Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Ford urged to recall 1.3M Explorers amid carbon monoxide poisoning concerns



October 17, 2017

Ford urged to recall 1.3M Explorers amid carbon 

monoxide poisoning concerns


There is a new push Tuesday morning for the  Ford Motor Company to recall its Explorer SUVs over carbon monoxide poisoning concerns. The Center for Auto Safety is urging Ford to pull more than 1.3 million Explorers off the road.
Ford announced it is offering free inspections and repairs to reduce the potential for exhaust to enter vehicles. But the company insists its Explorers are safe and said the offer is "for our customers' peace of mind."
The Center for Auto Safety is calling on Ford to recall all of its 2011 through 2017 Ford Explorer SUVs, reports CBS News' Kris Van Cleave.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating more than 2,700 complaints about possible carbon monoxide in Explorers, including reports of 41 injuries and three accidents that may also be linked.
In July, police in Austin, Texas, parked more than 400 Explorers after nearly two dozen officers were found to have high levels of carbon monoxide in their blood.
Across the country, Ford has been repairing the Explorer police cruisers at no cost, but the company says the issue is separate from the complaints in civilian models and due to modifications of the vehicles after they were purchased -- like installing emergency lights.
In a statement, Ford said they are "confident in our current methods for quickly identifying and addressing potential vehicle issues."
The company says it will send letters next month to owners of the 2011 through 2017 Explorers, urging them to take their SUVs to dealers for inspections, so any necessary repairs can be made.
Customers can take their vehicles, regardless of mileage or warranty status, to a Ford dealer to have this service performed, starting Nov. 1, 2017 through Dec. 31, 2018. Customer mailings will begin the week of Nov. 13, 2017, and be completed by Dec. 22, 2017.  Customers with questions also can call a dedicated hotline at 888-260-5575.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ford-explorer-models-2011-to-2017-center-for-auto-safety-recall-urged/


Toyota recalls 310,000 Sienna minivans to fix shift lever problem



Toyota recalls 310,000 Sienna minivans to fix shift lever problem


October 18, 2017



The recall affects 2005-07, 2009 and 2010 Siennas. Pictured 
is a 2010 Sienna.

Toyota Motor Corp. is recalling about 310,000 Sienna minivans in the U.S. to fix shift levers that could move out of park, perhaps causing the vehicle to roll away.
The recall affects 2005-07, 2009 and 2010 Siennas, the automaker's North American unit said Wednesday in a statement.
"Grease inside the shift lever assembly could transfer to other internal components," causing them to malfunction, Toyota said. The problem may cause the shift lever to slip out of park without the brake being pressed. This could cause the vehicle to roll away and may lead to a crash.
The company said Toyota dealers will remove and replace an "appropriate amount" of grease and replace the shift lock solenoid.
Last year, Toyota pulled about 744,000 Sienna minivans in the U.S. because of a problem that causes sliding doors to open while the vehicle is moving.
A Toyota spokesman declined to comment on whether the company is aware of any injuries or accidents related to the shift lever problem. Toyota said owners will be notified via mail by mid-December.

Ford says recall of F-150, Super Duty pickups to cost $267 million in Q4



Ford says recall of F-150, Super Duty pickups to cost $267 million in Q4


October 18, 2017


DETROIT -- Ford Motor Co. on Wednesday recalled 1.3 million 2015-17 F-150 pickups and 2017 Super Duty pickups to fix faulty side door latches.
In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Ford said the recall would cost it $267 million and will show up on the company's fourth quarter income statement. 
Ford said dealers will install a water shield in affected vehicles for free. Without the shield, the doors may not open or close properly and may open while driving, Ford said.
A Ford spokeswoman, Elizabeth Weigandt, said customers would be notified next month but did not have a timetable for when parts will be available. 
Affected F-150s were built from March 12, 2014, to Dec. 31, 2016, at the Dearborn Assembly Plant and from Aug. 11, 2014, to Dec. 30, 2016, at the Kansas City Assembly Plant.
Affected Super Duty pickups were built from Oct. 8, 2015, to Sept. 1, 2016, at the Kentucky Assembly Plant.
Ford said it is unaware of any accidents or injuries related to the problem.
This is not Ford's first door latch problem.
It took a $295 million hit in the first quarter because of two recalls, one of which involved the expansion of a door latch recall to nearly 211,000 vehicles including 2014 Fiestas, 2013-14 Fusions and 2013-14 Lincoln MKZs.
Ford has now recalled more than 5 million vehicles for varying door latch-related issues since 2016, but the company said the issue in the new recall is different from prior ones.
Weigandt said Ford's decision to issue a recall is driven by data. "When the data indicates a safety recall is needed, we move quickly," she said.
Reuters contributed to this report.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20171018/OEM11/171019669/ford-truck-recall-earnings


