⌘K
HomeRecallsInvestigations DP24003
NHTSA defect investigation · Defect Petition

Nuna defect petition DP24003

Seat harness can loosen without using harness release button on Nuna Rava car seats.. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this defect petition about the front adjuster button/release mechanism. Opened Apr 22, 2024, closed Oct 2, 2024 after 5 months without a recall. closed

What NHTSA says

Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filed

On March 21, 2024, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) was sent a defect petition (DP) that requested the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration investigate the NUNA RAVA car seats for a harness that can allegedly loosen without pressing on the harness release button.  The Petitioner stated there were 24 complaints in the NHTSA database all detailing the same issue.   According to the Petitioner, "this condition has poor detectability (there are no warning lights) and the consequence of failure in case of a crash would be severe or fatal injury".   ODI conducted a thorough search of its database and found 32 consumer complaints that were potentially related to the alleged defect. Following the receipt of a second DP mailed on April 1st, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to the manufacturer Nunababy Essentials.  The IR letter requested information on NUNA RAVA child seats regarding allegations of a harness loosening without the harness release button being pressed.  After reviewing ODI’s internal data and Nuna’s response to the IR letter, ODI decided to grant the petitions and open Preliminary Evaluation PE24-026.  This Defect Petition will now be closed due to the opening of the PE. The petitions can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov using the following ODI Report reference numbers: 11583786, 11585272.To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

Stage Defect Petition — NHTSA works to complete one within four months Opened Apr 22, 2024 Closed Oct 2, 2024 Manufacturer Nuna Baby Essentials, Inc. Components Child Seat › Harness › Front Adjuster Button/Release Mechanism, Child Seat › Harness › Front Adjuster

A Defect Petition is a petition from a member of the public asking NHTSA to open a defect investigation; the agency grants or denies it and publishes the reasons. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the opening and closing resumes with the full reasoning are on NHTSA’s site under this number.

What this means for an owner

Source: and what happens next

An investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.

This one closed without a recall. That means NHTSA found no defect trend it chose to act on at the time, or the manufacturer addressed the condition another way (a service campaign or a bulletin, which have their own pages). A closed file can be reopened if new reports arrive.

Model years it names

Source: as NHTSA filed them

NHTSA filed this action against Nuna Baby Essentials, Inc. without naming a model year — an equipment or manufacturer-level query.

Common questions

Source: NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation

Is DP24003 a recall?

No. A defect petition is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.

Is DP24003 still open?

No. It closed on Oct 2, 2024 without a recall.

Which vehicles does DP24003 cover?

NHTSA filed it against Nuna Baby Essentials, Inc. without naming a model year.