Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    General Motors Gets A $28,000 Fine From NHTSA For Answering Questions Too Slowly

    Sign in to follow this  

      NHTSA begins fining GM over not/slowly answering questions concerning the ignition switch recall

    Last month, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) sent General Motors a 27 page document with 107 questions that dealt with the massive ignition switch recall that affects 2.8 million vehicles worldwide and is linked to 13 deaths. NHTSA gave the company a deadline of April 3rd to finish answering all of the questions. Well its a week after the deadline, NHTSA has announced it will fine GM $7,000 per day starting on April 3rd because the company hasn't answered all of the questions and being slow to respond. At this current time, the total fine stands at $28,000.

    In a letter released last night, NHTSA said General Motors hasn't answered a third of its questions, including several that required no special technical expertise such as what data it looked at when deciding not to issue a recall before this year.

    "These are basic questions concerning information that is surely readily available to GM at this time. It is deeply troubling that two months after recalling the vehicles, GM is unwilling or unable to tell NHTSA whether the design of the switch changed at any other time," said the agency.

    NHTSA also warned that it could ask the Department of Justice to force GM's hand.

    Now NHTSA does state that General Motors sent the agency a note on March 20th saying that it would need more time to answer the questions. Then on on April 4, GM told the agency that it wouldn't be able to answer all the questions since it has an ongoing outside investigation by former U.S. attorney Anton Valukas. He is looking into GM's handling of the recall that goes back to 2001. As you might have guess, NHTSA isn't exactly pleased about this.

    “You explained that GM did not fully respond because an investigation by Anton Valukas and his team was in progress. This was the first time GM had ever raised Mr. Valukas’ work as a reason GM could not fully provide information to NHTSA in this timeliness investigation. Mr. Valukas’ investigation is irrelevant to GM’s legal obligation to timely respond to the special order and cooperate fully with NHTSA,” said NHTSA general counsel O. Kevin Vincent.

    General Motors spokesman Greg Martin tells The Detroit News the company has been fully cooperative by handing over 271,000 pages of information.

    “GM has produced nearly 21,000 documents totaling over 271,000 pages through a production process that spans a decade and over 5 million documents from 75 individual custodians and additional sources. Even NHTSA recognizes the breadth of its inquiry and has agreed, in several instances with GM, to a rolling production schedule of documents past the April 3rd deadline. We believe that NHTSA shares our desire to provide accurate and substantive responses. We will continue to provide responses and facts as soon as they become available and hope to go about this in a constructive manner. We will do so with a goal of being accurate as well as timely,” said Martin.

    Martin didn't say if the company would contest the fine or not.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), The Detroit News, Motoramic

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    How about a reverse fine against NHTSA for being ignorant in doing their job from the begining back when this problem began.

    Talk about a bunch of Morons covering their Arses in trying to make sure they still have a chair at the table of I kiss yours if you kiss mine stupid politics.

    • Downvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    All this nonsense stems from the fact that we do not have a legal system based strictly upon contractual obligations and specific legal compliance. There shouldn't be ANY legal obligation between a manufacturer and the consumer beyond what is specifically advertized about the product and/or stipulated in it's functional specifications. There should also not be ANY legal obligation to the government beyond compliance with specific certification requirements.

    In other words... If a car catches fire and it is not marketed as a car that will not catch fire, the consumer has no legal resort and the manufacturer has no legal obligations. You are not entitled to ANY compensatory or punitive damages. Also, the NHTSA can demand that manufacturers certify vehicles to their precisely stated standards using their precisely stated tests. Once they certify a vehicle they have no legal power to then punish the manufacturer for any safety or environmental issues no matter how serious.

    Frivolous lawsuits and/or overbearing government intrusions into private enterprises benefits no one but bureaucrats and lawyers. If you think that the absence of such will result in horrible and unsafe products, you are grossly underestimating the ability and discretion of consumers to choose products based on reputations and past performances. Just because no nobody can sue for millions of dollars if their relative die in car fire doesn't mean manufacturers will want to build cars that catch fire, because many consumers won't want to buy a car from a manufacturer known for making such cars!

