Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    NHTSA Fines Ferrari $3.5 Million Over Missing Reports

      Reports?! What Reports?


    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has issued a $3.5 million fine for Ferrari as it failed to comply with oversight requirements.

    The agency announced today that the Italian sports car maker had not submitted early warning reports for the past three years. These reports are important for NHTSA as it helps them identify potential or existing safety problems. Federal law requires manufacturers these reports quarterly. Previously, Ferrari was qualified as a a small-volume manufacturer which exempted them from providing these reports. However, Ferrari was still required to notify the agency of any fatal accidents involving its vehicles, something it didn't do for three accidents in this time. Also, Ferrari lost its small-volume manufacturer exemption when it became part of Fiat in 2011.

    "There is no excuse for failing to follow laws created to keep drivers safe, and our aggressive enforcement action today underscores the point that all automakers will be held accountable if they fail to do their part in our mission to keep Americans safe on the road," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx.

    Ferrari spokesperson Krista Florin said in a statement that the missed reports were unintended, and that the automaker had implemented new procedures to "ensure full compliance in the future."

    Source: Reuters, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at[email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    Press Release is on Page 2


    NHTSA Fines Ferrari $3.5 Million for Failing to Submit Early Warning Reports

    • Automaker Did Not Submit Required Safety Information for Three Years

    WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) today announced that Ferrari will pay a $3.5 million civil penalty and has been ordered to comply with NHTSA oversight requirements as set forth in a Consent Order for failing to submit early warning reports (EWR reports) identifying potential or actual safety issues. Federal law requires large manufacturers and affiliates of large manufacturers to submit comprehensive EWR reports on a quarterly basis, in order to provide notice to the Department of potential safety concerns. Ferrari, an affiliate of Chrysler, admitted that it violated the law when it failed to submit required reports to NHTSA over a three-year period, and failed to report three fatal incidents. Until Fiat (which includes Ferrari since 2011) acquired Chrysler, Ferrari qualified as a small volume manufacturer and was not required to file quarterly EWR reports. However, while Ferrari was not required to file quarterly reports, it must report fatal incidents nonetheless.

    "There is no excuse for failing to follow laws created to keep drivers safe, and our aggressive enforcement action today underscores the point that all automakers will be held accountable if they fail to do their part in our mission to keep Americans safe on the road," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx.

    In addition to the civil penalty, the Consent Order requires the automaker to improve its processes for EWR reporting, to train personnel on the EWR requirements, to communicate these improvements to NHTSA, and to retroactively submit all EWR reports. The Consent Order is immediately enforceable in federal court if any terms are violated.

    "The information included in early warning reports is an essential tool in tracking down dangerous defects in vehicles," added NHTSA Deputy Administrator David Friedman. "Early warning reports are like NHTSA's radar, helping us to find unsafe vehicles and make sure they are fixed. Companies that violate the law and fail to comply will be subject to comparable swift NHTSA enforcement action."

    EWR reports are required under the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act of 2000. The law requires quarterly reporting of: production information; incidents involving death or injury; aggregate data on property damage claims, consumer complaints, warranty claims, and field reports; and, copies of field reports involving specified vehicle components, a fire, or a rollover.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • No tough corner, it is amazing to think you feel there is no degradation in a 20yr old ICE auto. I know that both EV and ICE wear out, battery packs will outlive the actual EV and ICE auto.  At this point we do not have enough data to know if the EV motors will lose as much hp/torque as an ICE does over 20yrs of use and depending on how an auto is cared for it can be big changes or minimal changes. I know my Escalade is in much better shape than most and being it is garage kept; it is out of the elements and sun just like my EV is. With that, I also know I have two oil leaks after 200,000 plus miles. The oil pan and another leak that I suspect is at the input of the transmission to the engine. Both are so minimal that the thousands it costs to repair the gaskets does not justify the expense. I can also tell you that the response of the V8 is NOT what it was when it was new. I do not expect the EV to be the same after 200,000 miles either. No corner here to worry about, both autos will wear out, I can also say that my Escalade does not get the 15 mpg it got new and now averages 12 mpg. A 20% decrease in MPG after 200,000 miles of use and 19 years old. With out a compression test, I could not tell you how worn the rings are, though since I have only ever used synthetic in the engine, I would have to think it is minimal as I do not burn any oil, but the overall engine has wear and tear and it is clearly tired in comparison to a new motor. End result is as the original story stated, the EV battery pack will outlive the auto and that will outlive most ICE auto's as while we have the average age now just a little over 12yrs old, most ICE are not on the road after 20 years.
    • I know you're put into a corner when you'll do anything to defend your EVs and your Escalade. It's tough to admit that your Escalade isn't wore out but you're trying to say 20 year old cars are all worn out at the same time. 
    • No, it is not. A 20 year old ICE vehicle is not losing any SIGNIFICANT amount of range or power output.    So you're basically saying your Escalade is a piece of junk at this point? It's 20 years old. I think we both know it's probably pretty close to OEM status when it comes to output and range, right?  Even if they aren't as simple as a good tune-up away, they are still way closer to factory output and range than a 20 year old EV will be. 
    • WOW, I get it that your stuck on the 64% capacity issue. Yet the same thing can be said for ICE  A 20-yr old auto is NOT a tune up away from running near-new running condition. Never will be and the evidence of how moisture destroys an auto that has been sitting or only run in short local driving is everywhere. From gasket leaks due to age on just about every component that has a liquid to the rings on the piston that after 20 years of running will have blow by in not holding compression and cannot make the initial HP/Toque of when the engine is new. As one that grew up with building engines, transmissions and tune-ups on ICE, the clear evidence is both ICE and EV will still be around in 20 years, but how they work, and the power is very different. End result is the FUD that has been thrown at EVs is just that FUD as EVs is going to last just as long and in some cases could be longer as the auto industry has moved to superior insulation to avoid battery degradation, no different than how they realized heat shields play a pivotal role in maximizing the burning of unburnt hydrocarbons and how they use cats to clean up the exhaust.  EVs batteries are already better in dealing with extreme cold and heat than earlier generation EVs and will only get better over time. In this regards the batteries will outlast most of the auto's life and still have a use which cannot be said for an ICE Motor without having to have it totally rebuilt. I respect your choice to feel how you feel just as I feel about batteries versus ice. Have a relaxing weekend with the family.
    • We'll I always felt it needed to be updated, but is a Black Screen of death any better? Microsoft kills the iconic Windows 'Blue Screen of Death.' It looks like this now | PCWorld
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search