Another day, another inquiry.
The General is set to face another investigation in relation to the ignition switch recall debacle that’s plagued it ever since the faulty mechanism was brought to light last year, according to The Detroit News.
Now, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will seek to investigate the company based on its conduct during the aftermath of the recall, though at this point it’s not entirely clear whether the FTC is after the dealers or the company itself. The automaker learned of the investigation June 3.
The news outlet says it concerns, “certified pre-owned vehicle advertising where dealers had certified vehicles allegedly needing recall repairs.” Put another way, FTC claims certain GM dealerships advertised used cars that had not received recall repair work. It seems the validity of that practice is the FTCs main point of objection.
However, as the news outlet notes, any dealers that sells a new vehicle must ensure a recall is repaired before the vehicle is sold – yet no such law exists for used vehicles.
While an FTC spokesperson confirmed the investigation, both the agency and GM declined to comment.
Comments
It’s interesting that GM-A has a recommended article where GM seems already aware of this potential issue and voluntarily tried to address it. http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/04/general-motors-launches-innovate-new-recall-software/
Reading the article, it seemingly infers that dealers aren’t motivated to address recall issues regarding cars on their lot until a sale might be imminent.
Hmm. That’s seems a rather questionable practice.
Don’t consumers presume that if a recall is announced that said cars on lots are fixed ASAP? Or at least before they’d ever test drive one?
The way I see it many GM cars have the OnStar and the TV screens. Why not provide all of us owners a great service by having recall notifications networked right to the car?
Instead of having to fumble with crazy long VINs simply turning the car on routinely checks the net for recall notices? Not so easily dismissed notices either, especially if the new car lacks an owner.
Embarrassing recall repair notifications would FORCE dealers to fix the car ASAP.
Hey John, thanks for your comment. A few things to note here:
1) The capabilities of the recall software might not be shared by GM and GM Canada, leading to a disparity in how dealers can navigate and access such information.
2) The software will be gradually rolled out through the third quarter, which means there are likely many dealers without access at this time.
3) The investigation could be focused on vehicles purchased from dealerships before the software was introduced.
4) The FTC investigation could come up fruitless.
It was not my intent to infer a lack of motivation on the part of the dealer in fixing the repairs. Rather, its the validity of that practice itself that is up for debate as no such law currently exists for used cars.
As for recall repairs being networked into the car? Great idea. If manufacturers already have the capability to diagnose problems and notify customers on the fly via in-car screens, why can’t recall notices be delivered in a similar fashion? As you say, it would essentially force dealers to make these repairs.
Ah. Correct. You were not inferring. Instead the article was revealing a practice at dealerships. A practice that, itself, infers the dealers apparently need more motivation to address recall issues before a sale.
Thanks for the clarification, Drew.
I’m happy you got me regarding OnStar Recall alerts. Think of this entire airbag debacle, right? People who own victimized vehicles are asked to go to a website and ‘keep checking’. Maybe for dated cars, sure, but in the near future I believe that ‘practice’ should be phased out and instead your car tells you it needs repairs.
In the legal liability sense it’s fantastic — for once you receive the message the corporation has a time stamp of when you were notified. Like suppose my new Buick turns out to have a serious recall issue (tires fall off). Buick not notifying me THRU the car potentially delays contact and risks harm to me. But once notified, and re-notified (via pesterware), I have no grounds to day “but I wasn’t told!”.
This type of service could even expand to potential recalls. Suppose it’s suspected that Chevy Malibus have a mysterious oil leaking issue, but GM can’t figure out how many people or why. So every OnStar equipped Malibu contacts its owner and asks (via a text alert), “Do you have oil stains in your garage under the right front tire?” The answer could reveal that owners of the 2011 Malibu in cold climates do who bought from a certain aiding engineers to figure out what’s going on.
Yeah, some people would panic, but others would report ‘no’ but then keep an eye on it. This would inclusive transparent pre-recalling, if you will.
