When Should We Issue a Recall? Have Automakers Learned From History?
Posted by
Mark BelloSeptember 01, 2010 12:45 PM
Vehicle recalls have dominated the news for years and every automotive company has been affected by them. The majority of these recalls are “uneventful” in nature – more for fixes such as defective emergency brakes, leaky fuel lines, bad axles, etc. Sometimes, due to the severity of the defect and the resulting damage, it makes national headlines for weeks as has been the case lately with Toyota.
As newsworthy as the Toyota recall has been, it is hardly the largest prominent auto recall. The Ford recalled 1991 – 2004 cars and trucks because of its fire-prone, cruise control mechanisms. Probably one of Ford’s most noteworthy recalls was the 1978 Pinto for its fuel tank design flaw. The vehicle was termed “a barbecue that seats four.”
Bankrate has issued a report of the 8 most infamous car recalls in history.
General Motors – Models with a V-8 engine experienced sudden acceleration back in 1969. A voluntary recall was not issued until 1971.
Ford Pinto – One of the more notorious autos in U.S. history. The defect at issue involved both the location and installation of the Pinto's fuel tank. Ford's problems with the Pinto were amplified by a national magazine article that accused the automaker of refusing to initiate a recall because it was significantly more costly than simply paying judgments to burn victims. A recall was subsequently initiated in 1978.
Ford – Between 1970 and 1980, Ford built approximately 21 million vehicles with a very serious transmission defect. The defect enabled parked cars to slip easily into reverse. The NHTSA agreed to let Ford send warnings to vehicle owners, rather than issuing a recall. If a formal recall had been ordered, it would have been the largest in U.S. history.
Audi – In the 1980s, the Audi 5000 was prone to uncontrollable and sudden acceleration after shifting out of park. Three separate recalls were issued.
Chevrolet pick-up trucks – Several models of Chevrolet pick-up truck built in 1973 were equipped with 20-gallon fuel tanks on either side of the cab. According to safety experts, due to positioning of the tanks, they were likely to explode and catch fire during a side impact collision. GM chose to pay $51 million to U.S. road/accident safety programs rather than issue a recall.
Ford – Ford was forced to recall 1991 – 2004 cars and trucks due to the faulty cruise control deactivation switches.
Bridgestone-Firestone – Technically, this recall was only to the tires, but because of ongoing headlines over an influx of rollover deaths, Ford was impacted.
Toyota – The most recent case, Toyota was forced to change the pedal design in 9 million cars.
Automakers have come a long way since the Ford Pinto fiasco/disaster. Still, thousands of people are seriously injured or killed each year because of defective vehicles. Some defects cause accidents, others may worsen an accidental injury. Seatbelt or airbag failures, for instance, do not cause accidents, but they can certainly make the consequence of being in one more serious. Automakers must not wait for something serious to happens before correcting a problem or defect that might be potentially dangerous to drivers or others who drivers may encounter in their travels. Many believe that automakers often know about potentially dangerous defects that could be the subject of recalls, but decide that it is more cost effective to deal with any lawsuits than to issue a major recall. Does that kind of thinking still exist in the 21st Century?
Recalls before injuries occur are important pro-safety measures. While automobiles are designed and manufactured by human beings and human beings sometimes make mistakes, automakers can and should do more to ensure that their vehicles are safe before putting them on the market; further, they should, immediately, if not sooner, issue voluntary recalls when they detect a problem. Timely and appropriate recalls save lives and we encourage automakers to issue them promptly and responsibly. However, if automakers are still willing to risk lives to save money, that behavior should be exposed, and perpetrators made to pay, both civilly and criminally.
Mark Bello has thirty-three years experience as a trial lawyer and twelve years as an underwriter and situational analyst in the lawsuit funding industry. He is the owner and founder of Lawsuit Financial Corporation which helps provide legal finance cash flow solutions and consulting when a personal injury plaintiff requires necessities of life litigation funding while litigation is pending. Bello is a Justice Pac member of the American Association for Justice, Sustaining and Justice Pac member of the Michigan Association for Justice, Business Associate of the Florida, Tennessee, and Colorado Associations for Justice, a member of the American Bar Association, the State Bar of Michigan and the Injury Board.