In continuing coverage of the General Motors vehicle recalls
over problems with ignition switches, the volume of coverage erupted following
GM’s announcement yesterday of additional recalls. Several national outlets and
wires are reporting on the new recall numbers, with many others addressing the
overall recall scandal and the government’s response in both DOT and Congress.
The CBS Evening News broadcast that early yesterday evening,
GM announced it would be enlarging the number of vehicles so that the list
“includes newer models.” CBS reporter Jeff Glor says, “it’s a recall of every
single car manufactured under six different models,” recalling 971,000 more
cars. The broadcast continues, GM counts “at least 12 deaths in 31 crashes”
because of the problem, although the company “didn’t start the recalls until
last month,” despite having known of the ignition issue since 2001.
Furthermore, the broadcast mentions that GM CEO Mary Barra will be appearing
before Congress on Tuesday. The automaker is going to start repairs on the
switches “in two weeks, but they could take months to complete.”
NBC Nightly News broadcast that the cars in this latest
recall “were built from 2008 to 2011 and the vehicles include the Chevy Cobalt
and HHR, the Pontiac G5 and Solstice and the Saturn Ion and Sky,” but “unlike
the older vehicles no deaths have been officially linked to these models.” The
broadcast explains that GM is taking “an abundance of caution” in dealing with
the issue. Also, yesterday, GM further “told dealers to stop selling 2013 and
2014 models of the Chevy Cruze with 1.4 liter turbo engines” but “has not given
a reason for that order.”
In a long “AP Impact” report, the AP focuses on how NHTSA
handled 164 complaints submitted by 2005-2007 Chevrolet Cobalt drivers since
2005, which “was far more” complaints “than any of the car’s competitors from
the same model years, except for Toyota Corolla, which was recalled after a
government investigation in 2010.” Though the report implies that NHTSA should
have done more to address the concerns, it also considers the difficulty of
determining vehicle issues. The report mentions that Secretary Foxx last week
requested an “internal investigation” of the agency’s response to the GM
problems, noting the letter in which Foxx made the appeal, where he stated that
there was nothing he knew of to suggest that NHTSA “failed to properly carry
out its safety mission based on the data available to it and the processes
followed.” Foxx also “said that GM didn’t give the government enough
information.” Still, the report makes a point to say “sometimes NHTSA acts
quickly ... the agency investigated electric car maker Tesla Motors after just
two reports of vehicle fires and no injuries.” The AP also reports under the
headline “Major Events In GM’s Recall Of 1.6 Million Cars.”
Bold Rid reports online that “NHTSA has had its staff cut by
one fifth and its budget ‘stagnate’ in the years since the Ford Explorer safety
scandal in 2000,” after which Congress passed a law to bolster the agency’s
investigation powers. The report is sympathetic with the staff cuts, saying
that “51 versus 248 million,” or the estimated number of cars in the US, “is a
lop-sided contest, no matter the competition,” continuing by saying the agency
“is terribly underfunded and understaffed.”
Bloomberg News reports
that this augmented recall of 971,000 more vehicles “brings the total to 2.59
million small cars.” GM spokesperson Jim Cain explained in a phone interview
with Bloomberg News, “We know that these vehicles were built with good switches
but what we don’t know: Were any of them repaired with a bad switch ... So out
of an abundance of caution we’re just going to replace the switches in all of
them.” The report points out that, besides the congressional investigation into
GM, the company “is conducting an internal review and the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration is also investigating,” as well as the Justice
Department. Barra also issued a statement on the expanded recalls, saying that
“Trying to locate several thousand switches in a population of 2.2 million
vehicles and distributed to thousands of retailers isn’t practical.” The Los
Angeles Times reports that Cain also said, “We need to make sure that one of
these bad switches did not wind up in one of these newer vehicles. Rather than
leave anything to chance, we are going to call them back and replace them.”
A 1000+ word report by the New York Times talks about
Florida engineer Mark Hood, who was consulted in the lawsuit of the family of
Brooke Melton against GM. Preparing for his role in Melton v. GM, Hood “had
photographed, X-rayed and disassembled” the GM ignition switch from Brooke
Melton’s 2005 Chevy Cobalt, but Hood “was at a loss to explain why the engine
... had suddenly shut off, causing her fatal accident in 2010 in Georgia.” Upon
purchasing a replacement ignition switch from a local GM dealership, however,
Hood discovered that, despite having the same identification number as Melton’s
faulty switch, “a tiny metal plunger in the switch was longer in the
replacement part. And the switch’s spring was more compressed. And most
important, the force needed to turn the ignition on and off was greater.”
In a separate 1000+ word report on the additional recalled
vehicles, the New York Times mentions that NHTSA Administrator David Friedman
will also be testifying before Congress this coming week. The report notes that
Friedman as well as Barra will face tough questions from lawmakers in both
House and Senate committees.
The Washington Post reports that GM’s “slow recall” since
becoming aware of the ignition issue “has also put the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration under fire for not detecting the problem and ordering a
recall.” The report counters with NHTSA’s position, however, which is that the
ignition switch defect was difficult to pin down, even “despite opening three
special probes of accidents linked to the flawed switch.” Offering commentary
in the report as well is one a former administrator of NHTSA, Joan Claybrook,
who says, “What is so interesting to me is what the pressure of the public
spotlight and the possibility of criminal penalties have done to force this
company to behave.”