    • Upvote 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How about a reverse fine against NHTSA for being ignorant in doing their job from the begining back when this problem began.

    Talk about a bunch of Morons covering their Arses in trying to make sure they still have a chair at the table of I kiss yours if you kiss mine stupid politics.

    Which morons? You mean the ones who knew about the problem 10 years ago but decided that a $0.57 fix was cost prohibitive? I'm sure recalling millions of vehicles, fines,and bad press make it TOTALLY WORTH IT.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How about a reverse fine against NHTSA for being ignorant in doing their job from the begining back when this problem began.

    Talk about a bunch of Morons covering their Arses in trying to make sure they still have a chair at the table of I kiss yours if you kiss mine stupid politics.

    Which morons? You mean the ones who knew about the problem 10 years ago but decided that a $0.57 fix was cost prohibitive? I'm sure recalling millions of vehicles, fines,and bad press make it TOTALLY WORTH IT.

    They can start by pulling in the executives from that time and grilling them, confiscating their ill gotten gains and holding them accountable for making the right decision than to roast a woman who clearly cares more about quality and the customer than the idiots that made these decisions did back then.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    For starters, we have to stop banding about this $0.57 cost... That is only the cost for a new part going forward. That does not take into consideration the cost of retrofitting the cars already built or the huge potential stockpile of unused parts. I still question if this is such a big deal of a recall. Again, cars are inherently dangerous... and the act of driving one means that you have decided to accept that risk.

    Should GM recall all the Dexcool screwed intakes? Flooding the crankcase with antifreeze also likely can cause a car to stall if extreme enough. Should GM recall all the break pads? They wear for God's sake! Then you can't stop! Oh, think of the children!

    In any case, this law of unintended consequences here is that in the future GM will not study any potential issues. This recall would not have blown up in their face IF THEY HADN'T DONE THE BEAN COUNTER MATH! If questioning the quality of the parts becomes persona non grata at GM, there is going to be a lot of problem parts in the future. At some point, this bean counter math has to be accepted as part of the price of running a business with the intention of profit.

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest potluck

    Posted

    When initially discovered, it was not considered a safety issue at all, merely a customer annoyance.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    All this nonsense stems from the fact that we do not have a legal system based strictly upon contractual obligations and specific legal compliance. There shouldn't be ANY legal obligation between a manufacturer and the consumer beyond what is specifically advertized about the product and/or stipulated in it's functional specifications. There should also not be ANY legal obligation to the government beyond compliance with specific certification requirements.

    In other words... If a car catches fire and it is not marketed as a car that will not catch fire, the consumer has no legal resort and the manufacturer has no legal obligations. You are not entitled to ANY compensatory or punitive damages. Also, the NHTSA can demand that manufacturers certify vehicles to their precisely stated standards using their precisely stated tests. Once they certify a vehicle they have no legal power to then punish the manufacturer for any safety or environmental issues no matter how serious.

    Frivolous lawsuits and/or overbearing government intrusions into private enterprises benefits no one but bureaucrats and lawyers. If you think that the absence of such will result in horrible and unsafe products, you are grossly underestimating the ability and discretion of consumers to choose products based on reputations and past performances. Just because no nobody can sue for millions of dollars if their relative die in car fire doesn't mean manufacturers will want to build cars that catch fire, because many consumers won't want to buy a car from a manufacturer known for making such cars!

    Your post Rocks! :metal:

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This whole recall thing is pretty embarrassing. I would think they would want to answer everything, solve it and move on as quickly as possible.

