Editorial Standards

What we publish, how we source it, and what we won't do for money.

Our three core commitments

These are not aspirational. They're how the site operates. The rest of this page explains what they mean in practice.

Where our data comes from

Every recall, complaint, and severity classification on this site is sourced directly from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) through their public APIs:

• recallsByVehicle endpoint for active recall campaigns
• complaintsByVehicle endpoint for owner-filed defect complaints
• vPIC for VIN decoding and vehicle identification

We sync weekly. New recalls and complaints appear on the site within seven days of being filed with NHTSA. We do not modify NHTSA's data. We do not editorialize individual complaint summaries — they appear as filed by the original owner. We do assign internal severity classifications (critical, severe, moderate) based on whether a recall mentions injuries, fires, or crash outcomes, and we make those classification rules transparent: critical means the official record cites death, fire, or crash; severe means injury or major component failure; moderate means everything else.

Average repair cost figures, where displayed, are pulled from a combination of independent shop pricing surveys and our own data sources. Repair cost figures are estimates, not commitments — actual quotes vary by region, shop, and vehicle condition.

How editorial pieces are produced

The mechanic-voice editorial commentary on vehicle hub pages is written by working mechanics with hands-on experience on the engines and platforms being discussed. Some pieces are written by the founder under his real name; others are published under pen names to protect contributors who are still employed in the dealer or shop world.

Every editorial piece goes through a basic verification process before publishing:

• Technical claims about specific failures are cross-referenced against NHTSA records and known TSBs
• Repair cost estimates are sanity-checked against independent shop ranges
• Severity language must match what the data actually shows
• "Buy / walk / fix" recommendations have to be defensible based on the documented failure pattern

We don't write editorial commentary on vehicles we have no first-hand knowledge of. If a piece appears under a pen name, it was written by someone who has worked on that specific engine or platform.

Manufacturer payment policy

We do not accept payment, sponsorship, advertising revenue, or in-kind compensation from vehicle manufacturers, OEM parts suppliers, or their PR firms. We have already turned down at least one such offer. We will turn down more.

The reason is simple: the moment a manufacturer pays us, our editorial coverage of their vehicles becomes suspect. We can't write honestly about a 6.0 Powerstroke if Ford is paying for one of our other pages. So we don't take the money.

This applies to all forms of compensation. Free press loaners, paid junket trips, advertising buys, sponsored content, and "editorial partnerships" all qualify. None of it. If a manufacturer wants to dispute factual claims about their vehicles, they can reach out through the corrections process below.

Affiliate relationships and disclosure

ProblemsByVin earns revenue through affiliate relationships with extended warranty providers and automotive service products. When a visitor clicks through one of our affiliate links and completes a purchase, we earn a commission from the provider. The commission does not affect the price the visitor pays.

Affiliate links are disclosed in two places: the footer of every page on the site, and immediately adjacent to any specific affiliate call-to-action. Affiliate links include the standard rel="sponsored" attribute as required by FTC and search engine guidelines.

We do not allow affiliate revenue considerations to influence editorial recommendations. A vehicle that has documented reliability problems gets the same coverage whether it's one we'd send warranty traffic for or not. If we tell you a 6.4 Powerstroke is a bad engine, we're saying that even though that exact vehicle would generate warranty commissions if we steered you toward coverage on it. The editorial verdict comes first, every time.

Corrections and updates

If you find a factual error on the site, please reach out through our contact form with the URL of the page and the specific error. We review every correction request. Verified errors are fixed promptly, and substantive corrections are noted at the bottom of the affected page with the correction date.

NHTSA data is refreshed weekly. If a recall or complaint appears on our site after having been resolved or rescinded by NHTSA, that should self-correct on the next sync cycle. If it doesn't, contact us.

Editorial commentary is reviewed periodically and updated when warranted by new information. Significant editorial revisions are dated. We don't quietly rewrite our past positions to look right in hindsight — if our take changes, the page shows the change.

What we don't claim

ProblemsByVin is a research and reference site. We are not a substitute for a pre-purchase inspection by a qualified mechanic. We are not a vehicle history report — we don't pull title status, accident records, or ownership history. We are not legal or financial advisors. Our editorial verdicts on specific vehicles are opinions, not guarantees.

Use this site as one input in your buying decision, alongside an inspection, a paid VIN history report, and your own judgment about the specific vehicle in front of you.

Contact for editorial matters

Corrections, editorial pitches, contributor inquiries, and any concerns about our standards or coverage can be sent through the contact form on the site. We read every message. We respond when we can.

For more on who we are and why this site exists, see the about page.