Auto Recalls for Consumers

CADILLAC CTS - 2003 CADILLAC CTS Problems & Complaints

 
Auto Recalls For Consumers
by General Motors LLC

There are 220 complaints filed for the 2003 CADILLAC CTS

Below is a list of complaints & problems filed against the 2003 CADILLAC CTS. These problems includes information received by NHTSA from consumers either directly or as recorded by the Vehicle Safety Hotline. This information may be used by NHTSA during the investigation process. If you like to file an official complaint for the 2003 CADILLAC CTS, you can do so by calling the NHTSA Mon-Fri 8am to 8pm at 888-327-4236, TTY: 800-424-9153. You can also file your complaint online by clicking here. Your complaint will be added to the NHTSA complaints database after a thorough review. If a trend is discovered, an investigation will be opened by the ODI.

Search Complaints - Search Recalls

See complaints below ↓
View other component problems for this vehicle or view all problems
Air Bags (21) Equipment (7) Power Train (20) Service Brakes Hydraulic (25) Traction Control System (2)
Communications (1) Exterior Lighting (36) Seat Belts (1) Steering (21) Unknown Or Other (7)
Electrical System (19) Fuel System Gasoline (6) Seats (2) Structure (16) Vehicle Speed Control (19)
Electronic Stability Control (10) Fuel System Other (2) Service Brakes (6) Suspension (11) Visibility (7)
Engine (7) Other (1) Service Brakes Air (2) Tires (8) Wheels (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling (41)

Pages:  
<<  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  >>  ... 24
 
ComplaintDescription

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING: ENGINE

1/19/2010 - ENID, OK
TL CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CADILLAC CTS. WHENEVER THE CONTACT DROVE THE VEHICLE AT ANY SPEED INCLUDING APPROXIMATELY 10 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY BEGAN TO STALL AND SHUT OFF WITHOUT NOTICE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THE CRANK SHAFT SENSOR AND THE ECM COMPUTER WERE REPLACED; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE CONTINUED TO OCCUR. THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 88000. UPDATED 2/1/10 THE CAM SENSOR AND CRANKSHAFT POSITION SENSOR WERE DEFECTIVE. UPDATED 02/02/10.

View Details

SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC

1/17/2010 - BROOKHAVEN, NY
I DRIVE A 2003 CADILLAC CTS. I NOTICED THE BRAKES SEEMED TO NEED REPAIR (NOT RESPONSIVE ENOUGH) AND THE "BRAKE LIGHT" CAME ON. MY CAR HAD APPROX 70000 MILES AND THE BRAKE LINES HAD CORRODED! I HAVE THE BRAKE LINES THAT WERE REMOVED. A CAR WITH 70K MILES SHOULD NOT HAVE CORRODED BRAKELINES. IN ADDITION, IT TOOK ALMOST 2 WEEKS TO GET REPLACEMENT PARTS AND COST $250 TO REPAIR + RENTAL CAR. THIS WAS A REALLY BAD ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN.

View Details

COMMUNICATIONS: BACK UP ALARM

12/31/2009 - BLOOMINGTON, IL
THE LICENSE PLATE BACK UP LIGHT ASSEMBLY TO MY CADILLAC CTS 2003 MYSTERIOUSLY CAME UP MISSING. THIS IS A COSTLY PIECE TO REPLACE. I HAVE CALLED MULTIPLE SALVAGE YARDS TO FIND OUT THAT A LOT OF THEM RECEIVES 2-3 CALLS PER WEEK FOR THIS PART. I TALKED TO A CLAIM REPRESENTATIVE AT STATE FARM AND HE SO HAPPENED TO HAVE HAD 3 OPEN CLAIMS WITHIN ONE MONTH. ALL CONVERSATIONS LEAD THIS TO BEING A DEFECT IN THE MAKING OF THE VEHICLE. NOT HAVING THIS PART, LEAVES MY BRAKE LIGHTS EXPOSED.

View Details

STEERING: LINKAGES: TIE ROD ASSEMBLY

8/26/2009 - DELAVAN, MN
TL CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CADILLAC CTS WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN MAY 2009. THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE ROD FELL OFF OF THE VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER; HOWEVER, THE REPAIR PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER OFFERED $100 OFF OF THE NEXT ROUTINE SERVICE APPOINTMENT. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 54,000.

