Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

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

      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 [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    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.

    • Disagree 1
    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!

    • Agree 3
    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.

    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.

    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.

    • Agree 2
    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:

    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.

    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.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    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

    • Have traveled extensively by Amtrak. Sadly, I think it will be cut by the incoming administration. If I had your ability to move to Italy, I would leave before sunset.
    • This cherry one is in "cherry" condition, it seems.  There are some 45 photos.  It's somewhere in Massachusetts.  What a boulevardier.  What a beauty. https://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/caprice/1995/vin/1G1BL52W1SR117012/?radius=6000 It seems like people are taking to these Caprice Classics posthumously, given the prices on cleaner ones with lower miles.   This is a base model, given the upholstery, and 200 hp indicates the 4.3 L V8, which is enough to pull this car around and, in 4th gear, return very good highway mileage.  
    • Amtrak is an interesting beast. I have taken the Coast Starlight once, from Sacramento to Portland.  You sleep on it, in your seat, and the Siskiyou Pass is slow going and I believe you can see Shasta.  Even the cheap seats are extremely roomy. I have taken the Pacific Surfliner once, from L.A. Union Station to San Diego.  It's funny that several subway lines meet at L.A. Union and, even during rush hour, it doesn't feel crowded ... because it's L.A. and not NYC. I have taken the Cascades once from Portland to Seattle.  The price was right, the route is clean and green, and the train cars are not as tall and only 1 level. I have taken the train from Fort Lauderdale to Tampa. I don't remember the route's name. It is said to often run late.  It did.  Lauderdale is next to Metrorail.  A real helpful Cuban guy checked you in and a sassy Black guy was the conductor.  The people were the trippiest of any train ride I've been on.  A little edgier and it could have had some Jerry Springer value. When we were kids, my parents would take us cross-country on the Amtrak Santa Fe to Chicago, followed by another train to New York.  The only part I remembered was the eerieness of the Petrified Forest under thunderstorm skies and all the small bodies of water in Missouri.  I was told that there would be water moccasins in there.  We'd allow for 3 to 4 days in the New York area with relatives as a buffer before sailing from the city to Italy.  It was done in reverse if coming the other way.  My parents were a little weird this way. (The apple didn't fall far from the tree.) Two segments on TWA or Pan Am 747s would have shaved a lot of time off this trip! The U.S. is way behind in good train service.  California High Speed Rail is way behind schedule.  They are still working on the Merced-Fresno-Bakersfield segment. The Republicans hate the plan.  It's always better to build these projects sooner than later.  If anything, this project could further growth in California's interior since its coveted coastal metro areas are not feasible options for most people anymore.  Having people trampling along the route and in those inland areas makes for a "multiplier effect." Don't get me started on topics like this.
    • Hyundai says the WAIT is over for the 2025 IONIQ 5 family of SUVs available now at your local dealership. The question to ask is are the available choices including financial able to drive customers into the dealership? To start with, let's look at what Hyundai is offering from a financial standpoint since the biggest complaint is always the price of an EV. Hyundai Financial is offering two ways to help get you into a new IONIQ 5, Financing as low as 0.99% interest, APR for up to 60 months for qualified buyers or leasing as low as $199 per month for 24 months. $3,999.00 due at lease signing, for qualified lesses, excludes registration, tax, title, and license, 10,000 miles per year including the $7,500 EV lease bonus. All this with a starting price of $42,500, EPA estimated