The Wall Street Journal reports that GM has calculated that
a preponderance of the recalled vehicles have driven more than 100,000 miles,
which means that many GM dealers are eager to offer their help to potential new
customers bringing their recalled vehicles into GM dealerships. Although the
company has stated that dealers should not take advantage of the influx of
consumers bringing their cars in for repair, the report points out that GM has
unveiled a promotion of $500 cash allowance for owners of recalled vehicles
wishing to trade-in their models.
Bloomberg News reports that Barclay’s analyst Brian Johnson
predicts that GM “will probably create a fund of as much as $3 billion to pay
claims associated with” the ignition problems. Similarly, the head of
crisis-management firm Temin & Co. Davia Temin says, “I don’t think they
have a choice in terms of creating a fund,” because “I think Mary Barra has
been doing everything right up until now, and the next right thing is to create
this fund before someone orders it. You have to put your money where your mouth
is.”
GM orders halt to 2013-2014 Chevy Cruze deliveries, gives no
reason. USA Today reports online that “late Thursday,” GM notified dealerships
that it would “stop delivering 2013 and 2014 Chevrolet Cruze compacts with
1.4-liter engines – models that account for about 60% of Cruze sales.” Calling
the action “a mysterious move,” USA Today reports that the car company “won’t
say why it issued the order,” adding that “It’s unclear how the secretive
approach to details of the current order fits with the pledge of ‘transparency’
in all GM’s dealings made recently” by Barra. GM spokesperson Alan Adler
comments, “I have no details,” only divulging that “I’m sure somebody knows.”
Further according to the report, though, is that automakers often issue such
notices of halts in vehicle deliveries, which is “almost always related to a
safety problem.”
The AP reports, the GM directive for “dealers to stop
selling” the affected Cruze cars is affecting 21,000 vehicles, “but the company
won’t say why.”
House memo shows GM, regulators missed early chances to
correct ignition problem. New revelations on Sunday regarding early knowledge
of ignition problems in millions of GM vehicles by both the company and Federal
regulators received significant media coverage.
The AP reports that a new memo “from the House subcommittee
investigating” the GM recalls says that in 2005 the company “discussed two
separate fixes for an ignition switch defect but canceled them without taking
action.” The memo was put out on Sunday, “ahead of the subcommittee’s Tuesday
hearing on GM’s recall of 2.6 million small cars for an ignition switch defect
linked to 13 deaths.” The changes “were later canceled because they would take
too long and cost too much.” Later in 2005, GM “also approved but then canceled
a change to the key design.”
The Detroit Free Press reports the memo said that “there are
indications GM approved the design of the switches in 2002 even though the
company was aware they did not meet specifications.” Noting the 2005 action,
the Free Press says that “revelations raise even more questions about why GM
and federal regulators didn’t act sooner to address what appears to have been a
longstanding problem associated with defective ignition switches linked to 13
deaths and 31 crashes.”
Reuters reports that Rep. Tim Murphy (R), chair of the House
Energy and Commerce Committee’s Oversight and Investigations subcommittee, said
that the documents portray an “unsettling picture” of the handling of the
ignition problems.
NHTSA group opted not to pursue issue in 2007. In a brief
piece, NBC Nightly News reported that “federal safety officials declined to
launch a federal investigation into the problem more than six years ago, even
after being presented by evidence about complaints and crashes.”
The New York Times reports that officials at NHTSA’s Office
of Defects Investigation “decided not to initiate a formal investigation of
problems with the ignition switches” of the GM vehicles “even after an
investigative group reported that it knew about 29 complaints, four fatal
crashes and 14 field reports that showed the problem was preventing air bags
from deploying,” according to the House memo. That information was presented to
the Office of Defects Investigation in 2007, but the regulators “told committee
staff investigators that ‘the panel did not identify any discernible trend and
decided not to pursue a more formal investigation.’”
The Wall Street Journal reports that in response to the
memo, NHTSA said it “reviewed data from a number of sources in 2007, but the
data we had available at the time did not warrant a formal investigation.” The
NHTSA acting chief is expected to testify this week before both House and
Senate panels.
The Los Angeles Times reports that despite concerns about
airbag failures, “federal regulators twice declined to open formal
investigations to determine the cause, according to a congressional
investigation into delays in recalling the vehicles.” NHTSA and the DOJ “have
opened investigations into why it took so long for GM to recall the vehicles.
Documents indicate the company knew about the problem as early as 2001.”
Bloomberg News reports an NHTSA manager “recommended almost
seven years ago investigating why air bags in some” GM cars “weren’t deploying,
a memo issued by the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee shows.
We believe that obtaining legal satisfaction from those who
harmed you shouldn’t require more hardship. That’s why we do everything we can
to streamline the process, and we will file a lawsuit on your behalf if
necessary. If you or a loved one has been affected by this recall, and you
believe it caused an injury, contact Chhabra & Gibbs today by going to
www.cglawms.com or by calling this number: 601-948-8005.
