Democratic Senators Express Safety Concerns With NHTSA and FTC

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Federal officials still favoring corporate interests over consumer safety.

See Senators’ Press Release below:

From: “Johnson, Kayla (Blumenthal)” <Kayla_Johnson@blumenthal.senate.gov> on behalf of “Press (Blumenthal)” <Press@blumenthal.senate.gov>Date: Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 3:03 PMTo: “Press (Blumenthal)” <Press@blumenthal.senate.gov>Subject: BLUMENTHAL, SCHUMER, MARKEY, NELSON, DURBIN: FTC SETTLEMENTS ALLOWING USED CAR DEALERS TO ADVERTISE CARS WITH UNREPAIRED RECALLS AS ‘SAFE’ ARE ANTI-CONSUMER & ANTI-SAFETY

cid:image002.png@01D08CC6.9E16EC20

For Immediate Release

Contact:

Maria McElwain (Blumenthal): 202-224-6452

July 14, 2016

 

BLUMENTHAL, SCHUMER, MARKEY, NELSON, DURBIN: FTC SETTLEMENTS ALLOWING USED CAR DEALERS TO ADVERTISE CARS WITH UNREPAIRED RECALLS AS ‘SAFE’ ARE ANTI-CONSUMER & ANTI-SAFETY

Recent proposed settlements between the FTC and used car dealers allow dealers to continue advertising used cars as certified and “safe” even if those vehicles have unrepaired safety recalls

Senators today called on FTC and NHTSA to redraft the proposed settlements to ensure consumers have the information they need to stay safe

[WASHINGTON, DC] – U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Dick Durbin (D-IL) today called on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to ensure used car dealers cannot advertise a car as ‘safe’ if it has an unrepaired safety recall. Recent proposed settlements between the FTC and used car dealers allow dealers to continue advertising used cars as certified and “safe” even if those vehicles have unrepaired safety recalls. The Senators today called on the FTC and NHTSA to redraft the proposed settlements to ensure consumers have the critical safety information they need when buying a car.

“Congress has long debated whether dealers should be allowed to sell used cars subject to open safety recalls,” the Senators wrote. “We firmly believe that the law should prohibit such sales, as it currently does for new cars with open safety recalls. These proposed settlements wade into this contentious public policy debate, and we believe they would establish an anti-consumer, anti-safety precedent with far-reaching policy implications. Accordingly, we urge you to work together, and in good faith, to leverage your respective agency’s expertise and redraft the proposed settlements so they ensure that consumers receive meaningful information regarding the safety of their potential used vehicle purchases and that public safety is not compromised.

The text of today’s letter is available here and below:

Dear Administrator Rosekind and Chairwoman Ramirez:

We write with serious safety concerns regarding the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) recent proposed settlements with General Motors Company, Jim Koons Management, and Lithia Motors Inc, regarding their failure to adequately disclose unrepaired safety recalls when advertising their used car inspection programs. The proposed settlements would allow dealers to continue to advertise used cars as “safe,” “repaired for safety issues,” and having been rigorously and extensively inspected, including that they are certified—a term that connotes safety—even if those vehicles have unrepaired safety recalls. As such, in their current form, these proposed settlements would fail to address the wrongdoing at hand.

We understand that, at our behest, your two agencies have discussed these proposed settlements. Nevertheless, we remain concerned that this important public safety and public policy matter has not received the heightened scrutiny it deserves. Congress has long debated whether dealers should be allowed to sell used cars subject to open safety recalls. We firmly believe that the law should prohibit such sales, as it currently does for new cars with open safety recalls. These proposed settlements wade into this contentious public policy debate, and we believe they would establish an anti-consumer, anti-safety precedent with far-reaching policy implications. Accordingly, we urge you to work together, and in good faith, to leverage your respective agency’s expertise and redraft the proposed settlements so they ensure that consumers receive meaningful information regarding the safety of their potential used vehicle purchases and that public safety is not compromised.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has publicly stated time and time again that all recalls are safety recalls that need to be fixed. In 2011, a spokeswoman for NHTSA said, “All safety recalls resulting from defects present an unreasonable risk to safety and we believe it is inappropriate to suggest that some defects are not risky enough to require repair.”[1] In a 2013 hearing, former Administrator David Strickland testified, “All NHTSA safety recalls address an unreasonable risk to safety and should not be ignored.”[2] In addition, NHTSA’s current FAQ on vehicle recalls explicitly states, “A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards.”[3] There is no question that any vehicle with an outstanding recall is an unsafe vehicle.

In contrast to NHTSA’s longstanding position, the FTC’s proposed settlements would allow dealers to continue committing the same wrongdoing that was the impetus for the Commission’s actions. Car dealers would still be able to represent that a pre-owned vehicle is “safe,” has been “repaired for safety issues,” and has passed a “rigorous safety inspection” or to label a pre-owned car as being certified even when it is being sold with an unrepaired safety recall. A certified used vehicle with an unrepaired safety recall is inherently misleading. Perhaps more alarming, the proposed settlements would only require dealers to make a blanket statement that their rigorously inspected and certified used vehicles “may be subject to unrepaired recalls.” Consequently, this “disclosure” arguably amounts to nothing more than a legal disclaimer that could absolve dealers from their responsibilities and would likely do little, if anything, to meaningfully convey to consumers the existence of an open recall and dissuade them from purchasing such vehicles due to their safety risks.