range up to 318 miles, power up to 320 hp / 239 kW and Ultra-Fast Charging from 10-80% in 20 minutes. Let's start with the Ultra-Fast charging of 10% to 80% in 20 minutes. The press release photos show a Tesla supercharger, and yet the Hyundai is an 800V/350kW DC Ultra-Fast charging EV that will come with an adapter so that these NACS ported EVs can charge at the CCS charging stations where one can get this 20 min fast charge. Tesla Superchargers have 350kW charging coming but currently only in a few locations, so most of the time you will be using if you charge at a Tesla Supercharging station, a 400V charger, so expect 30 minutes to charge to 80% at 250kW or if you charge at home from 10% to 100% on a 240V level 2 charger in about 7hrs. This is where Hyundai is pushing to give you the right tools as with the 2025 IONIQ 5, Hyundai is also currently including a Complimentary ChargePoint Home Flex Level 2 EV charger or you can take a $400 charging credit good at any ChargePoint station that includes EVgo, Shell Recharge or ChargePoint station. The ChargePoint network is 87,000 chargers across the U.S. Hyundai has made it very clear that the ChargePoint charger is free, but installation is not included. The good point is Hyundai has already connected to have available electricians who can do the installation and they walk you through the process via the Hyundai Home Marketplace app. If the buyer / lease chooses to go with the $400 charging credit with ChargePoint, they have two years to use the credit before it expires. Hyundai offers the IONIQ 5 in multiple trims in what they consider a trifecta family.  IONIQ 5 Family core with Key specifications: SE Standard Range Starting MSRP $42,500 RWD: 245-miles all-electric range 125kW (168 hp) SE Starting MSRP $46,550 RWD: 318-mile all-electric range RWD: 168kW (225 hp) AWD: 290-mile all-electric range AWD 74kW + 165kW (320 hp)  SEL Starting MSRP $49,500 RWD: 318-mile all-electric range RWD: 168kW (225 hp) AWD: 290-mile all-electric range AWD 74kW + 165kW (320 hp)  HDA 2: Highway Driving Assist 2 Wireless device charging Limited Starting MSRP $54,200 RWD: 318-mile all-electric range RWD: 168kW (225 hp) AWD: 290-mile all-electric range AWD 74kW + 165kW (320 hp)  Vision roof Premium Head-up display (HUD) V2L Hyundai IONIQ 5 Standard Gallery IONIQ 5 XRT The dark side per Hyundai's own website of off-road rally racing inspiration. XRT  MSRP to be announced early 2025 18-inch XRT wheels with all-terrain tires 23mm or 1-inch lifted and tuned suspension XRT Front and rear bumpers Blacked-out styling accents Exclusive interior details and badging Hyundai IONIQ 5 XRT Gallery IONIQ 5 N edition The Bolder world performance car of the year for 2024 N edition Starting MSRP $66,100 0-60 mph in 3.25 seconds with N Grin Boost 162 mph top speed. 478kW (641 hp / 568 lb-ft of torque) Lowered 5.6-inch ground clearance with tuned suspension 221 mile range / 84kW battery pack Performance interior and badging Performance features: N Battery Preconditioning N race mode N Pedal mode or special tuned one pedal drive mode N Brake regeneration N Drift Optimizer mode N Torque Distribution N launch Control Mode N Grin Boost mode N e-shift  N Track SOC N Active Sound + Hyundai IONIQ 5 N Gallery The family of Hyundai IONIQ 5 comes with a three year or 36,000-mile warranty and a 10-year/100,000-mile Hybrid/electric battery warranty and 24/7 roadside assistance. With the growing EV charging infrastructure and the addition of the Tesla Supercharging stations network, getting around even on road trips across North America has become so much easier than one would have thought. One can check out more about the Hyundai IONIQ 5 family of autos here: 2025 IONIQ 5 | Electric SUV, Overview | Hyundai USA So this then brings us back to the original question posed, So will the choices and financial incentives drive customers into the dealerships and have them taking home a new EV? Sound off on what you think. View full article
    • @A Horse With No Name If you want to see a VAST array of American Iron, take the Amtrak train from Chicago to Seattle. It was AMAZING to see all the lined up trucks and cars from just about every make lined up in the fields by the train tracks heading west. It is an amazing site to see all the old autos rusting away in the fields as well as some of the abandoned small towns that the trains go by. You could also do the Seattle to Chicago ride. Still amazing sites to behold. Empire Builder Seattle To Chicago    
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

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