Jump to content
Create New...
  • 🚗 Your People Are Here. Get In.

    The internet is full of car content. This is the community.

    Cheers & Gears has been bringing enthusiasts together since 2001. Join the conversation, show off your garage, and find your people.

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    NHTSA Admits They Missed Clues During GM Ignition Switch Defect

      New Reports Show NHTSA Has Some Blame In the Ignition Switch Mess

    While General Motors has gotten most of the blame in the ignition switch fiasco, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) isn't getting away scot free. The New York Times reports that the Department of Transportation released two internal documents revealing a series of failings by NHTSA.

     

    One of those failings was the administration not paying sufficient attention to a Wisconsin state trooper’s report in 2007 which suggested that the ignition switch played a key role in a fatal accident. The reports go on to say that NHTSA didn't use their full power to hold GM accountable in terms of this problem.

     

    “There needs to be a complete overhaul of this failing agency. The results of this report are long overdue,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).

     

    NHTSA has begun to make a number of changes in light of these reports. They include,

    • Put manufacturers “on notice” about potential defects as soon they identified any troubling cases.
    • Institute a 'Risk Control' program that better aligns different sections of NHTSA and encourage more sharing
    • Be monitored by a group of outside experts including former officials of the National Transportation Safety Board and NASA


    “The G.M. experience changed the culture here. What that means is challenge the information you’re getting, and challenge the assumptions you are pursuing,” said NHTSA administrator Mark R. Rosekind.

     

    Still some people believe NHTSA needs to go farther.

     

    “It still soft-pedals why they have gone from one defect crisis to another,” said Sean E. Kane of the consulting firm Safety Research and Strategies. “What is missing is any mention of the importance of transparency.”

     

    Source: The New York Times


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    We could just do with killing many federal agencies and stop the wasting of tax payer dollars. Next waste will be a new agency to regulate the agencies that are supposed to regulate the agencies that are supposed to protect Americans.

     

    So sad and pathetic.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It was a perfect storm of circumstances. GM was a mess internally, evidenced by the steady decline throughout the 2000s going into the bankruptcy, then you had the failure of the NHTSA to put together 1 + 1 = ?? when so many accidents involving failed airbag deployments had been occurring. And lastly, we as consumers and drivers forgot the importance of keeping our keychains light and teaching young drivers how to handle a stall.

     

    When you have a mega corporation in termoil, a safety organization that can't deduce whose ass a fart came from, and a dumbing down of consumers, it's a recipe for disaster.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I stay away from the whole issue of driver liability just because in the land of lawsuits I've pretty much given up on the average American associating liberty with personal responsibility. And I'm from Canuckistan.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If GM is found liable, shouldn't the Government be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into whether the car was defective. Never forcing GM to actually do a Recall. The FEDERAL GOV'T was made aware of the situation and DID NOTHING. If the company gets sued, so should the Gov't. Again since GM was found liable, the Government should be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into it. This is the purpose of the NHTSA. Not only that... the car czars were supposedly going over GM, with a fine tooth comb, hence responsibility would and should still remain with the Government that owned a controlling stake in the company for 5 years

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I stay away from the whole issue of driver liability just because in the land of lawsuits I've pretty much given up on the average American associating liberty with personal responsibility. And I'm from Canuckistan.

    It's sad, but true..

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If GM is found liable, shouldn't the Government be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into whether the car was defective. Never forcing GM to actually do a Recall. The FEDERAL GOV'T was made aware of the situation and DID NOTHING. If the company gets sued, so should the Gov't. Again since GM was found liable, the Government should be held so as well. N.H.T.S.A, after two Cobalt crashes, investigated the cause, each time raising the possibility of a defect. They met with GM but never opened a broader investigation into it. This is the purpose of the NHTSA. Not only that... the car czars were supposedly going over GM, with a fine tooth comb, hence responsibility would and should still remain with the Government that owned a controlling stake in the company for 5 years

    How do we sue..ourselves..? pay higher taxes? lol

     

    All kidding aside,  because it is a gov't program I would think you could only hold the individuals responsible right(because I'm not sure how the gov't goes after the gov't.. I'm sure there are legal ways I just do not know the sequence of events) ? but at that point the company is supposed to have their backs unless it is proved to be intentional neglegence.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I actually had the ignition switch thing happen to me in my 06 Cobalt.

