Fiat Chrysler Faces Record $105M Fine for Recall Lapses(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Fiat Chrysler Faces Record $105M Fine for Recall Lapses
http://www.wsj.com/articles/regulators-close-to-hitting-fiat-chrysler-with-record-105-million-fine-for-recall-lapses-1437874509
9 comments
Or maybe they simply have a lot of problems out in the open right now. Coincidence is usually a better reason than conspiracy.
Urgh. Paywall.
Sorry about that.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/26/us-fiat-chrysler-r...
Or maybe:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/26/us-fiat-chrysler-r...
Or maybe:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
WSJ (non-paywall) link: http://on.wsj.com/1KqRrF4
Paywalled. This is more or less the same content, different author though: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/business/fiat-chrysler-fac...
For WSJ I've taken to selecting the headline, then right clicking and searching for it. There's usually any number of other media covering anything they do.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=Fiat+Chrysler+Faces+Record+%2...
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=Fiat+Chrysler+Faces+Record+%2...
Or $75 per car.
The NYT piece says they will have to buy back certain models and provide above market trade ins on others, I believe those actions are separate from the fines.
Just to be clear, these fines are for failure to execute prior recalls in a timely manner, not for the recent Jeep hacking recall, correct?
From behind the paywall:
"The government penalties come days after regulators separately
started probing Fiat Chrysler’s handling of recalled vehicles
with possible cybersecurity flaws, after hackers commandeered
controls of a moving Jeep. Those vehicles aren’t included in the
settlement expected to be disclosed in the coming week."Yes. It will be interesting to see what if anything comes from the security/hacking issues (or if there is even a law thy can use) but I'm sure that will take a fair bit of time.
NHTSA would first have to rule that it is a safety defect, as discussed here:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/Vehicle+Safety/Recalls+&+Defects/Motor+...
(Note that I've linked page 2 of 6, the discussion of what they consider a safety defect is there and not highly dependent on the previous page)
I guess Fiat Chrysler would fight such a ruling in court. They aren't going to be fined for executing a voluntary recall.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/Vehicle+Safety/Recalls+&+Defects/Motor+...
(Note that I've linked page 2 of 6, the discussion of what they consider a safety defect is there and not highly dependent on the previous page)
I guess Fiat Chrysler would fight such a ruling in court. They aren't going to be fined for executing a voluntary recall.
While there are laws being made[1] to make unwanted car hacking illegal (or explicitly illegal), I don't think there is anything specific in place to peg liability automotive companies beyond the usual safety negligence charges.
[1] http://www.newsweek.com/your-car-can-be-hacked-and-two-senat...
[1] http://www.newsweek.com/your-car-can-be-hacked-and-two-senat...
Chrysler is a curse. It gets handed around to owner after owner and brings them nothing but misery. Shoot it and be done with it.
Federal regulators are close to hitting Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV with a record $105 million fine for recall lapses covering millions of vehicles, said people familiar with the matter, adding to mounting scrutiny of the auto maker’s safety practices.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is expected slap the Italian-U.S. company with the financial penalty and assign an independent monitor to audit the company’s recall processes for an extended period as part of a sweeping settlement, the people said. In some cases, the auto maker will agree to repurchase recalled vehicles, the people added.
Fiat Chrysler is expected to sign a consent order agreeing to the penalties, which could be unveiled as soon as Monday, the people said. Fiat Chrysler will have an opportunity to recoup some of the financial penalty if it meets certain conditions, the people said.
The government penalties target lapses spanning nearly two dozen recalls affecting more than 11 million Fiat Chrysler vehicles, including older Jeeps with rear gasoline tanks linked to numerous fatal fires.
The fines are tied to legal violations in an array of areas, including misleading and obstructing regulators; inadequate and lagging repairs; and failing to alert car owners to recalls in a timely manner, the people said. The financial penalties aren’t tied to specific recalls, they said.
With 1.56 million recalled Jeeps linked to deadly fires, the agency has accused Fiat Chrysler of lagging in installing trailer hitches on the backs of vehicles for added protection in lower-speed collisions. Fiat Chrysler has said vehicle owners are often unwilling to get repairs despite many outreaches from the company.
