Bad end of lease experience - Nissan Leaf - Alliance Inspection Management

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

nagb

New member
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
2
I live in Sunnyvale and work in Santa Clara. My commute is less than 12 miles a day. I have less than 12k miles on the LEAF in my almost three year lease of the car.

I had "AIM - Alliance Inspection Management" come and inspect the car as I have to return the car on 11/14.
The representative who came to inspected the car to microscopic details and was saying there were four dents when there was no visible dent.
I didn't want to argue with the rep. I said if I call 100 people to look at the area there might be one person who might notice the microscopic dents. The rep asked me to call 100 people to check.
I ended up calling one of my colleague to inspect the area (this is the trunk door). My colleague didn't find a thing. Rep ended up saying "because your colleague didn't find it I will be waiving it off". It was a very bad experience for me.

Also, minor gouge (only one per tire) which the rep said will let it go to begin with then added to the list and charging me $100 for the minor gouge. These minor gouges which can be discovered when someone nitpicks. Rep added two tires to the list with minor gouges.

The wheel covers which are bound to be scratched with three years of use. Nissan will be charging me $100 per wheel cover. They the typically sell for a lot less in AutoZone. These covers should be part of the wear and tear.

I am totally disappointed by my end of lease experience. I won't be leasing/buying a Nissan car again. I have 6 friends who are leasing with Nissan. I will be telling my story to all my friends for them to be aware.

Thanks!
 
Take photos. Lots and lots of photos. From lots of angles and distances.
Then dispute the charges with Nissan and take it to mediation if Nissan does not relent.
 
FWIW, for my former '13 SV, I had $0 on chargeable damages and wear and tear from my end of lease inspection and after turning it in.

I might be able to find the paperwork tonight to see what company came by. It was whatever NMAC assigned me.
 
I did read the end of lease instructions but didn't have the printout handy during the inspection. The tire gauge for sure is less than 2 inches. I would say it was around 1 inches.
I tried calling Nissan to talk about this and had to wait 20 mins on hold to be diverted to another department which somehow diverted me to a voicemail to leave a message.
I am planning on calling them again and being on hold for 30 mins!!
 
cwerdna said:
FWIW, for my former '13 SV, I had $0 on chargeable damages and wear and tear from my end of lease inspection and after turning it in.

I might be able to find the paperwork tonight to see what company came by. It was whatever NMAC assigned me.
I found the papers and confirmed that Alliance Inspection Management was the one who inspected my former leased Leaf. YMMV.
 
that is ridiculous... $400 for wheel covers is basically replacing the wheel covers AND making a profit. Wheel covers is a consumable, which is not part of the car. If they want to play hardball, I would either take off the old wheel covers and keep them and let them charge you, and then bring the old wheel covers to Nissan as evidence..... And then have the charge waive.... Sounds like you have a worker that like to show off his power... Like at the post office, motor vehicles, or bad martial arts teachers....
 
nagb said:
The wheel covers which are bound to be scratched with three years of use. Nissan will be charging me $100 per wheel cover. They the typically sell for a lot less in AutoZone. These covers should be part of the wear and tear.
Well, if you can get wheel covers that exactly match what Nissan provided for less, you should do that and put on the replacements before turn in.

I leased an SV. There were no wheel covers since it had alloy wheels. The S has the plastic ones on top of steel wheels.
 
cwerdna said:
Well, if you can get wheel covers that exactly match what Nissan provided for less, you should do that and put on the replacements before turn in.
BINGO! Exactly right. If you think you are being overcharged, replace or repair the damaged items yourself.
 
You never know what to believe on the interwebs. Along comes a guy with a grand total of two posts describing a scenario that is completely contrary to what everyone else has experienced.
 
When I returned my Leaf lease it was at the 5 year mark with just under 75,000 miles... There were some little things here and there, as one would expect with a car of that age, and I expected to get dinged for them... Much to my surprise, the inspector said
I was good to go with no charges, handed me a piece of paper so stating, and wished me a good day. Maybe I just got lucky (for once)...
 
I had essentially the same experience with my 2011 LEAF return, the inspector did give the car a Concours level inspection, but since I was getting another LEAF and there is a $500 waiver of damage, everything went fine.
 
OrientExpress said:
I had essentially the same experience with my 2011 LEAF return, the inspector did give the car a Concours level inspection, but since I was getting another LEAF and there is a $500 waiver of damage, everything went fine.
That is how I read this thread too: Nissan using the inspection as a heavy handed leverage to put the consumer into another Nissan.
 
I don’t see that at all. What I see is those that don’t take care of the car and/or aren’t prepared for the turn-in inspection get surprised when the inspector writes up discrepancies, and those that are prepared pass the tur-in with no surprises. It’s not like it’s a mystery of what the inspector is looking for, Nissan provides you a list of exactly what they are looking for and the empirical criteria in advance.

It’s common practice for manufacturers finance arms to offer incentives by waving turn in fees to make a customer a repeat customer. Hardly heavy handed.
 
OrientExpress said:
I don’t see that at all. What I see is those that don’t take care of the car and/or aren’t prepared for the turn-in inspection get surprised when the inspector writes up discrepancies, and those that are prepared pass the tur-in with no surprises. It’s not like it’s a mystery of what the inspector is looking for, Nissan provides you a list of exactly what they are looking for and the empirical criteria in advance.

It’s common practice for manufacturers finance arms to offer incentives by waving turn in fees to make a customer a repeat customer. Hardly heavy handed.
I think you better read the OP again, and pay attention to the actual defects that were cited.
 
A couple of minor issues were noted on my inspection but as they fell within Nissan's "Wear and Use" I was not charged for them.

What I should have been charged for, but was not, was a scrape on the lower left front bumper caused when I was backing out of my father's driveway. Due to a van parked on the very edge of the apron (still legal under CA law), and the driveway being very narrow at the time, I was trying to maneuver the car in such a way so I can see around the van so as to not get clobbered by traffic. In the process my left front wheel went over the curb and the bumper scraped on the curb, which is rather tall.

The inspector noted that my car was "very clean" and perhaps he did see it and because of the overall great condition he let it slide. The damage was still there a month later when I Googled the VIN and saw it for sale at CarMax.
 
Back
Top