There are laws in place that require that people are contacted via paper yet. That still would have to be done.
Second most people get a check engine light and just keep driving anyways.
Third not all cars have OnStar. Many fleet cars have the OnStar Delete option and they would never get anything.
Also would the cars not connected to OnStar still get the full message. Most people who own GM cars never take OnStar one the free trial is over.
The real issue is as it has been dealers are not all honest or all very good. The ones that are bad do a lot of damage to GM’s image and there is little they can do about it since the FTC also protects the dealers from the MFG. Funny how the government agency trying to fix an issue that in the most part has been something the MFG would also like to fix and could fix but the FTC will not let them bring the hammer down on poor dealers.
GM has used as much leverage as they can but they are limited. They also tried to cut many of these dealers in the chapter 11 and the government stopped that. I have one Chevy dealer here that should have been close years ago for poor service but they got a government reprieve when GM tried to shut them down.
“Second most people get a check engine light and just keep driving anyways.”
Nice to see your contempt is for everyone who isn’t lucky enough to be you.
No contempt at all just something commonly seen by folks who repair cars for a living.
If you have ever worked on cars as a tech you would understand that many cars have little to no maintenance done to them. It is common for techs in the field to find cars with brake lights, check engine lights and other warning lights with tape over them. Not a joke or making light here just the way it is.
In states with no inspections for emissions Check engine lights are common till the car stops running right.
Hell in the past when I was still working on cars I found cars often with very dangerous things and the people were very casual about the issue. One customer I showed had a drum brake worn all the way through the drum and had nothing to press on. His reply was oh no wonder it does not stop well. He was in for a tire change and that was it.
The fact is cars are expensive to fix and many people just will drive them till they will not go anymore to avoid the cost of repair because they just don’t have it. In many cases the cars repairs may even be more than the value of the car.
Hart I am trying to be nice here as I have no real issue with you. If you want to pick a fight in front of everyone here you will have to try harder as I really don’t care anymore. If you want be an adult we can convers well, if you want to be childish I will let you be childish and embarrass yourself. Everyone is here watching and it is your choice I have made mine.
I will try to treat you as an adult no matter if you like it or not. As I said before if you do not like my post skip it. If you feel the need to comment you are more than welcome but try to be an Adult.
I was here long before you showed up and I will be here long after you have grown tired and moved on. So I will do fine either way you choose.
“Hart I am trying to be nice here.”
No you’re not. What you’re trying to do is bully people who don’t agree with you. You are constantly trying to pull rank —
“I was here long before you showed up — ”
— and trying to label a non-fanboy as a trolls —
” — and I will be here long after you have grown tired and moved on.”
As so as long as you insist on acting like this is your exclusive website and clubhouse — you’re going to get PUSH BACK.
One way to avoid push back is to consider the other person’s opinion instead of obliterate it with phrases like “The real issue is — ” and “The fact is –” and referring to an entitled ‘we’ at this site that you belong to and I don’t. ‘Trying to be nice’ isn’t simply obliterating a visitor’s opinions because you don’t like their politics.
In this thread Drew politely pointed out that I inadvertently put words in his article’s mouth. I ‘heard’ that and politely corrected my stance. That’s what I call civil. He then found my idea about OnStar being used as a communication tool interesting.
Then you followed thru and listed everything you thought was wrong with the idea. Some of it helpful, some of it… unhelpful.
For example, it’s unhelpful to point out that all cars don’t have OnStar yet. Duh, Scott. Really? No kidding. I already stated that by saying “Maybe for dated cars, sure, but in the near future — “. So if you’re going to chime in, at least read the post you’re responding to instead of jumping at the chance to find a way to have me ‘move on’.
Got some news for you, by the by. Don’t see a lot of women posting here. They might not like to be bullied by ‘know-it-all’ blowhards and might not like to push back. A smart webmaster realizes that everyone should be able to contribute instead of get in line behind boorish individuals who insist on saying “I was here first.”