Suit blames Ford for Austin police officer’s carbon monoxide illness



Suit blames Ford for Austin police officer’s carbon monoxide illness



By Nolan Hicks - American-Statesman Staff

TAMIR KALIFA
Police Interceptors are parked outside of the Austin Police Department’s downtown headquarters on 8th Street as officials prepare to move the vehicles off-site on July 29. The Austin Police Department pulled all 400 of its Ford Explorers from patrol amid concerns of carbon monoxide releases into the passenger compartment of the cars. (TAMIR KALIFA/ AMERICAN-STATESMAN)


Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Highlights

Ryan Hancock and his wife allege that a police SUV’s flawed exhaust system led to damage to his nervous system.
The suit asks for unspecified damages to pay for medical bills, lost wages and future earnings.
An Austin police officer and his wife are suing Ford Motor Co., alleging that its Explorer SUV’s flawed exhaust system led to the officer’s carbon monoxide poisoning and subsequent damage to his nervous system.
The lawsuit is at least the second filed by an Austin police officer that accuses the automaker of negligence, saying that it knew of the problems, failed to fix them and failed to alert the public. The suit asks for unspecified damages to pay for medical bills, lost wages, future earnings and for the couple’s pain and suffering.
“We’re suing Ford because they designed, manufactured and sold a defective product,” said Brian Chase, an attorney representing officer Ryan Hancock. “It’s important to get the word out that these Ford Explorers have a problem leaking carbon monoxide and Ford hasn’t been able to fix it.”
Chase said the Austin police cases are two of the roughly 30 he has across the country stemming from reported Ford Explorer-linked carbon monoxide poisonings.
The Austin Police Department parked its nearly 400 Explorer patrol vehicles in July for emergency inspections after dozens of officers were potentially exposed to the dangerous and odorless gas. Over four days in July, at least five police officers were hospitalized.
None of the Explorers has been returned to service so far, though some are currently undergoing testing, a City Hall spokesman said Thursday.
A spokeswoman for Ford declined to comment on the pending litigation, but said the automaker’s own testing showed the leaks might be caused by modifications ordered by police departments to get the SUVs ready for law enforcement duty. Ford announced earlier this month that it was offering to inspect and repair Explorer SUVs at no cost to owners.
But Austin police aren’t alone in reporting problems with the Ford Explorer. Between 2011 and 2015, 154 people across the country reported their Explorer to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, largely complaining about problems with the exhaust system.
A July report from the federal agency found cracks in Explorer exhaust manifolds as a possible culprit for the carbon monoxide leaks in the police Explorers. The agency said it would continue to investigate to determine how common the cracks are and whether it affects civilian models, too.
But for Hancock, the warnings and investigations came too late, the lawsuit alleges. According to the suit, Hancock became nauseated and light-headed, then his head began to hurt and his vision became blurred as he patrolled the city on July 21. When he reported for duty the next day still feeling sick, he was taken to a nearby hospital, where he was diagnosed with carbon monoxide poisoning, the suit says.
The lawsuit claims that Ford was aware of problems with the Explorer’s exhaust system as early as December 2012, when the company issued a bulletin to dealers acknowledging that the smell of exhaust was getting into the cabins of the SUVs.
“In sum, Ford knew that its Ford Explorer vehicles and Police Interceptor Utility vehicles, (including Hancock’s APD cruiser), were defective in that the design of those vehicles allowed deadly exhaust fumes, including poisonous carbon monoxide, to enter the passenger compartment,” the lawsuit claims. “(T)he suggested repairs failed to fix the problem.”
The lawsuit contains testimony from a Ford representative in a Florida case, who suggested in 2015 the exhaust problems were caused by a design flaw in the popular SUV.
“It doesn’t seem to be a problem with an individual part or an individual vehicle that was misbuilt,” the representative, Bob Gray, said. “It does seem to be a design issue.”
The suit, filed Monday in Travis County state District Court, also names Leif Johnson Ford of Austin and Silsbee Ford, a dealership in East Texas, as defendants, claiming they and five other unnamed businesses failed to fix the patrol SUV.
A Leif Johnson representative declined to comment. No one from Silsbee Ford was immediately available to comment.


