The United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has asked General Motors to provide details about what it knew and when surrounding ignition switch failures linked to 13 deaths. The failures have resulted in a recall of 1.6 million Chevrolet, Pontiac, and Saturn vehicles.
In a 27-page order, NHTSA has requested that GM provide it with specifics on the steps it took to investigate engineering concerns and consumer complaints dating from 2004. The agency has requested the report by April 3rd.
In February, General Motors said that heavy key rings or jarring could cause ignition switches on affected cars to move out of position, thereby cutting power and deactivating air bags. The agency also stated on its website that “Falsifying or withholding information in response to this special order may also lead to criminal penalties of a fine or imprisonment of up to 15 years, or both.”
The General has stated that it is fully cooperating with the probe, welcoming “the opportunity to help the agency have a full understanding of the facts,” said  Alan Adler, a GM spokesman, in an e-mailed statement.
“In addition to getting NHTSA the information they need, we are doing what we can now to ensure our customers’ safety and peace of mind,” Adler added. “We want our customers to know that today’s GM is committed to fixing this problem in a manner that earns their trust.”
General Motors CEO Mary Barra stated that she would guide senior executives in monitoring progress on the recall, adding that the automaker’s reputation may be driven by how it responds.
GM “has acted without hesitation” to address the recall in the past few weeks, reads Barra’s note from a GM employee website. “We have much more work ahead of us.”
NTHSA’s order contains 107 questions about the events leading up to the recall, including the 10-year timeline the automaker provided regulators on February 24th. The agency also requested all GM documents used to prepare the timeline, as well as details about each of the 23 crashes the automaker linked to the defect, and all depositions and testimony from lawsuits.
The agency also requested details surrounding the following items:
- Names and correspondence from any employee involved in efforts by GM employees to investigate and isolate ignition-switch failures, going back to 2004
- Specifics about the reason engineering modifications proposes in 2004 and 2005 were not implemented in production vehicles
- Information about the events following a 2007 meeting between regulators and GM, in which the two parties discussed an air bag failure after a Cobalt lost engine power
- Why GM North American President Alan Batey said that automaker’s “process employed to examine this phenomenon was not as robust as it should have been,” along with details about how the process will be changed
NHTSA spokesperson Nathan Naylor said in a statement that, “We are a data-driven organization, and we will take whatever action is appropriate based on where our findings lead us.”
Adding more complexity to the situation is a GM technical service bulletin to dealers from 2006 describing the issue; GM didn’t issue a a recall until 2014. Notably, a research team informed U.S. automotive safety regulators in 2007 of a possible link between defective ignition switches and airbags not deploying.
In a statement dated February 25th, GM stated that it was “deeply sorry”, while CEO Barra stated on March 5th that the automaker has commenced an internal investigation to provide an “unvarnished report on what happened.”
To note, the initial recall on February 13th was limited to 778,562 Chevrolet Cobalts and Pontiac G5s was expanded less than two weeks later to include more than 800,000 additional vehicles, including 2003-2007 Saturn Ion, 2006-2007 Chevrolet HHR, 2006-2007 Pontiac Solstice, and the 2006-2007 Saturn Sky. Other affected models not sold in the U.S. include the Canadian-market 2005-2006 Pontiac Pursuit and the European-market 2007 Opel GT.
Comments
As soon as I heard about the recall, I contacted my daughter in Manhattan. Her first experience was traumatic when going over a pothole in the high speed lane, lost power to the car. Trying to maneuver to the breakdown lane w/o power or blinkers during rush hour was harrowing. I told her to contact her local GM dealer about the recall and they said come back if you get a recall in the mail. Not the kid glove treatment that CEO Mary Barra has been talking about. I also asked my daughter to check on getting a free loaner car for the day when they do replace the ignition switch. Answer was something like “no way”. BTW, she drives a 2006 HHR.
This very alarming, GM dealer network is worthless at best.
I just don’t understand how GM is responsible for these cars!
We are talking about cars that were made years ago and are way passed the warranty!
How long are car makers responsible for taking care of repairs on a car?
Please stop saying that these switches are faulty! They lasted for 10 years in some cases! That’s not the definition of a bad part!
I think people just have it in for GM and will take any chance they get to bury them!
Simply pathetic!
Lay off this shit Brian. Its the simple fact GM sold vehicles they KNEW were dangerous and could cause serious injury…
Do some research on “Product Liability”; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_liability
It doesnt matter if it exceeded warranty, it had a defect that caused deaths…
Then it’s not a defective part! If the part last for years then there is no way it’s defective!
If the part was defective then why didn’t they all fail? Did every ignition go bad?
These are greedy people with their hands out hoping to get paid!
Let me ask you something, have you ever had a car that needed the ignition replaced?
Was that car out if warranty? If so what did you do? Have it replaced!
Please don’t think I’m just trying to stir the pot! I’ve driven plenty of these cars and used to own one myself and do you know how many problems I had with the?
