1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS

MERGING ONTO HIGHWAY SUDDEN LOSS OF CONTROL /STEERING AIRBAGS DEPLOYED CAUSING INJURIES INCLUDING CHEMICAL BURNS

MERGING ONTO HIGHWAY SUDDEN LOSS OF CONTROL /STEERING AIRBAGS DEPLOYED CAUSING INJURIES INCLUDING CHEMICAL BURNS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DECELERATING FROM DRIVING AT 70 MPH, A FUEL ODOR EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED INTERMITTENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER BUT WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS PREVIOUSLY SERVICED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 95V063000 (FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE). THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 77,000.

HEADLIGHTS GO OUT WHILE DRIVING. *TR

TOOK CAR IN FOR SQUEAKING NOISE UNDER CAR; DISCOVERED IT WAS U-JOINT SEAL GOING DRY. HOWEVER, UPON INSPECTION TECHNICIAN DISCOVERED FOUR DANGEROUSLY WORN BALL JOINTS, BOTH UPPER AND LOWER BALL JOINTS ON BOTH SIDES, AND DANGEROUSLY WORN IDLER ARM. THIS WAS CONFIRMED VISUALLY BY MYSELF. UPPER LEFT BALL JOINT WAS IN THE BEST CONDITION, ALL OTHERS WERE MISSING JACKETS, HAD NO LUBRICATION, AND WORN TO THE LEVEL THAT VERY LITTLE FORCE WAS NEEDED TO REMOVE THE BALL FROM THE SOCKET AFTER REMOVAL, ONE CAME OUT WITH NO FORCE. THE IDLER ARM WAS BARELY CONNECTED, AND OVER 75% OF METAL AT THE LINK WORN AND RUSTED. NOTHING IN THE CAR'S DRIVING BEHAVIOR GAVE ANY INDICATION THAT ANY OF THESE PARTS WERE WORN. STEERING HAD ONLY SLIGHT AMOUNT OF PLAY WHICH WAS STILL PRESENT AFTER THE PARTS WERE REPLACED AND THE CAR ALIGNED. LEFT UPPER BALL JOINT HAD BEEN REPLACED ONE YEAR AND 3 MONTHS PREVIOUS TO DISCOVERY. NO OTHER SIGNS OF WEAR WERE PRESENT AT THAT TIME. THE PREVIOUS BALL JOINT REPLACED WAS LEAST WORN, BUT JACKET WAS TORN AND NO LUBRICATION PRESENT. WITH ONE EXCEPTION, THE BALL JOINTS APPEARED TO HAVE ONLY GRAVITY AS THE PRIMARY FORCE HOLDING THE BALLS IN THE SOCKETS. MY CONCERN FOR OTHER DRIVERS IS RELATED TO THE LACK OF INDICATIONS THAT THE FRONT END OF THIS CAR HAD DEGRADED TO THIS LEVEL. THE VEHICLE'S STEERING RESPONSES WERE ASYMPTOMATIC, PERIOD. THIS HAD NOT BEEN MY EXPERIENCE IN THE PAST. POSSIBLE CAUSES FOR ASYMPTOMATIC BEHAVIOR IS UNKNOWN (WEIGHT OF VEHICLE AND GRAVITY?) THE EARLIER PROBLEM (1YR 3MO. EARLIER) WITH THE LEFT TOP BALL JOINT FAILURE WAS ONLY DISCOVERED AFTER IT FAILED AFTER HITTING SMALL POT HOLE COMING FROM PARKING LOT AND THE WHEEL BROKE AND LAYED IN FLAT ON THE ROAD. SPEED WAS UNDER 5MPH. *JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY MALFUNCTIONED AND BECAME INOPERABLE. THE CONTACT SWITCHED ON THE HIGH BEAMS THAT ALSO MALFUNCTIONED WITHIN A FEW MINUTES AND FAILED TO FUNCTION. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE HEAD LAMP CIRCUIT WAS FAULTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT BUT NO SOLUTION WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 76,000. UPDATED 07/28/14 MA THE CONSUMER REFERENCED RECALL # 95V189000. UPDATED 07/29/14