     

    The GPS lost its suction and fell off the window, hitting the key on the way down and shutting off the car.  At highway speeds.

     

    Fortunately I figured out that I could restart the car if I shifted into neutral before anything bad happened.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I actually had the ignition switch thing happen to me in my 06 Cobalt.

     

    The GPS lost its suction and fell off the window, hitting the key on the way down and shutting off the car.  At highway speeds.

     

    Fortunately I figured out that I could restart the car if I shifted into neutral before anything bad happened.

     

     

    Still... cause and effect.. the GPS, or rather the insanity of us still using "suction cups" in 2015, IMO, would be more at fault than anything else if U had of crashed. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As far as I'm concerned, GM is on trial because the weak ignition switch caused a situation in which the airbags fail to deploy to prevent injury. It bothers me endlessly to hear people (and the media) quoting the story like the Cobalt's were killing people simply by turning off. If you're going fast enough to have a devastating crash, the steering will barely feel different without power assist, and the brakes retain power boost for at least one full press.

     

    Yes, it's a significant problem. You slide off the road (whether it's ice or avoiding an accident or anything) into a tree, or hit an obstacle that causes you to lose control, and the jarring event shuts off the car and therefore the airbags, not a defect to be taken lightly. However, how much different would the narrative be if it was reported as "Ignition switch fails to deploy airbags in 110 fatal accidents" versus "Ignition switch causes 110 fatalities." IMO the second line doesn't even make any damn sense, it's like click bait. An ignition switch can't cause death.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The other issue was that apparently airbags have always had a percentage that do not deploy in an accident and the percentage of non-deployments in these cars was not outside of the statistical norm, thus no statistical anomaly to detect.

    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.




  • Support Independent Automotive Journalism

    25 years of honest automotive coverage — because someone has to do it.

    Cheers & Gears has never been filtered by manufacturer relationships or driven by algorithm. Just real people, real opinions, and a genuine love of cars. Subscribers keep the lights on and get an ad-light experience starting at $2.25/month.*

    View subscription options

    *A small number of ads feature member-exclusive coupon deals and will still appear.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Does anyone know of or have any experience with cardboard wardrobe boxes made for moving? The ones from Home Depot are not that good.  With the metal hanger rod extended across the top, it does not prevent torsion in the box and the folding side flap, which is meant to give you a look into the box, is flimsy ... and if you even put small things on top of this tall box, it tends to sink in. Someone out there has to have some good solid wardrobe boxes in their available inventory of moving supplies. Help and ideas, please ...
    • Some of these famous buildings are hideous, some are interesting with decent parts to them, and a rare few are really nice. The hideous ones include the newer architecture building at University of Washington, Wurster Hall (also architecture) at UC Berkeley, and perhaps the Salk Institute in San Diego.  These buildings are cold and soul sucking, so they're hard to be in.  They also come from a fairly ugly (on various levels) sixties and seventies granola period. One of these buildings would be a "hybrid" and it's fine.  That would be Campbell Hall (again ... architecture) at the University of Virginia, which is definitely brutalist reinforced concrete at the first taller level or two, with an exposed waffle slab at levels above you.  However, they soften it up by using brick on the upper floors' exterior, as well as lower floor to ceiling heights.  The one brutalist gem would have to be the main library at University of California San Diego.  They definitely did not do this to reduce costs because it's a complicated building.  However, it's probably a nice space to be inside because of the floor to ceiling windows all around. It's just that there was a wave of putting up these buildings on West Coast campuses, surrounded by eucalyptus or fir and hemlock, and it was usually at hippieish campuses and their atmospheres don't gel with me.
    • Happy Mother's Day to the mothers in our lives - family, friends, coworkers  She came to mind, so I looked for a gif on her.  She is originally from Buffalo!  Most people have doubles.  I don't think she does. Happy Sunday.
  • 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