People’s opinions matter to GM. You’re not GM. So you may have to suffer thru opinions by people you disagree with. Since everyone isn’t signed onto GM as a religion.
Hart this is a web site that puts out info for debate and comment. That is just what I have done. We all here challenge and debate and shoot holes in each others comment and theories.
I do it as well as most others here. To be honest this is a more mild site than many.
This is how be BOTH learn no just me or you, I sharpens our theories and ideas.
You need to stop thinking this is just about you or just about me. This is where you say what you think and what you know to enter into the discussions.
If you are an overly sensitive person the web can make it tough and there is not much I can do about that.
If you disagree with a statement or comment I make give yours and substantiate it. Some things we can agree and others we will never but that is just the way it is. You said you want to learn this is how things work on most automotive web sites. I think many here will back me up on this.
My comments here were nothing but on topic and posed some things to consider. You are entitled to disagree and more than welcome to provide proof if I am wrong. In this case you want to take this and make it personal.
My statement about being here before and after is not a statement of ownership or entitlement. I was just making the statement I am going to be here and we need to get along.
As it is I am fully willing to not make this personal. But be aware I am not going to sit there and agree or disagree with everything you say. That is what the rest of us do.
The bottom line is I am not making this or going to take this personal. What you do is up to you. If you even care about the others here I really don’t think they will want us to continue very long as it interferes with the conversation and debate.
If I do not agree just as anyone else here I will continue to challenge a comment just as I expect mine to be challenged. No this is not GM but this is where the debate takes place.
All I did here was interject that while the OnStar thing has its merits there are more things to consider as to government requirements that are in place. Also the issue of people not having OnStar or even subscribed would this still work? This was not saying your idea sucked it was a challenge to see if anyone knows if it is even plausible or things that could hamper such an effort.
From this point we can debated and discuss topics here if you like. I will tell you up front there will be times I will agree with you and times I will challenge you. Do not take it personal. If you can prove me wrong you only strengthen your side of the debate.
If you want to continue to take and make this personal I am not going to play the game. You can piss and moan all you like but I am not going to return this as a personal debate. I already let this get father than I should have. While not perfect one of us has to stop this before it goes over the top.
Like I said I will agree and disagree nothing personal. If you disagree with any of my post I welcome a disagreement and just why I am wrong. That is how it works and nothing personal just debate.
To be honest this would be pretty dull place if we all agreed.
“I was here long before you showed up and I will be here long after you have grown tired and moved on.”
doesn’t mean this
“My statement about being here before and after is not a statement of ownership or entitlement. I was just making the statement I am going to be here and we need to get along.”
All your previous actions have been just that. Only now that I’ve called you on it countless times has your tone finally and dramatically changed to a civil one.
Let it go dude.
Stop reading into things more than I am trying to get across.
It is this simple I have been here and plan to stay. I expect you have the same intentions do you not?
If so we need to learn to deal with each other. I am trying to do that now and have explained my actions.
If you want to continue to look for a fight best to keep looking else where. If you are not going to do it for yourself do it for the others here. People tire of this fast and it just get ugly from there.
Now back to the topic.
I would like to see how the regulations are written on recalls and how they companies are required to contact owners. I know on a recent recall I got E mails, Letters and Phone Calls. Others mostly have been letters or post cards about once a month till I could get it in,
the OnStar Idea would be nice but I am not sure it would meet the requirements or as I pointed out many owners. Would it still contact them in cars not paying for the service?
Any ideas Drew?
The behavior of operating a car for months, or even years, with various warning lights ablaze is all too true. My adult son, a truly brilliant person in most ways, has done this repeatedly. He still has “our” 2001 Intrigue, and I’m sure the traction control/brake module stopped working a year ago. Very expensive to fix in his area of Colorado, so he simply motors on and we shudder. He’s moving to upstate NY for a new job in a few weeks, and will finally dump what is left of that car and lease an AWD CUV, probably Toyota or Nissan because they have dealers nearby. The kind of person a lease was invented for!