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS SUDDENLY MALFUNCTIONED AND BECAME INOPERABLE. THE CONTACT SWITCHED ON THE HIGH BEAMS THAT ALSO MALFUNCTIONED WITHIN A FEW MINUTES AND FAILED TO FUNCTION. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE HEAD LAMP CIRCUIT WAS FAULTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT BUT NO SOLUTION WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 76,000. UPDATED 07/28/14 MA THE CONSUMER REFERENCED RECALL # 95V189000. UPDATED 07/29/14

ALL THE BRAKE LINES ON CAR FROM FRONT TO REAR ARE ROTTED. CAUSE BRAKE FAILURE WHILE DRIVING. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF 55 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD AND DROVE ONTO THE EMERGENCY LANE. THE CONTACT CONFIRMED THAT THE FIRE BEGAN INSIDE THE DASHBOARD AREA AND SPREAD TO THE COMPONENTS UNDER THE HOOD. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE POLICE WERE CALLED AND A REPORT WAS FILED; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 90,000. UPDATED 6/1/10 *CN UPDATED 06/18/10.*JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF 55 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD AND DROVE ONTO THE EMERGENCY LANE. THE CONTACT CONFIRMED THAT THE FIRE BEGAN INSIDE THE DASHBOARD AREA AND SPREAD TO THE COMPONENTS UNDER THE HOOD. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE POLICE WERE CALLED AND A REPORT WAS FILED; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 90,000. UPDATED 6/1/10 *CN UPDATED 06/18/10.*JB

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE SPEEDOMETER AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED ON HIS VEHICLE. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE DIGITAL DISPLAY BOARD FAILED. THE REPAIR COST WAS ESTIMATED AT $1,000. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY WOULD ONLY REPAIR THE VEHICLE ACCORDING TO NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). THE VEHICLE WILL BE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 82,000. UPDATED 06/27/09 *BF UPDATED 06/23/09.*JB

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE SPEEDOMETER AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED ON HIS VEHICLE. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE DIGITAL DISPLAY BOARD FAILED. THE REPAIR COST WAS ESTIMATED AT $1,000. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY WOULD ONLY REPAIR THE VEHICLE ACCORDING TO NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). THE VEHICLE WILL BE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 82,000. UPDATED 06/27/09 *BF UPDATED 06/23/09.*JB

I ALSO HAD THE CLUNK NOISE AFTER A LEFT TURN, ABOUT 1 MONTH AS WELL AFTER MY LEFT TIRE FELL OFF AS I WAS BACKING OUT OF GARAGE. BALL JOINTS HAD GIVEN OUT PREMATURELY. 1300.00 TO FIX PLUS TOW CHARGE. *TR

I ALSO HAD THE CLUNK NOISE AFTER A LEFT TURN, ABOUT 1 MONTH AS WELL AFTER MY LEFT TIRE FELL OFF AS I WAS BACKING OUT OF GARAGE. BALL JOINTS HAD GIVEN OUT PREMATURELY. 1300.00 TO FIX PLUS TOW CHARGE. *TR

CRUISE CONTROL WAS REPLACE WITH A JUMPER. IT WORKED FOR ABOUT A MONTH, AND NOW IT IS NOT WORKING. THE REPAIR SHOP REFUSE TO FIX IT. THEY SAY THAT SOMETHING ELSE IS WRONG, AND WANT TO CHARGE ME A LOT OF MONEY TO FIX IT. THE CAR HAS BEEN WORKING EVERY SINCE I PURCHASED IT IN 1995. NOW IT IS NOT. *TR

AFTER MAKING A SHARP RIGHT HAND TURN, I HEARD A LOUD CLUNK CLUNK NOISE AND THE CAR MADE A AWKWARD MOVEMENT UNTIL I STRAIGHTEN THE VEHICLE BACK OUT. ABOUT A MONTH LATER AFTER GETTING MY BRAKES SERVICED THE REPAIRMAN TOLD ME THAT THE BALL JOINT SEALS WERE BUSTED PREMATURELY AND I HAD NO PROTECTION. $1000.00 FIX. *TR

VEHICLE SHUDDERS WHEN SHIFTING GEARS. THIS IN AN INTERMITTENT PROBLEM AND OCCURS MORE FREQUENTLY WHEN THERE IS LOW LOAD ON ENGINE AND WHEN TRANSMISSION IS TRYING TO SELECT GEARS. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A LOUD BANGING NOISE AND THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE LOWERED TO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO HER RESIDENCE. AN INVESTIGATOR FROM HER INSURANCE COMPANY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND CONCLUDED THAT THE LOWER BALL JOINTS SEPARATED FROM THE VEHICLE. SHE IS IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 76,000.