The sale of any car with an unrepaired safety recall is a threat to public safety. We support the concerns raised in the comments recently filed by a number of consumer groups that no dealer should be able to advertise that a car is certified or any similar terminology connoting safety, if the car is subject to an outstanding recall.[4] Please report back by August 10, 2016 on how you intend to cooperate and work together to amend the proposed settlements and ensure that car dealers cannot mislead and deceive consumers about the safety of their prospective purchases.

Sincerely,

###



[1] Christopher Jenson, Faced With Recalls, Rental Companies Sometimes Decide to Wait, N.Y. Times Wheels, Apr. 19, 2011, http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/19/faced-with-recalls-rental-companies-sometimes-decide-to-wait/.

[2]Hearing on S. 921, the “Raechel and Jacqueline Houck Safe Rental Car Act of 2013” Before the Subcomm. on Consumer Protection of the S. Comm. Commerce, Science, and Transp., 113th Cong. (2013) (statement of David Strickland, Adm’r, Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., available at https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/492dcbd0-de37-4ea6-9810-8b72d07bb4c0/F2BA003C793F45BA47EB84D6116C92BD.strickland.pdf.

[3] Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., Vehicle Recalls: Frequently Asked Questions, Safercar.gov,https://vinrcl.safercar.gov/vin/faq.jsp (last visited June 10, 2016).

[4] Letter from Consumer Groups to Federal Trade Commission (Feb. 29, 2016), available athttps://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_comments/2016/02/00011-100830.pdf.

Forty years later, this reminds me when, as a citizen, I testified before the FTC in the early 1970’s for posting gasoline octane ratings on gasoline pumps against opposition from the oil industry and the voluntary standards organization ASTM.  The FTC Administrative Law Judge so shocked me by his obvious bias, that I turned to him while on the stand and blurted out: Whose side are you on?
Lou Lombardo

Two U.S. Senators Call on Honda For “Do Not Drive” Recall For Air Bag Rupture Defect

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Please see Press Release below from Senators Blumenthal and Markey.

For Immediate Release

Contact: Maria McElwain (Blumenthal)

(202) 224-6452

Giselle Barry (Markey)

(202) 224-2742

July 26, 2016

 

AFTER NEW DATA REVEALS TAKATA AIR BAG RUPTURE RATES AS HIGH AS 50%, BLUMENTHAL & MARKEY CALL ON HONDA TO IMMEDIATELY ISSUE ‘DO NOT DRIVE’ ORDER FOR VEHICLES WITH THESE AIR BAGS

[WASHINGTON, DC] – After new data revealed that Takata air bags in certain Honda and Acura vehicles have a 50 percent chance of rupture in a crash, U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Edward J. Markey (D-MA) are calling on Honda to immediately issue a “do not drive” order to owners vehicles with these dangerous air bags. In a letter to Honda today, the Senators urged Honda to take the strongest possible action to ensure that vehicles with such air bags are immediately removed from the road before more people are killed. They also called on the company to take additional measures to make it as easy as possible for owners of these vehicles to have this dangerous defect repaired, without having to drive the vehicle to a dealership.

“Honda has a responsibility to clearly communicate the danger to consumers so that they understand the grave risks at hand,” the Senators wrote. “A ‘do not drive’ instruction should be conspicuously displayed on any recall notices, as well as this new test data so owners are informed that in the event of a crash, there is a 50 percent change that the airbag will violently explode. This new test data, coupled with the fact that eight of the 10 confirmed U.S. fatalities due to defective Takata airbags were in this subset of vehicles, make it abundantly obvious that a ‘do not drive’ instruction is absolutely warranted.”

The Senators first expressed concerns with NHTSA’s limited recalls and testing of Takata airbags in October 2014. They have also called on Takata to recall all vehicles with ammonium nitrate-based airbags, and expressed serious concern about the pace of Takata recalls and repairs. Earlier this year, the senators sent a letter urging President Obama to recall every vehicle with airbags using ammonium nitrate as their propellant, and to use “every tool at his disposal” to accelerate the repair of all vehicles with potentially-lethal Takata airbags.

A copy of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Mr. Mikoshiba:

In light of new test data released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) revealing that certain model-year 2001-2003 Honda and Acura vehicles show rupture rates as high as 50 percent in a crash, we write to urge you to immediately issue a “do not drive” order to owners of this subset of vehicles. This data warrants the strongest possible action that a manufacturer can take to ensure that vehicles with such air bags are immediately removed from the road before more people are killed.