John, I hope you and Scott can get past this feud. I haven’t found him to be especially harsh when different opinions arise. You both have perspectives that can be beneficial to the group.
Marc one of the funniest ones I had heard looking back was a friend of my Fathers who moved is Daughters Toyota. one evening.
He got in and there was a piece of electric tap over the oil light [this was a while ago.]. He pulled it off and saw the oil light.
He asked her what was that for? and all she could tell him is it was on for the last month and the tape was blocking the light to keep the light out of her eyes at night. Luckily it was just a bad sensor as she never checked the oil. Boy was he mad then but looking back we all cam laughed about it today.
Thanks Marc for the input. I have moved on.
Scott- Wow, taping over that “annoying” light is incredibly funny. Appreciate your automotive insight, and also like to see the views of a “non fan boy” of GM such as John. I have to admit a modest bias for GM, although I’ve had many other makes in the past.
While working as a mechanic in High School and through collage I can tell you some really scary stories on some of the cars I saw people drive and they knew full well what was wrong. One guy had a Fleetwood that really looked good but the caliper froze so he took it off and plugged the line. Yes he drove on only 3 calipers.
One guy fitted air plane tires to his pacer. Some how he was able to put on tires from some kind of fighter plane on truck wheels. He jacked up the car and put them on. He cut some deeper grooved in them just to make sure they were legal tread wise. They were like 16 or 24 ply and really did not need air in them as they were so stiff. I wish I had a photo today. He said a buddy who worked at Goodyear got them for him. He said they would last the life of the car. But the car did not last much loner anyways.
As an employee within a GM sales department, I have a few comments (I am sure I will get ripped apart):
1. Many times recalls are announced for vehicles that are 1-2 yrs old and only after a few months we often see that widened to include previous model years. During that time, no doubt some of those expanded model years were sold and now require the recall.
2. Manufacturers often announce recall model years based on if the car is within warranty or not first, followed by expanded years so parts can be produced fast enough to supply a fix for the model years announced within a reasonable amount of time.
3. GM has announced more stop-deliveries this year than the last 10 combined. Some are warranted and some are not. If it is a direct safety related issue by all means stop delivery. But examples like a possible coolant drip on the Cruze due to a bad connector does not need to be a stop delivery (which it was); there are warning indicators of low coolant levels which will prevent damage to vehicles (especially since the number of vehicles affected was miniscule). This could have been a technical service bulletin instructing dealerships to inspect the vehicle on its next regular service and a letter sent to owners to have them inspected in case they don’t do service at a GM dealership. Most dealerships finance their used inventory (thank goodness our dealership principle owns his used inventory outright) and pay carrying charges which in turn affects pricing, etc, especially since many of these recalls are announced as a stop delivery and GM has yet to manufacture a fix or the procedures for doing so. I have seen vehicles sit on our lot for over 4 mths waiting for a fix to be designed, parts produced, shipped to dealers, and then have a claim system in place before the work can be done.
4. Many times we have customers wanting to buy a vehicle with a stop delivery. We advise them of the stop delivery, the reason, the estimated time frame for the repair (getting parts, etc) and if it is a safety issue, we refuse to sell the vehicle. If it is a reason like the above mentioned Cruze, we check the vehicle over and as long as the customer is alright with taking delivery knowing there will likely be an official inspection needing to be done once GM has announced the procedure/fix, we sell the car.
There are those dealerships out there who don’t stop delivery even on safety issues and those are the dealers who need to be investigated.
You pretty much summed it up.
With the variation and number of recalls anymore it is difficult to keep up with them and then add in the TSB information on top of that it is crazy. I have had TSB’s or recalls I have found and the dealer had no idea till I gave them the number. I have access from work to the system to retrieve numbers if you look for them.
Then like you said some dealers even if they know disregard them and sell away.
Stop sells really have been numerous since the ignition deal. They normally are short but many times on popular cars.