I RECEIVE A RECALL NOTICE ON MY FORD GRAND MARQUIS -1995 TO DISCONNECT MY CRUISE CONTROL BECAUSE IT MAY CAUSE A FIRE (RECALL NUMBER 05S28). ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2007 WE TOOK OUR VEHICLE TO MATHEWS FORD IN HEATH OHIO TO HAVE THE CRUISE CONTROL DISABLED. WE WERE TOLD THE PART WOULD BE IN SOME TIME IN JANUARY. AFTER CALLING AND CHECKING ON THE PART FOR QUIT SOMETIME, THE PART FINALLY ARRIVE AND WAS INSTALL ON APRIL 8, 2008. AFTER THE PART WAS INSTALL, MY CRUISE CONTROL DID NOT WORK. IT HAD BEEN WORKING FINE PRIOR TO THE CRUISE CONTROL BEING DISABLED. I RETURNED TO MATHEWS FORD ON APRIL 25, 2008 TO COMPLAIN THAT MY CRUISE CONTROL DID NOT WORK. I WAS INFORMED THAT THEY WOULD LOOK AT IT, BUT IF IT WAS NOT THE PART THEY REPLACED I WOULD BE CHARGE $70 FOR THEM TO LOOK AT IT AND RECEIVE AN ESTIMATE TO FIX THE PROBLEM. I REFUSED THE SERVICE. I DO NOT FEEL THIS IS PROPER. IT WAS WORKING BEFORE THEY MESSED WITH. IF THEY WOULD OF MADE THE REPAIR IN SEPTEMBER AND IT WORKED AFTERWARDS AND THEN LATER BROKE I WOULD UNDERSTAND. THEY ARE TELLING ME SOMETHING COULD OF HAPPENED SINCE THEY DISABLED IT. WELL SOMETHING MAY OF HAPPENED WHILE IT WAS DISABLED FOR 8-9 MONTHS IT WAS DISABLED, BUT SINCE I COULD NOT USE IT, IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. I FEEL THEY SHOULD RETURN MY VEHICLE TO THE CONDITION IT WAS IN BEFORE THEY MESSED WITH IT. AT A MINIMUM, I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY MONEY FOR THEM TO DIAGNOSE A PROBLEM THEY CAUSED! IF THEY DIAGNOSED IT AND IT WAS ANOTHER PART--THEN I COULD DECIDE HOW TO PROCEED AND I SHOULD NOT BE LOCKED INTO A SERVICE CENTER THAT I WOULD NOT NORMALLY USE. I FEEL LIKE THE FOX IS WATCHING THE HEN HOUSE. IS THERE ANYWAY I CAN GET THIS ISSUE RESOLVED WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY A DEALERSHIP? I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME IN THIS MATTER. MARK SHELL *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: CRUISE CONTROL. WHILE LEAVING HER HOUSE, THE CONTACT WITNESSED HER VEHICLE ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT STATED THAT THE FIRE ORIGINATED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, WHERE IT CURRENTLY REMAINS. THE POWERTRAIN AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 170,000.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT, AND ODOMETER. THE MILEAGE INFORMATION AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT, AND ODOMETER. THE MILEAGE INFORMATION AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT, AND ODOMETER. THE MILEAGE INFORMATION AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT, AND ODOMETER. THE MILEAGE INFORMATION AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN.

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT, AND ODOMETER. THE MILEAGE INFORMATION AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN.

STEERING BOX SEALS WENT TWICE IN 2 WEEKS. ANOTHER COMPLAINT ON THIS SITE TELLS THE SAME STORY. THE SEALS WENT ONCE WHEN I WENT TO DRIVE AND THE OTHER TIME, WHEN I WENT TO BACK INTO A PARKING SPACE. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL FAILED. IN AUGUST OF 2007, THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, BUT IT DID NOT MENTION TO PARK THE VEHICLE INSIDE. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A SECOND NOTICE FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 08V051000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:CRUISE CONTROL), WHICH ADVISED HIM NOT TO PARK THE VEHICLE INSIDE DUE TO THE POSSIBILITY OF A FIRE. THE CONTACT FELT THAT THE FIRST LETTER SHOULD HAVE STATED THIS INFORMATION. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 70,000.