View Details

EXTERIOR LIGHTING

6/24/2009 - COLUMBUS , GA
THE REAR BACK UP LIGHT FELL OFF MY 2003 CADILLAC CTS. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP TO SEE ABOUT GETTING ANOTHER ONE PUT ON, ONLY TO LEARN THAT GM DOES NOT EVEN MAKE THAT PART ANYMORE DUE TO IT BEING DEFECTIVE. TO FIX MY VEHICLE I WOULD HAVE TO ORDER A NEWER MADE PART THAT COST APPROXIMATELY $697.00. AFTER DOING EXTENSIVE RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET, I LEARNED THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT NUMEROUS CONSUMERS HAVE ENCOUNTERED. THE DEALERSHIP SAID THAT THE MANUFACTURER THAT PRODUCED THIS PART FOR GM DID NOT USE THE CORRECT EPOXY TO ADHERE THE BACK UP LIGHT TO THE BODY OF THE VEHICLE, AND I WOULD HAVE TO CALL GM CORPORATE OFFICE TO TAKE THE "PROBLEM" UP WITH THEM. AFTER ALMOST A MONTH OF THE DISTRICT SPECIALIST "INVESTIGATING" THE PROBLEM, HE TOLD ME HE WOULD CALL ME WITH A FINAL DECISION AND NEVER CALLED. I HAVE PLACED CALLS TO THEM EVERYDAY SINCE AND I KEPT GETTING THE RUN AROUND. SUPPOSEDLY NO ONE BUT THE DISTRICT SPECIALIST HANDLING MY CASE CAN HELP ME AND HE WILL NOT ANSWER OR RETURN MY CALLS. MY QUESTION IS THIS, UNDER THE LAW SOMEONE CANNOT SELL ANYTHING KNOWING THAT IT IS DEFECTIVE. WITH VEHICLES ALL EXTERIOR COMPONENTS OF THE VEHICLE ARE SUPPOSE TO WITHSTAND "MOTHERNATURE" AND NATURAL OCCURRENCES OF THE WEATHER, SO WHY WHEN KNOWING THE PART IS DEFECTIVE DO THEY EXPECT THE CONSUMER TO REPLACE IT? GM CLAIMS THAT BECAUSE IT CAN NOT CAUSE BODILY HARM THEY DO NOT HAVE TO REPLACE IT OR RECALL THE DEFECTIVE PART. IS THIS WHAT OUR ECONOMY HAS COME TO, LARGE CORPORATIONS SWINDLING THE "LITTLE" CONSUMERS THAT KEEP THEM IN BUSINESS? WITH GM FILING BANKRUPTCY AND THE TAXPAYERS AND GOVERNMENT "BAILING" THEM OUT, YOU WOULD THINK THEY WOULD WANT TO TREAT THEIR "LITTLE" CONSUMERS BETTER. HOW IS IT LEGAL FOR THEM TO KNOW A PRODUCT IS DEFECTIVE, TO THE POINT THEY WON'T EVEN MAKE THAT SAME PRODUCT TO REPLACE IT WHEN IT TEARS UP BUT ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR FIXING IT?

View Details

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

4/3/2009 - HOMESTEAD , FL
TL CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CADILLAC CTS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE DISPLAYED MULTIPLE FAILURES OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS. THE VEHICLE WOULD SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. WHILE DRIVING 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE SHUT OFF. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO SAFELY MANEUVER THE VEHICLE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. HE ATTEMPTED TO RESTART THE VEHICLE, BUT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL. THE CONTACT HEARD A TICKING NOISE COMING FROM THE ENGINE DURING THIS TIME AND WAS UNABLE TO REMOVE THE KEYS FROM THE IGNITION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THE BATTERY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE BATTERY WAS REPLACED AT THE COST OF $106. WHILE DRIVING HOME AFTER THE REPAIR, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND THEY DETERMINED THAT THE A SENSOR FAILED. THE VEHICLE IS CURRENTLY AT THE REPAIR SHOP. THE CONTACT IS IN THE PROCESS OF NOTIFYING THE MANUFACTURER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 34,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 36,300.

View Details

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING: EXHAUST SYSTEM: EMISSION CONTROL: CRANKCASE (PCV)

3/23/2009 - COLDWATER, MI
TL CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CADILLAC CTS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PCV PASSAGE FROZE AND CAUSED OIL TO SPILL ONTO THE EXHAUST. HE CALLED THE LOCAL DEALER AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE PAV PASSAGE WAS FAULTY. THE DEALER REDESIGNED THE PCV PASSAGE IN THE VEHICLE. THREE MONTHS AFTER THE REPAIR, THE PCV PASSAGE BEGAN LEAKING AGAIN. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER ABOUT THE LEAK, BUT HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR THE DEALER. HE FEELS THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE THE BURNING OIL LEAVES A TOXIC SMELL IN THE VEHICLE, AND THE LEAKING COULD CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO SHUT OFF. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 67,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 66,164.

View Details

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING

3/13/2009 - MARYSVILLE, MI
OIL LEAKAGE FROM CAM COVER GASKETS THAT REQUIRE REPAIR. 3.2L V-6 IN MY 2003 CADILLAC CTS. BLACK SMOKE WITH EXTREME BURNING SMELL FLOODED VEHICLE INTERIOR COMPARTMENT ALSO SMOKE STARTS TO COME FROM UNDER HOOD OF VEHICLE. PULLED INTO SAFE LOCATION FOUND HUGE OIL LEAK ON LEFT SIDE OF ENGINE AROUND VALVE COVER. COULD HAVE POSSIBLY STARTED A FIRE DUE TO HIGHLY COMBUSTIBLE OIL BEING BLOWN ON ENGINE BUT LUCKILY DID NOT CATCH ON FIRE. CHECK ON-LINE FOUND TSB 05-06-01-007A STATING GM KNOWS THIS IS A PROBLEM. "WHEN OPERATING IN EXTREMELY COLD WEATHER CONDITIONS. AND GM DOESN'T HAVE THE PARTS AVAILABLE TILL JUNE FOR MY CAR AND AT A COST OF 860.00 DOLLAR. PCV HOSE KIT, P/N 55558592 AND OIL FILTER CAP, P/N 12589430. SAFETY OF THE DRIVERS AND PASSENGERS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED CAUSE OF THE FUMES BEING RELEASED IN THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. SEVERAL PEOPLE I KNOW HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AND THERE WAITING ALSO. A KNOWN PROBLEM AND GM SHOULD STEP UP AND ISSUE A RECALL ON THIS.

