{"count":1,"message":"Results returned successfully","results":[{"odiNumber":11728595,"manufacturer":"Kia America, Inc.","crash":false,"fire":false,"numberOfInjuries":0,"numberOfDeaths":0,"dateOfIncident":"03/31/2026","dateComplaintFiled":"04/01/2026","vin":"5XXG64J27NG","components":"POWER TRAIN","summary":"STATEMENT OF FACTS: I presented my Kia K5 for two safety recalls (SC356 and SC263) with an active Check Engine Light for code P047100 (Exhaust Pressure Sensor). I informed the service advisor, Aliyah, that this code is a symptomatic secondary fault of the pressure irregularities addressed in Recall SC356, which explicitly lists an \"Illuminated Check Engine Light\" (MIL) as a primary warning sign. The dealership dismissed my technical assessment—which was backed by advanced AI data analysis. After the software update was performed, the advisor claimed the code remained \"active,\" thereby \"proving\" it was unrelated to the recall. Based on this, I was charged a $248 diagnostic fee and told I needed a $534.02 out-of-pocket hardware repair for a \"physically failing\" differential pressure sensor that was allegedly reading 2 HPA against a spec of 23.09 HPA.  EVIDENCE OF ERROR: Upon taking delivery of the vehicle, the Check Engine Light was completely extinguished. If the light were truly \"still active\" after the update, as I was told to justify the fee, the fault would have been present at pickup. Since then, I have driven over 120 miles (including multiple cold-start drive cycles between [XXX]  and my place of work) with a 100% clear dashboard. My XXX App confirms the XXX fault is resolved, while the recalls remain \"Open\" administratively.  REGULATORY VIOLATION: Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, a manufacturer must remedy a safety defect without charge. A software \"Logic Update\" cannot physically repair a broken pressure sensor. The fact that the fault disappeared immediately following the update proves the sensor was functional and the fault was caused by the recall defect. By misdiagnosing a recall symptom as a non-covered hardware failure, the dealer effectively charged me for a federal safety repair. I request an investigation into these \"diagnostic gatekeeping\" practices and a full refund of the $248.00 fee. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)","products":[{"type":"Vehicle","productYear":"2022","productMake":"KIA","productModel":"K5","manufacturer":"Kia America, Inc."}]}]}