We found the following complaints for FORD E-250 (2006)
Read complaints for FORD E-250 (2006)
Ford 2005 e250 has been identified with formaldehyde poison in it at above danger levels to humans which can cause serious health issues.the van is custom done by a company in mississippi.the a/c unit in the rear doesn't work and was in for service 3 times and over the 15 day requirement for lemon law in the state of fl where it was sold.after the lemon law is completed i am going to request that a national alert be issued to make sure no one else becomes sick due to this toxic fumes but we can not do it at this time.
Spark plug ejection on cylinder #4, broken tread on cylinder.*ln
The contact owns a 2006ford econline e250. The contact stated that after exiting the vehicle, the smell of gasoline fuel emitted from under the vehicle. The contact confirmed that the odor was caused by a leak in the fuel line assembly. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where the failure was confirmed. The manufacturer was contacted and they advised the contact that the vin did not qualify for repairs under nhtsa campaign id number:08v057000 ( fuel system, gasoline:fuel injection system:fuel rail). The vehicle was repaired. The failure mileage was 56,400 and the current mileage was 56,500.
I own i ford freestyle, i am currently replacing the throttle body for the second time.it took a mechanic much trial and error to find the problem, which cost me a great deal of money.the car started acting the same way yesterday!this has been the 2nd time in less than a year!i wish i could give this car back to ford!if there is anything...any kind of recourse please give me information.thank you....
Front pads and rotors,front upper and lower ball,joints. Rear loaded calipers,two rear rotors replaced on 43,664 mi.2006 forde-250.
I have been contacted by the manufacturer that these tires are subject to a recall (recall # 13t-012) and must be replaced due to a safety hazard. Yet these tires are on national backorder with michelin, and noone around here (santa rosa, ca) has any, nor do they have any of the other two series that michelin offers as a suitable replacement (ltxa/t2 or xps rib). And there are very few alternates that anyone can offer me. As i see it, i am driving on tires that michelin says are unsafe, yet they have no simple solution to replace them with another one of their tires that doesn't involve me spending a lot more time than i already have to basically do their job. We buy michelin for their name and quality, yet they are bailing on me as a consumer to make an alternate choice on manufacturers and/or tire distributors that i know nothing about. Thank you michelin.
We purchased a vehicle from gascar auto in miami, florida on december 31st, 2019. We drove it back to minnesota. It took us 4 months and over 30 phone calls to get them to send us the title-which they wrote date of sale as 4/19/2020. We just ran the vehicles vin, (the dealership had also ran a carfax, but not disclosed to us an accident or the discrepancy in mileage) and discovered the odometer had been rolled back to read 100,000 less miles than we were told we were purchasing it with. We were under the impression we were buying what we were told we were buying on the odometer disclosure form, not a vehicle with 100k more miles. Had we known that, and had we known the company would falsify the dates on the title and refuse to give it to us, we never would have purchased the vehicle. They lied on several occasions about sending the title, and it took a notification our attorney was involved to get them to mail it after 4 months. In contacting the dealer today, he told us it isnt his problem because he had "exempt" written on the front of the title. However, he did fill out the odometer disclosure, he did falsify the date of sale, and he did sell us a title that had apparently originally been purchased by his dealership more than 1 year prior, though he never transferred the title to the dealership from the previous owner. I am including documentation of all of this.
Dt: the contact stated both side exterior rear view mirrors did not provide sufficient driver visibility.he took the vehicle to the dealer, who suggested replacing the mirrors with larger exterior mirrors forextended model van.the dealer attempted to replace the mirrors with larger ones,but the larger mirrors would not attach properly to the doors.he contacted the manufacturer in an effort to resolve the matter.the manufacturer stated he would need to replace the standard doors with a larger model they offered.
Read more
