table in the dealership and proceeded to ask if we wanted to buy the vehicle, or trade it in on another Nissan. I and my wife said no we just wanted to turn the vehicle in.

Then over came Chris White the Finance Manager. He asked if we had the vehicle pre-inspected and we attempted to explain the conversation we had with NMAC. He kept interrupting us and saying they were refusing to accept the vehicle for return. I asked him to give us a written statement of the refusal and he refused to do that. He later said they would accept the vehicle for return but I would have to sign a written agreement that I waived any and all rights I had, that way if "a tree limb fell on the vehicle after they had accepted it for return, I would still be responsible for all damages."

Needless to say I would not sign the waiver. He refused us talking with any other member of management at the dealership. We then took pictures of the vehicle as it sat in front of the dealership and a couple pictures of the front of the dealership building. Then we drove home totally shocked by this experience,as this Chris had gone on to explain to us that the dealership could sell a vehicle to anyone, for any price, charge any interest rate and could refuse to sell to anyone for no reason at all, and they did not have to honor even their own advertised sales. Why he even mentioned this we do not know.

We returned home and promptly called NMAC, as the dealership also refused to call them when we were there earlier. NMAC verifed our earlier conversation with them about the return of the vehicle and got the dealership, a Troy Sales Manager, on a conference call with me. The end result was a lot of apologies, retraction of the statement that I refused the inspection of the vehicle and that Troy would call someone he knew and get the vehicle set for inspection and the next day. I called Troy later that same night and he said he would try for the next day but could arrange it within three days.

Today I called the dealership and spoke to Sam the General Sales Manager as Troy had the day off and had not made an appointment for the inspection. I made Sam aware of the previous nights situation and he said he would call and get the inspection set up. Well he called later today to advise that the inspection would be on March 5th, which I find unacceptable. Tonight I called and talked with a Don Henderson at NMAC and virtually all he would do is attempt to quote me things out of the lease about required inspection and a wait for the inspection of up to 14 days, etc.

I did correct him that the lease does not say an inspection is required, does not say that the inspection could take up to 14 days. I reminded him that all payments were made on time that the vehicle is below the 39,000 miles allowed on the lease, is in good shape, no mechanical defects, that I had the brakes replaced around 18,000 miles and the tires around 26,000 and that there was a couple of door dings, but we both remarked that was ordinary for a 39 months old car driven in and around Atlanta, GA.

But he also stated that the 14-day wait for the inspection was within their guidelines and refused to do anything to assist us. I firmly believe I am being abused in this transaction. Both my wife and I are shocked by the treatment we received by the Finance Manager at the Dealership and his statements, and rudely treated by this Don Henderson from NMAC. We now have the added expense of the round trip to the dealership and back home because of the refusal to accept delivery. And, I now have to carry the vehicle from yesterday to at least March 5th on auto insurance again because of the refusal to take delivery.

We have other very bad experiences with Nissan, going back to Salisbury Nissan in Salisbury, MD where Nissan also refused to get involved. But that dealership owner wound up being put out of business by the State of Maryland for the same tactics we had outlined in our complaint back then. This type of customer treatment should not be allowed to continue. The feeling we have always gotten with Nissan is we are so big you have to like it.

Back to the top | Nissan