2025 NISSAN LEAF

0 recalls, 10 complaints

No recalls found for this vehicle.

Complaint Statistics

10 total complaints

Top Reported Components

Component	Complaints
SERVICE BRAKES	2
POWER TRAIN	2
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM	1
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL	1
STEERING	1
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: WARNINGS	1
LANE DEPARTURE: WARNING	1
LANE DEPARTURE: ASSIST	1

Incident date: Jun 20, 2026

These systems of the car have almost caused collisions, being forced off the road or emergency braking that almost caused additional accidents. These systems are supposed to prevent accidents and are more likely to cause traffic accidents then prevent them. All of the systems have to be disabled to ... Read more

Incident date: Jun 20, 2026

Incident date: Mar 17, 2026

Vehicle steering wheel was off-center and the vehicle wandered whenever the road changed camber or had rough sections. The vehicle was purchased used from Carvana,. I took it in for 4-wheel alignment and the tech reported that "All adjustment hardware at rear were pretty loose", and stated that it p... Read more

Incident date: Nov 22, 2025

This has happened twice while on a drive, cruising along on a highway and go to pass a car in another lane, transmission down shifts and then lose all power, transmission repair light comes on as well as emission controls, vehicle is still running but no power to the wheels, trying to get back acros... Read more

Incident date: Nov 22, 2025

Incident date: Feb 12, 2025

ABS Control Module has failed. The part number is 68228991AD. The dealership informed me the manufacturer no longer makes this part, and they were unable to resolve the issue. While I was advised by the dealership the truck is ok to drive, my additional research indicated a failed ABS module can ... Read more

Incident date: Feb 10, 2025

All the windows make a rattling noise when they're rolled halfway down when hitting bumps.

Incident date: Nov 21, 2024

Over the past year my Bronco Sport has thrown two different codes, powertrain malfunction and collision assist unavailable, and put me in limp mode, 25 times. And the last several times it has gone into limp mode it is accompanied by a weird smell. It has been on the hoist several times at the Ford ... Read more

Incident date: Sep 26, 2024

See attached document for complaint.

EPA Fuel Economy, 2025 NISSAN LEAF

Trim / Engine	City MPG	Highway MPG	Combined MPG	Fuel Type	Annual Fuel Cost
Automatic (A1) (Front-Wheel Drive)	123.0	99.0	111.0	Electricity	$700

CO2 Emissions: 0.0 g/mile (Midsize Cars)

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Actual fuel economy may vary based on driving conditions.

NHTSA Safety Investigations, NISSAN LEAF

Investigations opened by NHTSA into potential safety defects. These are separate from recalls and may or may not result in a recall.

PE, Closed , Model Year: 2011

Front Occupant Classification System Mat

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,Read more

DP, Closed , Model Year: 2011

Front Occupant Classification System Mat

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 re... lated 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.Read more

NISSAN LEAF - All Years Overview

Complete safety history for the NISSAN LEAF across all model years (2013, 2026).

49 Total Recalls

1,510 Total Complaints

2 Investigations

107 Reported Crashes

20 Reported Fires

2 Reported Deaths

NISSAN LEAF - Year by Year

Compare recalls and complaints across model years. Click any year to see full details.

Year	Recalls	Complaints
2026	2	4	View
2025 (current)	0	10
2024	0	7	View
2023	3	33	View
2022	4	139	View
2021	4	80	View
2020	6	223	View
2019	5	320	View
2018	4	117	View
2017	2	27	View
2016	4	50	View
2015	4	146	View
2014	6	45	View
2013	5	120	View
2012	0	71	View
2011	0	117	View
2010	0	1	View

Other NISSAN Models

Model	Recalls	Complaints
ROGUE	457	9,808	View
SENTRA	291	8,185	View
PATHFINDER	267	10,167	View
VERSA	224	4,473	View
FRONTIER	219	4,441	View
TITAN	208	4,415	View
ALTIMA	183	20,085	View
MAXIMA	173	8,847	View

Vehicle Safety

Consumer Safety

Infrastructure

Public Health