Two New Teslas - Terrible Reliability Hits New Records



EXCERPTED COMMENTS BELOW CLICK LINK TO REVIEW ALL

Two New Teslas - Terrible Reliability Hits New Records


Tesla has now acheive a number of new records.

Record #1 and #2 - As of today my Model S which I took delivery of 30 days ago and my Model X that we took delivery of 16 days ago have both now individually each spent more days in the Service Center (5 days each, but S clock is still running as it is still there) than the combined total days of all new cars I have bought in the last 30 years. 

Record #3 - Tesla service has put more miles on my Model X than my wife and I have since delivery.

Record #4 - I have now had 7 different Tesla loaner cars over the past month. That is 7 more than any car I have ever bought (although I tend to wait for service even when Porsche oil change took 4+ hours).

That is quite an amazing streak over such a short period. When I drive my Telsas I love them, just wish I got to more often. 

Joking aside it has come to the point where I worry about my wife taking her X too far right now and I am docmuenting everything on both cars in the case I have to Lemon Law them. Really a shame and starting to feel foolish for purchasing two in such a short time period.



Wow, who changed the title of my Thread? I did not label it Lemon Law.

Model S - Air Suspension Leak - Brought it in on 10/10 for Service and notified Service that the air compressor went on for long period of time after car sat at rest for while. They kept it overnight and they claimed could not replicate the issue. Picked the car up on Wednesday the 11th and the next morning when I went out to the car it did the same thing, so I videoed it and then later in the day when I went to drive the car I got a warning "Air Suspension Needs Service". I called service and they were going to send a flatbed, but given my last experience when they picked up my X, I decided to drive it there after the code cleared when I next went out and started the car. Dropped the car off Thursday the 12th. They replaced a stuck air valve on Friday and tested over night on Friday and Saturday they said Drivers side strut leaked completely down so needs to be replaced and part will not arrive until Monday the 16th.

Model X - Parking Brake Needs Service - Fully documented in my other thread where the Technician who picked up my X decided to take it home 70 miles from the Service Center. Tesla Service Experience Takes a Strange Turn

I am sorry that yours broke down.

Let's take a look at lemon law:

  • The warranty for the vehicle must be current:
Checked for both S & X
  • The vehicle must be taken in for repair to an authorized dealer, for the same problem, at least 3-4 times. NOTE: For California law specifically, the law includes that if a certain repair may cause death or serious injury, 2 attempts to repair is sufficient cause to qualify a vehicle as a lemon. For example, brake failure would qualify after two repair attempts, as it is a major safety defect.

May be not 3 to 4 times so far?

  • The vehicle must have been inoperable for a total of 30 days (the days do not need to be consecutive).
May be not. Yours have been in the shop since October and now is still the same month.
  • The defect or malfunction in the car must be of severe impact either impairing the safety, value or use of the vehicle.
Checked for both S & X
  • In order to qualify, all cars must be leased or purchased in California and used for personal, family or business use.
Checked for both S & X

So, for Lemon: You got 3 checked off but the other 2 are not?



I recently saw a thread about parking brake messages. There's a firmware glitch that as far as I know Tesla's still working on.
"Parking Brake Needs Service"
All the service centers really should know about this, no surprise if they don't though.