Under terms of the settlement with regulators, Fiat Chrysler is expected to start offering cash to Jeep owners to encourage them to go to dealerships for repairs or additional money on top of the value of their vehicle if they decide to trade it in, the people said. The Jeep Grand Cherokee and Liberty sport-utility vehicles covered under the recall have model years ranging from 1993 to 2007.
Fiat Chrysler’s executive in charge of vehicle safety and regulatory compliance earlier this month outlined measures the company has taken to improve its handling of safety problems and said the auto maker could have handled recalls better and that NHTSA officials raised legitimate concerns.
The government penalties come days after regulators separately started probing Fiat Chrysler’s handling of recalled vehicles with possible cybersecurity flaws, after hackers commandeered controls of a moving Jeep. Those vehicles aren’t included in the settlement expected to be disclosed in the coming week.
The fines against Fiat Chrysler top the $70 million the government assessed against Honda Motor Co. earlier this year for lapses in reporting possible safety problems and a $35 million fine paid by General Motors Co. in 2014 for failing to alert regulators in a timely manner to a faulty ignition switch now linked to more than 120 deaths.
Car makers and auto-safety regulators have faced persistent criticism on Capitol Hill and from elsewhere for problems handling safety defects. GM and Takata Corp. of Japan face Justice Department probes for deadly flaws with ignition switches and rupturing air bags, respectively. Auto-safety regulators, meanwhile, have adopted a more aggressive posture after facing criticism for failing to spot safety problems.
Regulators at a hearing earlier this month outlined widespread transgressions at Fiat Chrysler, accusing the auto maker of misleading and obstructing the government on its handling of recalls. The lapses included failing to properly alert car owners to recalls, botched repairs and taking too long to fix vehicles. according to regulators.
Other scrutinized recalls include Fiat Chrysler vehicles with Takata air bags and others with ignition switches that can slip out of the run position. Regulators are also probing Fiat Chrysler vehicles that continued catching fire after inadequate repairs to headliner wiring; inadvertent air-bag deployments that continued after attempted fixes; and delays addressing vehicles with defective left tie rod assemblies.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is expected slap the Italian-U.S. company with the financial penalty and assign an independent monitor to audit the company’s recall processes for an extended period as part of a sweeping settlement, the people said. In some cases, the auto maker will agree to repurchase recalled vehicles, the people added.
Fiat Chrysler is expected to sign a consent order agreeing to the penalties, which could be unveiled as soon as Monday, the people said. Fiat Chrysler will have an opportunity to recoup some of the financial penalty if it meets certain conditions, the people said.
The government penalties target lapses spanning nearly two dozen recalls affecting more than 11 million Fiat Chrysler vehicles, including older Jeeps with rear gasoline tanks linked to numerous fatal fires.
The fines are tied to legal violations in an array of areas, including misleading and obstructing regulators; inadequate and lagging repairs; and failing to alert car owners to recalls in a timely manner, the people said. The financial penalties aren’t tied to specific recalls, they said.
With 1.56 million recalled Jeeps linked to deadly fires, the agency has accused Fiat Chrysler of lagging in installing trailer hitches on the backs of vehicles for added protection in lower-speed collisions. Fiat Chrysler has said vehicle owners are often unwilling to get repairs despite many outreaches from the company.
Under terms of the settlement with regulators, Fiat Chrysler is expected to start offering cash to Jeep owners to encourage them to go to dealerships for repairs or additional money on top of the value of their vehicle if they decide to trade it in, the people said. The Jeep Grand Cherokee and Liberty sport-utility vehicles covered under the recall have model years ranging from 1993 to 2007.
Fiat Chrysler’s executive in charge of vehicle safety and regulatory compliance earlier this month outlined measures the company has taken to improve its handling of safety problems and said the auto maker could have handled recalls better and that NHTSA officials raised legitimate concerns.
The government penalties come days after regulators separately started probing Fiat Chrysler’s handling of recalled vehicles with possible cybersecurity flaws, after hackers commandeered controls of a moving Jeep. Those vehicles aren’t included in the settlement expected to be disclosed in the coming week.