NONE!
Total And Complete BS!
If the part is detective then don’t you think 95% of the components involved would fail?
Did that happen? No!
If it wasnt defective then we wouldnt even have this situation. If it wasnt defective then they wouldnt be recalling 1.4 Million cars would they? The problem in question is that GM KNEW about the potential safety hazard and STILL sold the vehicles, acting like the problem wasnt even there. THAT is grounds for lawsuits, especially now that people died. Maybe you dont understand, but as consumer we have the RIGHT to get compensation for a companies defective product.
And yes, it IS defective whether you like it or not.
Did the part make it past the warranty? If the answer is yes then it’s not defective!
We have this problem cuz are looking for a hand out!
I would be looking for a handout too if i paid $30K for a car and it has a potentially deadly part. Also, some of these deadly accidents occured when the warranty was still in play. Also, you should rethink your approach, a warranty cannot help a person when the defective part already caused an accident or even death.
I dont think you understand warranties…At all…
(You might want to take notes.)
Warranty:
In contract law, a warranty has various meanings but generally means a guarantee or promise which provides assurance by one party to the other party that specific facts or conditions are true or will happen. This factual guarantee may be enforced regardless of materiality which allows for a legal remedy if that promise is not true or followed. (GM knew of the problem but chose not tell the public the car had a problematic ignition, thus lying.)
Breach of Warranty:
A breach of warranty occurs when a product is defective, or broken, to an extent that cannot be reasonably expected by a buyer. (A buyer does not expect the ignition to become faulty from the factory and cause a severe accident)
Product Liability:
Product liability is the area of law in which manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers, and others who make products available to the public are held responsible for the injuries those products cause. Although the word “product” has broad connotations, product liability as an area of law is traditionally limited to products in the form of tangible personal property. (This shows that even though the product exceeded warranty, it is still the manufactures problem IF it causes injuries)
Types of Manufacture Liability:
Section 2 of the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability distinguishes between three major types of product liability claims:
– manufacturing defect
– design defect
– a failure to warn (GM is being accused of this)
The simple fact is, GM knew of the issue, sold the cars anyways. And because the issue CAUSED DEATHS, it is now the manufactures problem for simple negligence. GM wouldnt be in hot water if they had just fixed the issue before selling the vehicles, but instead they ignored the public safety and sold these cars anyways…Its sickening and they deserve every bit of heat. Warranties do not matter in situations that cause deaths. And it doesnt matter how many Cobalts are still on the road, it only takes a handful to ruin the whole batch. How can you defend GM for being guilty for something so obvious?
I cant believe you are so filled with Bias that you cant allow yourself to believe GM did something wrong.
If some of the cars failed during the warranty then they would have been fixed during that time which is normal!
These people are making a mountain out of a nothing just to get some money they don’t deserve!
Why doesn’t the driver have to take any of the responsibility of being able to pull the car over when there is a loss of power!
Have you ever been in a car when the car died, I have pulling over to the side of the road is not a major problem! But I guess GM is responsible for that too!
These ignitions are not what caused deaths it was the drivers inability to bring his or her car to a safe stop!
You don’t need power steering to steer, you don’t need power brakes to stop, and you don’t need hazards to let other people know your having a problem!
Let me ask you would this have been a big deal if she just ran out gas?
The same thing would of happened the car would of just shut off and they would of had to get the car over to the side of the road regardless!
You give the victim a pass! I don’t!
Would be nice if they converted the cars to push button ignition as the fix. Anyone know how difficult this would be?
I find this rediculous, $500 is pennys when buying a car in todays economy. This a PR disaster, this is a week offer at best. While Scott has some great points, when you consider the challenges of modern driving and many of the conditions out their, a Cobalt stalling out without warning would be incredibly dangerous. Considering most of the time I am being talegated if my car was to suddenly shut off I would be toast before I could even begin to figure out what was happening. Lets say I just purchased a used Cobalt from auction for $4,000 with around 100,000 miles, a dealer is going to mark that up 2 to 3 grand. So the average joe is going to buy a used 05 to 07 Cobalt for around 7 to 8 grand. Now what is it owrth, maybe $2,000 to $3,000 at auction. GM has to protect its consumers wether buying used or new, this is the concept they failed to understand in pre-bankruptsy but I believe they do get this now. While the old GM is at fault here, lets not forget that most people dont know or care if their was an old or new GM. New GM has finally come out of the closet with this and has a responsibility as well as new GM to resolve the issue as well as any lawsuits that come from further investigation. I believe their will be some serious accountability reprecusions from this. Lets hope new GM stays focused on the course and continues to develop class leading products.
GM is not responsible for lawsuits pre bankruptcy 2009! They are only responsible for the cost of repairing the switches!
These are not my words they are fact!
Old GM New GM!
I still want to know why the victims in all of this are not held to a higher standard when it comes to driving?
Cars lose power everyday and people deal with it, they find their way to the side of the road! Why these switches any different?