View Details

WHEELS: RIM

2/25/2009 - ALLEN PARK, MI
TL CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CADILLAC CTS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ALL FOUR RIMS ON HIS VEHICLE SEEMED TO "DE-LAMINATE" FROM THE BASE METAL. HE FIRST NOTICED THE ISSUE APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS AGO. THE RIMS SEEM TO AFFECT THE TIRES AND THEIR ABILITY TO HOLD AIR. HE WOULD HAVE TO REFILL THE TIRES WITH AIR AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK. THE DEALER STATED THAT BECAUSE THE RIMS WERE NOT FACTORY MANUFACTURED, THEY COULD NOT ASSIST. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THESE WERE THE RIMS THAT CAME WITH THE VEHICLE. HE WAS UNAWARE THAT THEY DID NOT COME FROM THE MANUFACTURER BECAUSE THEY DISPLAYED THE CADILLAC EMBLEM. HE HAS NOT SPOKEN WITH THE RIM OR VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 54,755 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 36,000.

View Details

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING: ENGINE

2/16/2009 - PLANKINTON, SD
CAR ENGINE FAILED AT 30,000 MILES - IT STARTED MAKING A CLICKING SOUND, SO MY HUSBAND DECIDED TO TAKE IT TO THE SHOP. HE DIDN'T EVEN MAKE IT TO THE SHOP - JUST HAD TO TOW IT. THE CAR WAS DRIVEN GINGERLY BY MY 80 YEAR OLD GRANDMOTHER FOR 7,000 MILES, THEN BY ME (AGE 40 WITH TWO CHILDREN IN CAR SEATS) FOR THE REMAINING MILES. CADILLAC OFFERED TO PAY 1/2 THE COST TO REBUILD, BUT THE TOTAL COST WAS ESTIMATED AT OVER $15,000. THEY SAID THERE WEREN'T ANY NEW ENGINES TO DROP IN, BUT THEY FOUND ONE USED ENGINE (WITH 1 MILE ON IT) THAT THEY COULD USE THAT WOULD COST ABOUT $4,150. HOWEVER, THEY WOULDN'T PAY ANY OF THE COST OF DROPPING IN THE USED ENGINE. WE OPTED TO REPLACE THE ENGINE AT OUR COST INSTEAD SO WE COULD GET AWAY WITH PAYING $4,150 INSTEAD OF $7,500. I COMPLAINED TO GM SERVICE DEPARTMENT, AND KEPT BEING GIVEN INCORRECT INFORMATION. ONE PERSON WOULD TELL ME THEY WOULD PAY 1/2 THE COST TO REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ENGINE, THE NEXT WOULD SAY THEY WOULD NOT PAY. I KEPT GOOD RECORDS OF ALL PERSONS CONTACTED DURING THE LONG, LONG PROCESS. THEY EVEN HAD ME GATHER ALL MY PRIOR SERVICE RECORDS SO THEY COULD BE CERTAIN THE CAR) HAD BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED (WHICH IT HAD.) AT ONE POINT I WAS EVEN TOLD (BY THE DISTRICT SPECIALIST OFFICE AT GM) THAT MY GRANDMOTHER HAD APPARENTLY PURCHASED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY ON IT, AND THEY COULD JUST USE THAT. LATER, I WAS TOLD THAT NO EXTENDED WARRANTY EXISTED. I WAS LED ON AND MISINFORMED FOR 1 1/2 MONTHS, WHILE MY CAR SAT AT THE DEALERSHIP 90 MILES AWAY. I WAS WITHOUT MY VEHICLE FOR 1 1/2 MONTHS, WHILE EVERYONE DECIDED WHAT SHOULD BE DONE, AND AS IT ENDS UP, IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE IMMEDIATELY IF I HADN'T BEEN GIVEN THE RUN AROUND BEING TOLD GM WAS GOING TO HELP WITH THE REPAIR COST. NOT A GOOD EXPERIENCE - NOT A GOOD CAR.

View Details
Pages:  <<  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  >>  ... 24
Home  •  Car Recalls  •  Tires  •  Motorcycles  •  RVs  •  Commercial Vehicles  •  Car Seats  •  Complaints  •  Sitemap  •  Privacy Policy

Edmunds  •  Kelley Blue Book  •  SaferCar.gov  •  Consumer Recalls  •  Government Recalls
Follow arfc_recalls on TwitterRSS Feeds