1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS WITH SPEED CONTROL RECALL. CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE IN TO HAVE THE WIRING HARNESS DISCONNECTED. CONSUMER HAS YET TO BE NOTIFIED OF WHEN THE REPLACEMENT PART WILL BE AVAILABLE. *KB

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A FORD SAFETY RECALL NOTICE IN SEPTEMBER OF 2007 FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. THE SWITCH WAS DISCONNECTED AT THAT TIME. HE HAS BEEN INFORMED BY FORD SINCE THAT TIME AND, EVERY MONTH THEREAFTER, THAT THE SWITCH WOULD BE REPAIRED THE FOLLOWING MONTH. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. THE PURCHASE DATE AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 96,000. UPDATED 3/4/08 *CN THE CONSUMER PROVIDED THE RECALL NUMBER 05S28. UPDATED 03/04/08 *TR

1995 MERCURY MARQUIS RECALL PARTS NOT AVAILABLE. CONSUMER STATES THAT SHE WAS TOLD THE PART WASN'T IN WHEN TALKING TO THE DEALER. CONSUMER HAD THE OLD PART REMOVED BUT THE NEW PART WAS NOT INSTALLED BECAUSE IT WAS NOT IN. *KB

1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS RECALL FOR SPEED CONTROL. CONSUMER STATES THAT THE DEALER HAS INFORMED HER THAT THE PART IS NOT AVAILABLE AND ALL THEY CAN DO FOR THE TIME BEING IS DISCONNECT THE PART. *KB

1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS WITH SPEED CONTROL RECALL. CONSUMER STATES THAT SHE RECEIVED THE RECALL IN AUGUST 2007. SHE STATES THAT THE DEALER STATED THAT THE PARTS WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN DECEMBER NOW THEY WILL BE AVAILABLE IN FEBRUARY TO MAY 2008. *KB

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A SAFETY RECALL NOTIFICATION FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL IN SEPTEMBER OF 2004. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE PART WOULD BE AVAILABLE THE FOLLOWING MONTH. AS OF JANUARY 16, 2008, THE DEALER HAD NOT REPAIRED THE VEHICLE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 124,000 AND THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. UPDATED 02-14-08. *KB UPDATED

MY 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS ODOMETER IS OVER 144K. I'VE EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH, ESPECIALLY WHEN TEMPERATURE IS NEAR OR BELOW FREEZING. WHEN IT'S COLD OUTSIDE, AND THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN SITTING FOR A WHILE AND THEREFORE COLD WHEN I TURN ON THE HEADLIGHTS, I HAVE TO PLAY WITH THE SWITCH FOR THE HEADLIGHTS TO STAY ON. IT'S NOW TAKING LONGER AND LONGER FOR ME TO GET THE LIGHTS TO STAY LIT. I'VE ONLY EXPERIENCED ONE FAILURE WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, AFTER THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN DRIVEN FOR OVER 20 MINUTES. WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED MY VEHICLE, I REPLACED ALL 4 HEADLAMP BULBS BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO DIM. THE REPLACEMENTS DIDN'T RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. FROM WHAT I'VE READ, THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM IS THE PLASTIC COVERING ON THE HEADLAMPS. THE COMPOSITION OF THE PLASTIC BREAKS DOWN WITH AGE AND DISCOLORS, REDUCING THE BRIGHTNESS OF THE HEADLIGHTS. THIS DESIGN FAULT OF USING PLASTIC OVER GLASS IS A DANGEROUS SAFETY HAZARD. IF I CHANGE FROM LOW TO HIGH, MY HEADLIGHTS APPEAR TO ILLUMINATE THE ROAD WITHIN ALLOWABLE BRIGHTNESS, INCREASING VISIBILITY. DRIVING ON ROADS WITH INSUFFICIENT STREET LIGHTS IS DANGEROUS WITH ONLY THE LOW BEAM HEADLAMPS. I'VE CONSIDERED DRIVING WITH THE HIGH BEAMS AT ALL TIMES, TO ENSURE MY SAFETY, BUT HAVE QUESTIONED THE LEGALITY OF SUCH A CHOICE. THE NEWER VEHICLES TODAY SEEM TO BE SPORTING THOSE SUPER BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS, ARE EXTREMELY BLINDING TO THOSE WHO HAVE TO DRIVE IN FRONT OF OR IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AS THEY BLIND YOU AS THEY GET CLOSER AND PASS YOU. THIS PAST FALL, I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE CRUISE CONTROL IN MY GRAND MARQUIS. I TOOK THE VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP; THEY DISCONNECTED THE CRUISE CONTROL, TAPED THE ENDS OF THE WIRE, AND SENT ME ON MY WAY. I WAS TOLD THAT THE PARTS WOULD BE IN DURING Q4, AND THAT I WOULD RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO COME BACK AND HAVE THE REPLACEMENT PART INSTALLED. WE ARE INTO Q1 OF THE NEXT YEAR, AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY FOLLOW-UP FROM FORD/MERCURY. *TR

