2007 Subaru Impreza. Consumer write in regards to recall and repairs. The consumer stated the knuckle/hub was rusted. The consumer referenced recall wvx-34 that was not being honored.

- Abingdon, VA, USA

The contact owns a 2007 Subaru Impreza. While pulling into the driveway, the control arm failed and the wheels seized. There were no warning indicators illuminated. The dealer (wallace Subaru, 320 volunteer pkwy, bristol, tn 37620, (888)-859-0650) was contacted, but the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 110,000.

- Abingdon, VA, USA

Takata inflators...not sure I am in the right place but we live in Missouri and bought a car in Tennessee and it will not pass inspection in Missouri. So had a mechanical shop start fixing it and the more he got involved the more was wrong with it. Right now it will cost us over 5000 to fix and we bought it for 7000.the shop refuses to do anything about it and says it is not its responsibility. We have pictures of parts that were put on wrong which damaged other parts. They said they bought it an auction and it was not their fault. Sorry if I am in the wrong place if I am could you please send me who I should contact. There other things wrong but could only check 3 items. Thank you.

- Hillsboro, MO, USA

I was at the dealership having a recall done for my front suspension a frames. (wvx34) and was told that the vehicle needed more extensive repairs as parts were corroded and could not be changed without being damaged. I was told Subaru had refused to agree the repairs until their dpsm had seen the vehicle, he would be at the dealer in the next 4 weeks. I contacted the dealer on the 5th December to be told the rep would be in until the 18th December (I am out of the country then). I contacted Subaru as I was disappointed with the service and the contacted the dealer and called me back on the 6th. I was told that the vehicle was dangerous and that the repairs were $5,000 worth and that I would have to pay as they had corrosion and that this wasn't part of the recall and the dpsm date was still the 18th. I would assume that if the a frames wee damaged due to corrosion and that the same corrosion had damaged other parts of the suspension then this would not be my liability. I am driving a dangerous vehicle (says the dealer to Subaru but not me) and Subaru not only don't care enough to inspect the vehicle as a matter of urgency but do not want to repair the vehicle. So the complaint is that the recall (wvx34) is just for a frames and the actual corrosion damage is much more extensive.

- Temecula, CA, USA