    I actually think it is worth grilling Mary Barra also, she still had high positions while all this happened, even if she wasn't at the very top. And who's to say she isn't like the previous CEO's that were looking to cash in on short term performance and leave. I think that is a big problem with GM over the past 20 years, they give these CEO's and upper management bonuses based on short term goals, so they do what makes money in the short term and don't care what happens 3-5 years later. Barra is the 6th CEO in the past 8 years, it isn't like these people care what happens 5 years later.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    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.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford and GM, the U.S.'s top two auto manufacturers are bracing themselves for the worst.  They have been running economic modeling to determin the steps they would take given a medium or severe recession in the US and across global markets.  General Motors has a stockpile of $18 billion in cash while Ford has $20 billion saved up.
      GM is relying on deferring non-essential capital expenditures and a shift in production to lower cost vehicles as part of its plan to save costs in the event of a a strong downturn.  Ford says is is evaluating its future moves. 
      Fears of a recession have plagued Wall St. most of 2019 while a trade war with China rages on.  Higher costs of materials due to tariffs is adding to the pain of weak product demand in the U.S., China, and Europe.  In Germany, Europe's biggest economy, growth shrank by 0.1 percent in Q2 2019 as trade conflicts and auto industry troubles weighed heavily on the economy.  Both exports and lagging demand at home have put a strain on German automakers already looking to slash costs. 
      Today, a strong signal that a recession is looming appeared as the 10-year treasury yield dropped below the 2-year treasury yield while do Dow Jones Industrial Average sank over 450 points.  
      Related:
      Honda Slowing Production, Cutting Shifts
      Nissan Profit Plunges 99%; 12,500 Job Cuts Eminent
      Ford Europe Laying Off Another 12,000
      Daimler Books First Quarterly Loss in Ten Years

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford and GM, the U.S.'s top two auto manufacturers are bracing themselves for the worst.  They have been running economic modeling to determin the steps they would take given a medium or severe recession in the US and across global markets.  General Motors has a stockpile of $18 billion in cash while Ford has $20 billion saved up.
      GM is relying on deferring non-essential capital expenditures and a shift in production to lower cost vehicles as part of its plan to save costs in the event of a a strong downturn.  Ford says is is evaluating its future moves. 
      Fears of a recession have plagued Wall St. most of 2019 while a trade war with China rages on.  Higher costs of materials due to tariffs is adding to the pain of weak product demand in the U.S., China, and Europe.  In Germany, Europe's biggest economy, growth shrank by 0.1 percent in Q2 2019 as trade conflicts and auto industry troubles weighed heavily on the economy.  Both exports and lagging demand at home have put a strain on German automakers already looking to slash costs. 
      Today, a strong signal that a recession is looming appeared as the 10-year treasury yield dropped below the 2-year treasury yield while do Dow Jones Industrial Average sank over 450 points.  
      Related:
      Honda Slowing Production, Cutting Shifts
      Nissan Profit Plunges 99%; 12,500 Job Cuts Eminent
      Ford Europe Laying Off Another 12,000
      Daimler Books First Quarterly Loss in Ten Years
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Back in early May, we reported that electric truck maker Workhorse was in talks with General Motors to buy the shuttered Lordstown Assembly plant that formerly built the Chevrolet Cruze.  The plan seemed founded more on hopes and dreams rather than actual financial reality.  Workhorse's only model, the W-15 is a truck with an 80 mile range and a built in range extender, has not exactly been climbing the sales charts.   In fact, the company booked only $6,000 in sales in the 2nd quarter of 2019, roughly $70 per day.  Following that report, the company's stock plunged 35%. Deliveries of the truck are currently on hold and will resume in the 4th quarter this year. There is currently a $70 Million backlog of orders to fill.
      Hopes of a solution for Lordstown coming from Workhorse are dim, but there is one thing that could save the deal: a $6.3 Billion contract from the US Postal Service to build the next generation of mail trucks, though Tom Colton, a spokesman for Workhorse said that the Lordstown deal isn't contingent on the contract from the USPS. 
      Under the proposed Lordstown deal, a new company would be formed called Lordstown Motors Corp. which would license the Workhorse technology to produce vehicles based on the W-15 model.  Workhorse itself would own a minority stake in the company. 
      The UAW is still in talks with General Motors to reopen the plant and assign new product to it.