MY 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS ODOMETER IS OVER 144K. I'VE EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH, ESPECIALLY WHEN TEMPERATURE IS NEAR OR BELOW FREEZING. WHEN IT'S COLD OUTSIDE, AND THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN SITTING FOR A WHILE AND THEREFORE COLD WHEN I TURN ON THE HEADLIGHTS, I HAVE TO PLAY WITH THE SWITCH FOR THE HEADLIGHTS TO STAY ON. IT'S NOW TAKING LONGER AND LONGER FOR ME TO GET THE LIGHTS TO STAY LIT. I'VE ONLY EXPERIENCED ONE FAILURE WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, AFTER THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN DRIVEN FOR OVER 20 MINUTES. WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED MY VEHICLE, I REPLACED ALL 4 HEADLAMP BULBS BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO DIM. THE REPLACEMENTS DIDN'T RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. FROM WHAT I'VE READ, THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM IS THE PLASTIC COVERING ON THE HEADLAMPS. THE COMPOSITION OF THE PLASTIC BREAKS DOWN WITH AGE AND DISCOLORS, REDUCING THE BRIGHTNESS OF THE HEADLIGHTS. THIS DESIGN FAULT OF USING PLASTIC OVER GLASS IS A DANGEROUS SAFETY HAZARD. IF I CHANGE FROM LOW TO HIGH, MY HEADLIGHTS APPEAR TO ILLUMINATE THE ROAD WITHIN ALLOWABLE BRIGHTNESS, INCREASING VISIBILITY. DRIVING ON ROADS WITH INSUFFICIENT STREET LIGHTS IS DANGEROUS WITH ONLY THE LOW BEAM HEADLAMPS. I'VE CONSIDERED DRIVING WITH THE HIGH BEAMS AT ALL TIMES, TO ENSURE MY SAFETY, BUT HAVE QUESTIONED THE LEGALITY OF SUCH A CHOICE. THE NEWER VEHICLES TODAY SEEM TO BE SPORTING THOSE SUPER BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS, ARE EXTREMELY BLINDING TO THOSE WHO HAVE TO DRIVE IN FRONT OF OR IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AS THEY BLIND YOU AS THEY GET CLOSER AND PASS YOU. THIS PAST FALL, I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE CRUISE CONTROL IN MY GRAND MARQUIS. I TOOK THE VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP; THEY DISCONNECTED THE CRUISE CONTROL, TAPED THE ENDS OF THE WIRE, AND SENT ME ON MY WAY. I WAS TOLD THAT THE PARTS WOULD BE IN DURING Q4, AND THAT I WOULD RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO COME BACK AND HAVE THE REPLACEMENT PART INSTALLED. WE ARE INTO Q1 OF THE NEXT YEAR, AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY FOLLOW-UP FROM FORD/MERCURY. *TR

