My brakes had to be repaired in August, 2005 and again today. The car has only 19145 miles on it. In August the dealer replaced the rotors and brake pads, the paperwork said it was done on the front brakes, they said that they never seen rotors in that bad of shape (rusted and pitted). I had 15990 miles on the car at that time. It was still covered by warranty. Now today I had to pay $191.69 to replace the front brake pads (which were completely separated from their backing) I also had to have the rotors turned down. When I told them that they had just replaced the front brakes in Aug.(3000 miles earlier) they told me that they made a mistake on the work order paperwork and they had actually replaced the rear brakes in August. I ask them why they didn't check all of the brakes or find the problem then. I have got the brakes pieces that they took off today. They said that I actually got about 5000 more miles out of the brake pads than most people get. This just doesn't seem right to me. When you buy a brand new car you don't think that you should be replacing brakes with 14000 miles and twice within 19000 miles. This time the brakes went clear to the floor several times while I was driving it and also locked up several times, luckily there was no accident.

- Mercer, PA, USA

: the contact stated while applying brake pressure at 5 mph there was a loud grinding noise. The vehicle was seen by an authorized dealer, where it was determined the rotors were rusted and needed to be replaced. The dealer suggested rusted rotors were attributing to the lack of driving of the vehicle rather than road salts. The last incident occurred at an annual state inspection, the brakes did not pass state inspection due to the rust on the rotors. The vehicle was taken to an independent repair shop and the mechanic suggested replacing the entire antilock brakes to correct the problem.

- Tuckahoe, NY, USA