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Back in early May, we reported that electric truck maker Workhorse was in talks with General Motors to buy the shuttered Lordstown Assembly plant that formerly built the Chevrolet Cruze.  The plan seemed founded more on hopes and dreams rather than actual financial reality.  Workhorse's only model, the W-15 is a truck with an 80 mile range and a built in range extender, has not exactly been climbing the sales charts.   In fact, the company booked only $6,000 in sales in the 2nd quarter of 2019, roughly $70 per day.  Following that report, the company's stock plunged 35%. Deliveries of the truck are currently on hold and will resume in the 4th quarter this year. There is currently a $70 Million backlog of orders to fill.
      Hopes of a solution for Lordstown coming from Workhorse are dim, but there is one thing that could save the deal: a $6.3 Billion contract from the US Postal Service to build the next generation of mail trucks, though Tom Colton, a spokesman for Workhorse said that the Lordstown deal isn't contingent on the contract from the USPS. 
      Under the proposed Lordstown deal, a new company would be formed called Lordstown Motors Corp. which would license the Workhorse technology to produce vehicles based on the W-15 model.  Workhorse itself would own a minority stake in the company. 
      The UAW is still in talks with General Motors to reopen the plant and assign new product to it.
    • By Drew Dowdell
      DETROIT — General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) delivered 746,659 vehicles in the United States in the second quarter of 2019.
      Crossover sales set a new second quarter record after sales grew year over year by 17 percent. Sales of the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 crew cab and GMC Sierra 1500 crew cab were both up 12 percent year over year. The Chevrolet Equinox and Traverse and GMC Canyon all delivered record second quarter sales. Sales of every Buick crossover were up year over year, with the Envision posting a 28 percent sales increase. The Enclave was up 21 percent and the Encore was up 5 percent. Buick deliveries were up 5 percent and GMC deliveries were up 10 percent. The all-new Cadillac XT4 continues to lead its segment and the all-new Cadillac XT6 has begun shipping to dealers. Cadillac crossover deliveries were up 19 percent in total year over year, helping the brand grow both total and retail sales. The Chevrolet Suburban, Tahoe and GMC Yukon XL were each up more than 20 percent compared to a year ago. Overall, GM deliveries during the second quarter were down 1.5 percent versus a year ago, in line with third-party estimates for industry sales. The company estimates that its retail market share was even with a year ago, with truck and crossover deliveries offsetting lower passenger car sales.  
       