MY 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS ODOMETER IS OVER 144K. I'VE EXPERIENCED INTERMITTENT FAILURE OF THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH, ESPECIALLY WHEN TEMPERATURE IS NEAR OR BELOW FREEZING. WHEN IT'S COLD OUTSIDE, AND THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN SITTING FOR A WHILE AND THEREFORE COLD WHEN I TURN ON THE HEADLIGHTS, I HAVE TO PLAY WITH THE SWITCH FOR THE HEADLIGHTS TO STAY ON. IT'S NOW TAKING LONGER AND LONGER FOR ME TO GET THE LIGHTS TO STAY LIT. I'VE ONLY EXPERIENCED ONE FAILURE WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, AFTER THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN DRIVEN FOR OVER 20 MINUTES. WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED MY VEHICLE, I REPLACED ALL 4 HEADLAMP BULBS BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO DIM. THE REPLACEMENTS DIDN'T RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. FROM WHAT I'VE READ, THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM IS THE PLASTIC COVERING ON THE HEADLAMPS. THE COMPOSITION OF THE PLASTIC BREAKS DOWN WITH AGE AND DISCOLORS, REDUCING THE BRIGHTNESS OF THE HEADLIGHTS. THIS DESIGN FAULT OF USING PLASTIC OVER GLASS IS A DANGEROUS SAFETY HAZARD. IF I CHANGE FROM LOW TO HIGH, MY HEADLIGHTS APPEAR TO ILLUMINATE THE ROAD WITHIN ALLOWABLE BRIGHTNESS, INCREASING VISIBILITY. DRIVING ON ROADS WITH INSUFFICIENT STREET LIGHTS IS DANGEROUS WITH ONLY THE LOW BEAM HEADLAMPS. I'VE CONSIDERED DRIVING WITH THE HIGH BEAMS AT ALL TIMES, TO ENSURE MY SAFETY, BUT HAVE QUESTIONED THE LEGALITY OF SUCH A CHOICE. THE NEWER VEHICLES TODAY SEEM TO BE SPORTING THOSE SUPER BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS, ARE EXTREMELY BLINDING TO THOSE WHO HAVE TO DRIVE IN FRONT OF OR IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AS THEY BLIND YOU AS THEY GET CLOSER AND PASS YOU. THIS PAST FALL, I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE CRUISE CONTROL IN MY GRAND MARQUIS. I TOOK THE VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP; THEY DISCONNECTED THE CRUISE CONTROL, TAPED THE ENDS OF THE WIRE, AND SENT ME ON MY WAY. I WAS TOLD THAT THE PARTS WOULD BE IN DURING Q4, AND THAT I WOULD RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO COME BACK AND HAVE THE REPLACEMENT PART INSTALLED. WE ARE INTO Q1 OF THE NEXT YEAR, AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY FOLLOW-UP FROM FORD/MERCURY. *TR

1995 GRAND MARQUIS CAUGHT FIRE WHILE PARKED. CUSTOMER STATES THERE WAS NO WARNINGS ON WHY THE VEHICLE CAUGHT FIRE. DEALER TOLD HIM THAT HIS VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN ANY OF THE RECALL FOR THIS VEHICLE. *KB THE CONSUMER STATED HE RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE SHORTLY AFTER THE INCIDENT PERTAINING TO THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED FORD, HOWEVER FORD STATED THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT'S FATHER OWNED A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE DRIVER VEERED OFF THE ROAD AND DROVE OVER A 10-INCH GAP, WHICH FLATTENED THE PASSENGER SIDE FRONT AND REAR TIRES. THE FLAT TIRES CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO ROLLOVER AND LAND ON THE ROOF. AS A RESULT, THE ROOF CAVED IN AND KILLED THE DRIVER. THE CONTACT DID NOT KNOW WHO INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT'S BROTHER BELIEVED THAT THE DEATH WAS DUE TO A MISSING PILLAR ON THE ROOF'S STRUCTURE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VIN APPEARED TO BE INVALID. THE ENGINE SIZE, POWERTRAIN, AND NUMBER OF CYLINDERS WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 400.