The fines against Fiat Chrysler top the $70 million the government assessed against Honda Motor Co. earlier this year for lapses in reporting possible safety problems and a $35 million fine paid by General Motors Co. in 2014 for failing to alert regulators in a timely manner to a faulty ignition switch now linked to more than 120 deaths.
Car makers and auto-safety regulators have faced persistent criticism on Capitol Hill and from elsewhere for problems handling safety defects. GM and Takata Corp. of Japan face Justice Department probes for deadly flaws with ignition switches and rupturing air bags, respectively. Auto-safety regulators, meanwhile, have adopted a more aggressive posture after facing criticism for failing to spot safety problems.
Regulators at a hearing earlier this month outlined widespread transgressions at Fiat Chrysler, accusing the auto maker of misleading and obstructing the government on its handling of recalls. The lapses included failing to properly alert car owners to recalls, botched repairs and taking too long to fix vehicles. according to regulators.
Other scrutinized recalls include Fiat Chrysler vehicles with Takata air bags and others with ignition switches that can slip out of the run position. Regulators are also probing Fiat Chrysler vehicles that continued catching fire after inadequate repairs to headliner wiring; inadvertent air-bag deployments that continued after attempted fixes; and delays addressing vehicles with defective left tie rod assemblies.
I have a 2013 Jeep Wrangler, that while unrelated to the hacking incident, is quite disturbing in its own right. An Atlanta TV station did a story about the TIPM (Totally Integrated Power Module): http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/channel-2-investigates-...
In my case, the TIPM has failed -- completely -- twice. The first time, I lucked out -- it happend while I was in my condo's parking lot. The Jeep completely died -- engine shut off, power windows didn't work, lights, radio, everything dead. If this had happened on the freeway during the 40-mile freeway drive I was about to do..yikes.
The second time the part failed was overnight. I was awoken at 3 am by my Jeep with its reverse lights on, the horn intermittently beeping, and the headlights and windshield wipers coming on. I could not get it to stop until I disconnected the battery. In both cases the dealership replaced the TIPM. I asked specifically if the part number showed that they had "improved" the part -- but no. It's the same.
There's even been a lawsuit filed to get them to do something about it:
http://www.autosafety.org/cas-calls-nhtsa-investigation-chry...
Long story short -- if you are in the market for a Jeep, PLEASE make sure you are fully informed about the TIPM situation.
In my case, the TIPM has failed -- completely -- twice. The first time, I lucked out -- it happend while I was in my condo's parking lot. The Jeep completely died -- engine shut off, power windows didn't work, lights, radio, everything dead. If this had happened on the freeway during the 40-mile freeway drive I was about to do..yikes.
The second time the part failed was overnight. I was awoken at 3 am by my Jeep with its reverse lights on, the horn intermittently beeping, and the headlights and windshield wipers coming on. I could not get it to stop until I disconnected the battery. In both cases the dealership replaced the TIPM. I asked specifically if the part number showed that they had "improved" the part -- but no. It's the same.
There's even been a lawsuit filed to get them to do something about it:
http://www.autosafety.org/cas-calls-nhtsa-investigation-chry...
Long story short -- if you are in the market for a Jeep, PLEASE make sure you are fully informed about the TIPM situation.
Some interesting discussion on the TIPM, complete with pictures, is here:
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f96/oem-tipm-study-1200238/
I wonder how much Chrysler saved by putting so much functionality into one "god object", compared to what it costs them to replace all the failing ones. Also would like to know the exact causes of these failures; the thread linked above suggests bad solid-state relays, which would probably fail regardless of whether they were all put into one TIPM or scattered in separate modules throughout the vehicle.
Edit: in that thread someone experienced the wiper switch behaving like an inverted ignition switch, and another user had a fire related to headlight wiring that apparently is not fused(!) on these models.
I wonder how much Chrysler saved by putting so much functionality into one "god object", compared to what it costs them to replace all the failing ones. Also would like to know the exact causes of these failures; the thread linked above suggests bad solid-state relays, which would probably fail regardless of whether they were all put into one TIPM or scattered in separate modules throughout the vehicle.