        QUARTER 2 (CALENDAR YEAR-TO-DATE) JANUARY - JUNE   2019 2018 %Change Volume   2019 2018 %Change Volume   Cascada 1,312 1,374 -4.5   2,058 2,292 -10.2   Enclave 15,159 12,551 20.8   27,739 22,420 23.7   Encore 24,291 23,167 4.9   48,897 48,635 0.5   Envision 9,138 7,118 28.4   16,761 16,814 -0.3   LaCrosse 2,487 4,053 -38.6   5,389 11,119 -51.5   Regal 2,985 4,507 -33.8   6,393 8,215 -22.2   Buick Total 55,373 52,891 4.7   107,240 109,695 -2.2   ATS 371 3,785 -90.2   893 7,747 -88.5   CT6 1,862 2,427 -23.3   4,050 4,894 -17.2   CTS 2,443 2,640 -7.5   4,871 5,082 -4.2   Escalade 9,432 9,655 -2.3   16,251 17,766 -8.5   XT4 7,080 0 ***.*   14,106 0 ***.*   XT5 13,118 17,045 -23.0   26,396 31,890 -17.2   XT6 74 0 ***.*   74 0 ***.*   XTS 5,359 3,665 46.2   9,093 8,563 6.2   Cadillac Total 39,739 39,222 1.3   75,734 75,949 -0.3   Blazer 11,772 0 ***.*   14,795 0 ***.*   Bolt EV 3,965 3,483 13.8   8,281 7,858 5.4   Camaro 12,433 13,588 -8.5   24,516 25,380 -3.4   Colorado 31,669 41,016 -22.8   65,163 69,875 -6.7   Corvette 5,788 5,785 0.1   9,731 10,242 -5.0   Cruze 16,166 37,836 -57.3   39,477 77,691 -49.2   Equinox 85,657 73,967 15.8   174,157 156,365 11.4   Express 21,528 21,413 0.5   38,743 41,187 -5.9   Impala 12,536 13,595 -7.8   25,795 27,662 -6.7   LCF 1,305 756 72.6   1,864 1,286 44.9   Malibu 30,974 42,267 -26.7   65,171 76,417 -14.7   Silverado HD 31,496 37,452 -15.9   61,037 76,471 -20.2   Silverado LD 109,930 118,077 -6.9   194,426 214,603 -9.4   Silverado MD 1,038 0 ***.*   1,314 0 ***.*   Sonic 4,024 4,582 -12.2   8,484 10,565 -19.7   Spark 7,226 4,454 62.2   13,649 11,399 19.7   Suburban 18,266 15,136 20.7   29,295 29,861 -1.9   Tahoe 32,942 26,880 22.6   53,795 50,523 6.5   Traverse 38,152 35,892 6.3   72,375 74,090 -2.3   Trax 21,790 26,507 -17.8   46,370 46,989 -1.3   Volt 1,146 4,336 -73.6   3,666 7,814 -53.1   Chevrolet Total 499,847 528,100 -5.3   952,248 1,019,019 -6.6   Acadia 28,420 20,108 41.3   59,620 50,008 19.2   Canyon 11,909 9,635 23.6   18,863 16,848 12.0   Savana 9,503 7,167 32.6   16,069 11,964 34.3   Sierra HD 13,946 14,364 -2.9   23,188 27,022 -14.2   Sierra LD 42,911 45,042 -4.7   74,215 73,852 0.5   Terrain 24,988 22,327 11.9   50,352 55,291 -8.9   Yukon 20,023 19,520 2.6   34,970 34,522 1.3   GMC Total 151,700 138,163 9.8   277,277 269,507 2.9   GM Vehicle Total 746,659 758,376 -1.5   1,412,499 1,474,170 -4.2  
  • Posts

    • Standard Adaptive cruise is a Toyota thing currently.  It seems like Ford and Nissan are not far behind on it. 
    • GM needs to fix that STAT.  Something like adaptive cruise control should actually come standard.
    • Electrify America is working hard to build up the largest network of electric chargers in the US.  They have already partnered with Chargepoint, so that if you have an account with one company, you can use your account at either company's charging stations without additional fees.   Now the network has gotten even larger as an interoperability agreement has been reached with EVgo, one of the largest charging networks out there.  So now, if you have an Electrify America account, you can charge your EV with at least three different providers on a single account with no additional fees.  Electrify America is the company that was formed from Volkwagen's dieselgate scandal and is hard at work deploying EV charging stations around the US, including 350-kW stations for fast charging. They are also working towards "plug and charge" capability which would allow the car to be charged without the need for a card at all.  The current Electrify America map before adding EVgo or ChargePoint: Related: Porsche Offering Three Years Free Charging with Taycan View full article
    • So true, the average is 1 to 2 people per Bolt, Lyft, Uber ride. The number of large rides is usually covered by a van type of service. Some interesting info on Lyft. https://expandedramblings.com/index.php/lyft-statistics/ https://expandedramblings.com/index.php/uber-statistics/  
    • Most of my ride-share rides have been done in vehicle the Bolt would be equal or larger than. I've only rode with more than 2 people twice in which we needed 5 or 6 seats.  Yeah, the Bolt can't cover the complete spectrum of Uber or Lyft "packages" but the entry price compared to an EV Mercedes is probably only 2/3 the price or less. I think it is safe to assume it would pay itself off quicker than the Mercedes even if you can't "Uber Black". 
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Howard
      Howard
      (63 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...