I PURCHASED MY 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS USED IN JUNE OF 2005. I'VE HAD INTERMITTENT PROBLEMS WITH THE HORN SINCE THEN. LAST SUMMER, I REPLACED THE HORN BECAUSE ONE OF THE 2 TONES HAD FAILED. UPON REMOVAL OF THE ORIGINAL HORNS, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE HORNS HAD SEVERE CORROSION, AND COULD NOT BE REUSED. I PURCHASED 2 NEW HORNS, AND HAD THEM INSTALLED. IF I PRESS THE HORN BUTTON ON THE STEERING WHEEL FOR MORE THAN 5 SECONDS, THE HORN SHORTS OUT THE FUSE, AND I'M LEFT WITH NO HORN ON THE HIGHWAY. I DRIVE 23.5 MILES EACH WAY TO WORK, IN HEAVY HIGHWAY TRAFFIC, AND THE LOSS OF MY HORN IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS WHEN YOU ARE AROUND DRIVERS WHO DON'T CHECK BEFORE CHANGING LANES. IN THE PAST YEAR, I HAVE REPLACED THE FUSE 6 TIMES. I AM AGAIN LEFT WITH ONLY 1 OF 2 TONES ON THE HORN, AND WILL NEED TO REPLACE THE HORNS AGAIN. IT APPEARS THAT THE LOCATION OF THE HORN UNDER THE ENGINE BEHIND THE FRONT BUMPER IS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE CORROSION PROBLEM. IS THERE ANYTHING AVAILABLE TO RELOCATE THE HORN TO THE TOP OF THE FIREWALL? ALSO THERE APPEARS TO BE A FACTORY INSTALLED ALARM IN THIS VEHICLE, BUT WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LOCATE THE MASTER CODE WITHIN THE VEHICLE TO RESET THE CODE TO BE ABLE TO USE THE ALARM. ANOTHER PROBLEM WE HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT THE WINDSHIELD WASHER SWITCH IS SENSITIVE, AND DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK. WE HAVE TO PLAY WITH THE SWITCH, ROCKING IT BACK AND FORTH TO GET THE WASHER FLUID TO PUMP. IN ADDITION, THE FLUID FREEZES IN THE WINTER, IF YOU DON'T USE THE SUPER DUTY ANTI FREEZE SOLUTION. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THERE IS A MAJOR PROBLEM DRIVING TO WORK DURING OR AFTER A SNOW STORM, DUE TO ROAD SPLATTERED ON THE WINDSHIELD. I HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO PULL OVER ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD TO THROW SNOW ON THE WINDSHIELD TO CLEAN THE SALT OFF OF THE WINDOWS. THIS IS DANGEROUS IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC, WHEN THE BREAK DOWN LANE IS TURNED INTO A TRAVEL LANE. *JB

STEERING BOX SEAL LET GO, CAUSING ME TO LOSE STEERING. DID THIS TWICE IN 2 WEEKS. SEALS IN THE GEARBOX ARE VERY COMMON. HAPPENED WHEN I STARTED THE CAR AND STARTED TO DRIVE AND THE SEAL WENT BOTH TIMES. *NM

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED OUTSIDE OF THE GARAGE, THERE WAS A STRONG ODOR OF SMOKE PRESENT. THE CONTACT WENT OUTSIDE TO DETERMINE THE ORIGIN OF THE SMOKE AND DISCOVERED THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE ENGULFED IN FLAMES. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS ALERTED AND EXTINGUISHED THE FIRE. AFTERWARDS, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND DETERMINED THE FIRE ORIGINATED AT THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE VEHICLE SUSTAINED EXTENSIVE FIRE DAMAGE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED. *AK THE CONSUMER STATED THAT HE RECEIVED A RECALL LETTER PERTAINING TO CRUISE CONTROL WHICH WAS THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THEM OF THE RECALL NOTICE AND IN TURN THE MANUFACTURER ASKED THEM TO CONTACT THE INSURANCE COMPANY WHICH ALREADY COMPENSATED THE CONSUMER FOR THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER PROVIDED PHOTOS AND THE RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE. UPDATED 09/18/07 *TR

VEHICLE WAS IN FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND A GENERAL INSPECTION WAS BEING DONE PRIOR TO A FAMILY TRIP. THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO BE "EXTREMELY" RUSTED ABOUT 6 INCHES BACK FROM THE FRONT TIRES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE (DIRECTLY BELOW THE FRONT DOOR HINGE AREA OF THE VEHICLE). THE LOWER CHANNEL OF THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED AND GONE ON THE DRIVER SIDE AND EVEN WORSE ON THE PASSENGER SIDE (THE SAME LOCATION ON BOTH SIDES). THE VEHICLE WAS DEEMED TO BE COMPLETELY UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND WAS TAKEN OFF THE ROAD AND PARKED. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND POTENTIALLY LETHAL FAILURE. COMPLETE REPLACEMENT OF THE FRAME SEEMS THE ONLY REMEDY TO CORRECT THIS FAILURE. THE VEHICLE IS IN OTHERWISE GREAT SHAPE AND SHOWS NO SIGN OF OTHER BODY RUST PROBLEMS. FILING THIS COMPLAINT IS THE ONLY ACTION TAKEN AT THIS TIME TO CORRECT THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM OPERATION DUE TO SAFETY REASONS. *NM

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE THE ENGINE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING AND RESULTED IN A LOSS OF ALL POWER. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP. THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED, HOWEVER NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. UPDATED 3/17/2006 - *NM