When buying Tesla's, it may be a good idea to space the purchases out and let the first one go through the break-in period, fix everything, before buying the next one. For all 3 Tesla's that we bought the break-in period was under 6 months (actually, the oldest - 2013 - was the best in that respect). Knock-on wood, once all fixed they've held up great so far.


https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/two-new-teslas-terrible-reliability-hits-new-records.100099/

Power steering failure




Power steering failure
Submitted by chayan.b
on October 12, 2017
(3-week old Tesla Model X)
-------------------------------
Power steering failure
Submitted by chayan.b on October 12, 2017
 
Is anyone else seeing the errors below pop up?
 
"Car needs service - steering assist unavailable"
"Park assist unavailable"
 
The primary issue is that the power steering is not engaging. Given the 6,000 lb beast the
MX is, it is essentially not maneuverable without power steering. The falcon doors have
become nonfunctional too. All this on a 3-week old Tesla! My MX was sitting pretty in the
local SC for the better part of this week. I called in today and they said all was looked at
and fixed. Initial diagnosis I was provided was that the connectors on the relays and EFuse
were lose and were torqued to company specification. Upon further probing, I was told that
the problem is more software related. They have introduced a new module and the
software needs to be fine-tuned. It was also mentioned that the issue could recur and the
only solution as of now is to hard-reboot (disengage 12V battery). This ultimately will only
be fixed with the next software update. 2 hours out of the SC and few miles on, I'm back to
square one. Errors pop up and the steering is stiff again. Luckily I could get home. Quite
irritated with this right now.
 
If it is a software calibration issues/bug, then someone else must have experienced this
too. If not, did I get a lemon?
 




FEDS CLOSE INVESTIGATION INTO BMW'S RECALL FAILURES





FEDS CLOSE INVESTIGATION 


INTO BMW'S RECALL FAILURES



Investigation closed after BMW pays $40 million consent order and answers for recall failures.

Posted in Investigations
 — The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has closed an investigation that was opened in 2015 concerning BMW and how the automaker conducted recalls and filed federal reports.
In 2014, the feds had tested two MINI Coopers to see how the cars handled side impact crashes and following the tests, NHTSA said it looked like BMW ignored problems that should have been addressed.
Following an additional test, BMW told NHTSA that certification for 2014 MINI Cooper Hardtops was based on the testing of 2014 MINI Cooper S Hardtops, even though the Cooper S is a heavier car.
In January 2015, BMW recalled certain MINI Coopers to install foam patches in the rear door panels, then another MINI recall was ordered to change vehicle weight and capacity information on the tire labels.
But what got the attention of NHTSA was when BMW said a "service campaign" would be performed to add padding to the rear side panels of 2015 MINI Cooper 2-door Hardtops, but the automaker never started the campaign. To top it off, the automaker didn't mention anything to the government about failing to conduct the campaign.
NHTSA said BMW should have known about rear passenger safety problems in MINI vehicles and should have known those problems needed to be fixed. In addition, safety regulators said BMW failed to notify them about recalls in a timely manner.
BMW was hit with a consent order in December 2015 after the automaker admitted it failed to conduct timely recalls, failed to file quarterly reports in a timely manner, failed to contact owners about safety defects, failed to tell NHTSA about delays in sending dealer notices and failed to submit copies of recall-related documents in a timely manner.
That's a lot of failures, and NHTSA imposed a $40 million civil penalty against BMW for those failures.
The consent order also required BMW to appoint an independent safety consultant to assist in creating better methods for complying with the Safety Act and evaluating safety issues.
BMW was also told to create a program to train dealers on the importance of not selling vehicles with unrepaired safety defects and to improve dealers' access to information necessary to increase completion of open (unrepaired) recalls.
NHTSA says it is closing the investigation because by agreeing to the consent order, BMW has admitted to violating the law and so far has played by the rules. However, by closing the investigation, NHTSA says it has no bearing on BMW's responsibility to follow terms of the consent order.