Edit: in that thread someone experienced the wiper switch behaving like an inverted ignition switch, and another user had a fire related to headlight wiring that apparently is not fused(!) on these models.
I recently bought a two year old car. I was thinking of a Patriot or GC.
I didn't buy it because:
- Everyone that I told I was thinking about this immediately said that Jeep reliability is crap. I didn't do my own research on that, but that this is apparently a front of mind meme was disturbing.
- I had recently read about the gas tank problem. It's mounted aft of the axle. You can see it if you drive just off the rear quarter of a jeep on the highway.
- I also read about Chrysler's handling of the tank problem. Their solution is to mount a tow bar on the vehicle. I guess that's about the best they can do, you're not going to move the tank on an existing vehicle.
- But, they aren't going to do this for all affected vehicles. Because some of them are too rusted out to accept the tow bar. This is apparently in violation of the rules: if you recall a car, you have to fix all of them.
I didn't buy it because:
- Everyone that I told I was thinking about this immediately said that Jeep reliability is crap. I didn't do my own research on that, but that this is apparently a front of mind meme was disturbing.
- I had recently read about the gas tank problem. It's mounted aft of the axle. You can see it if you drive just off the rear quarter of a jeep on the highway.
- I also read about Chrysler's handling of the tank problem. Their solution is to mount a tow bar on the vehicle. I guess that's about the best they can do, you're not going to move the tank on an existing vehicle.
- But, they aren't going to do this for all affected vehicles. Because some of them are too rusted out to accept the tow bar. This is apparently in violation of the rules: if you recall a car, you have to fix all of them.
Relability: When it comes to Jeeps their super reliable phase was pretty much pre-2007. Mechanical was reliable because it was all old proven technology.(Thus, very outdated too.) Electrical was very good 1997 through around 2004. AMC based electrical before 1997 was just okay. The AMC electrical had numerous fundamental design issues with the wiring harnesses that made them prone to killing systems if a ground wire was disrupted.
The Gas Tank Thing: The Cherokee (XJ) was designed in the 1980's and the Grand Cherokee (ZJ/WJ) was based on the Cherokee (XJ) even though it debuted in 1993. Locating the gas tank behind the axle in the rear was fairly standard back then. I really can not blame Chrysler when they get defensive about it since that was how vehicles were being built in that time period. They had even switched to double walled plastic tanks by early 1990's which are much less prone to being ruptured. Adding a tow hitch can help, but only other practical solution is to toss on a skid plate.
Even the Wrangler had behind the axle mounted gas tanks through 2006. Both the Wrangler (TJ) and Cherokee (XJ) are not part of the gas tank recall even though they both could be similarly affected.
The Gas Tank Thing: The Cherokee (XJ) was designed in the 1980's and the Grand Cherokee (ZJ/WJ) was based on the Cherokee (XJ) even though it debuted in 1993. Locating the gas tank behind the axle in the rear was fairly standard back then. I really can not blame Chrysler when they get defensive about it since that was how vehicles were being built in that time period. They had even switched to double walled plastic tanks by early 1990's which are much less prone to being ruptured. Adding a tow hitch can help, but only other practical solution is to toss on a skid plate.
Even the Wrangler had behind the axle mounted gas tanks through 2006. Both the Wrangler (TJ) and Cherokee (XJ) are not part of the gas tank recall even though they both could be similarly affected.
Took my 2003 Honda Civic into the dealership for an oil change once, afterwords it starting having electrical issues.. the entire car would shut off at seemingly random times. No stearing (not just loss of power steering, but no steering at all), foot break does not work. This happened momentarily several times while on a freeway.
Turns out it was only a loose battery terminal.
Turns out it was only a loose battery terminal.
When media covers a new model it's Jeep. When they cover a recall it's Fiat Chrysler. Funny, isn't it?
It is as if some interest is trying to manipulate any possible sell of or merger of Fiat Chrystler.[1]
[1] http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/motors/fiat-s-sergi...