REAR BRAKE LINE HAD TO BE REPLACED DUE TO SPONGY BRAKES AND EXCESSIVE FLUID LEAKING OUT. PROBLEM CAUSED BY FLOOR PAN STIFFENING RIB CHAFING THE LINE. SECOND PROBLEM WHICH HAS NOT AS YET BEEN CORRECTED IS THAT THE HEADLAMPS ARE COMPLETELY DISCOLORED, YELLOWED MAKING IT DANGEROUS TO DRIVE AT NIGHT. TO REPLACE HEADLAMPS IS OVER $400.00. LAST PROBLEM IS THAT THE EXTERIOR CLEAR COAT IS PEELING. *JB

REAR BRAKE LINE HAD TO BE REPLACED DUE TO SPONGY BRAKES AND EXCESSIVE FLUID LEAKING OUT. PROBLEM CAUSED BY FLOOR PAN STIFFENING RIB CHAFING THE LINE. SECOND PROBLEM WHICH HAS NOT AS YET BEEN CORRECTED IS THAT THE HEADLAMPS ARE COMPLETELY DISCOLORED, YELLOWED MAKING IT DANGEROUS TO DRIVE AT NIGHT. TO REPLACE HEADLAMPS IS OVER $400.00. LAST PROBLEM IS THAT THE EXTERIOR CLEAR COAT IS PEELING. *JB

REAR BRAKE LINE HAD TO BE REPLACED DUE TO SPONGY BRAKES AND EXCESSIVE FLUID LEAKING OUT. PROBLEM CAUSED BY FLOOR PAN STIFFENING RIB CHAFING THE LINE. SECOND PROBLEM WHICH HAS NOT AS YET BEEN CORRECTED IS THAT THE HEADLAMPS ARE COMPLETELY DISCOLORED, YELLOWED MAKING IT DANGEROUS TO DRIVE AT NIGHT. TO REPLACE HEADLAMPS IS OVER $400.00. LAST PROBLEM IS THAT THE EXTERIOR CLEAR COAT IS PEELING. *JB

DT: THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN HE APPLIED THE BRAKES THE PEDAL WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKE FLUID LEAKED FROM THE BRAKE LINE. A CERTIFIED MECHANIC REPLACED THE BRAKE LINES ON THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT HAS NOT CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER. THE CONTACT STATED AT ONLY 38,000 MILES, WHILE STOPPED AND MAKING A LEFT TURN, THE PITMAN ARM CAME OFF AND CAUSED LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL. A MECHANIC REPAIRED THE PITMAN ARM . *AK

DT: THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN HE APPLIED THE BRAKES THE PEDAL WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKE FLUID LEAKED FROM THE BRAKE LINE. A CERTIFIED MECHANIC REPLACED THE BRAKE LINES ON THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT HAS NOT CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER. THE CONTACT STATED AT ONLY 38,000 MILES, WHILE STOPPED AND MAKING A LEFT TURN, THE PITMAN ARM CAME OFF AND CAUSED LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL. A MECHANIC REPAIRED THE PITMAN ARM . *AK

CONSUMER COMPLAINED ABOUT A BRAKE PROBLEM. WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES BRAKE PEDAL WOULD GO COMPLETELY TO THE FLOOR. OWNER HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO THE DEALER, AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE BRAKE LINE COMPLETELY RUSTED AND THERE WAS NO BRAKE FLUID IN THE LINES. *AK

FROSTING AND DISCOLORATION OF PLASTIC HEAD LAMP LENSES SEVERELY REDUCE LIGHT OUTPUT, AND ARE A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD. THIS IS CAUSED BY HEAT FROM THE BULBS AND PERHAPS UV RADIATION FROM SUNLIGHT. LENSES ON MY 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS BECAME DANGEROUS TO DRIVE AT NIGHT AT LEAST TWO YEARS AGO (AT 8 YEARS OLD). DEALER (OEM) REPLACEMENTS ARE $205 EACH, WHICH IS PROHIBITIVE FOR RETIRED OWNERS LIVING ON SOCIAL SECURITY. BY COMPARISON, THE OLD GLASS SEALED-BEAM UNITS LASTED NEAR-FOREVER AND ONLY COST $5 TO REPLACE. MANUFACTURERS SHOULD RECALL AND REPLACE THESE FOR FREE.*AK