As Department of Transportation Secretary Foxx stated following the release of this news, “Folks should not drive these vehicles unless they are going straight to a dealer to have them repaired immediately, free of charge.”[1] In the wake of this announcement, we expected Honda to echo the Secretary’s remarks and quickly follow-up with a “do not drive” instruction to owners of this subset of vehicles.

We are extremely disappointed that Honda does not appear to have taken this important step. Honda has a responsibility to clearly communicate the danger to consumers so that they understand the grave risks at hand. A “do not drive” instruction should be conspicuously displayed on any recall notices, as well as this new test data so owners are informed that in the event of a crash, there is a 50 percent chance that the airbag will violently explode. This new test data, coupled with the fact that eight of the 10 confirmed U.S. fatalities due to defective Takata airbags were in this subset of vehicles, make it abundantly obvious that a “do not drive” instruction is absolutely warranted.

Additionally, we call on you to take additional measures to make it as easy as possible for owners of these vehicles to have this dangerous defect repaired, without having to drive the vehicle to a dealership. Considering NHTSA has directed consumers “to not drive these vehicles,”[2] we suggest Honda make available mobile mechanics who can travel to where an owner lives or works to conduct the necessary repair; or free towing to the closest repair facility, so that owners will not have to drive these high risk vehicles. As you know, there remains 313,000 vehicles with this very dangerous defect unrepaired, and we believe making such additional options available will be critical to achieving a 100 percent recall completion rate.

We urge you to immediately issue a “do not drive” instruction order, on at least this subset of cars with airbags exhibiting substantially higher risk to life. Please let us know by July 31, 2016, what actions you have taken to this end, as well as any other actions you have taken to ensure vehicles with these especially high risk air bags are immediately removed from the roads.

Sincerely,

Ford Recall Model of Placing Money Before Customer Safety and Satisfaction

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Forbes has an excellent report on Ford Windstar recall that shows how Ford – and NHTSA – did not put safety ahead of corporate short term money.

Forbes has done its readers, company and government safety engineers, and hopefully some corporate executives a service by showing how companies should not put short term gains ahead of safety and customer satisfaction.

“The danger that caused the recall is supposed to be eliminated, not mitigated, said Joan Claybrook, former head of Public Citizen who was in charge of the N.H.T.S.A. from 1977 to 1981.  She contends the brackets are not a “lawful repair.”

There’s also a problem with charging for the axle, even if it is a discounted price, because federal regulations require a free repair says Clarence Ditlow, the executive director of The Center for Auto Safety.

The safety agency doesn’t have a problem with Ford’s approach.

“The support brackets that were the recall remedy, eliminated the safety-related consequence if they were properly installed,” N.H.T.S.A. spokesman Bryan Thomas said.”

Readers can check the April 2016 issue of Consumer Reports rankings of “Which Brands Make the Best Cars” and find Ford ranks 16th.  Ford ranks 16th!!!

Reminds me of the NHTSA safety engineer that I worked with and had a great reputation.  He bought a Windstar and was very sorry he did so.

This inequality of safety vs. money and power must change for the better to end vehicle violence.
Lou Lombardo

____________________Lou Lombardowww.CareForCrashVictims.com

USA Today Carries Safety Advocates Views on Tesla Fatal Crash

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

USA Today reports:“It wasn’t ready to go out on the road,” said Rosemary Shahan, president of the advocacy group Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety about Tesla’s Autopilot. “If you have a system called Autopilot that cannot distinguish between the side of a truck and the open sky, it’s not ready.”….“The tragic Tesla crash shows again the need for aggressive oversight of an industry that has implemented new systems before they are truly tried and tested, ” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn, in a statement. “Whatever the promise of self-driving cars, automakers have failed at even simpler technologies, like ignition switches and air bags.”….

“No manufacturer should ever put a beta system on the road and make consumers the test drivers,” said Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety. Other automakers put millions of miles on major safety systems before they are deemed ready for prime time, he says, including many hours at their own test tracks.

Ditlow said NHTSA’s lack of a regulation on self-driving car features amounts to a “loophole” that Tesla exploited.

“If you look at any car, there’s a certification label that says ‘this vehicle meets all applicable safety standards’ and you can’t sell it unless you certify that it does,” Ditlow said. In this case, there were none of those standards in place.”

See http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2016/07/05/concern-over-tesla-death-close-self-driving-loophole/86726396/

____________________Lou Lombardowww.CareForCrashVictims.com

Fwd A Grandma To Be Heard And Heeded

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Marianne Karth, who lost two daughters in a crash, wrote:

My grandson just turned 10 years-old. Lately I’ve been noticing little things that show me how much he is maturing and taking responsibility. And I keep thinking how proud AnnaLeah and Mary would be of him. They both spent so much time with him from the time he was born.

gertie 264Minolta DSC

One thing Marcus asked me about the other day was when he saw my copy of the book Car Safety Wars by Michael Lemov. Car safety wars, he asked?  So I had to try and explain it. I asked him what a war is and what happens in a war. And we talked about how it’s a war because while we’re “fighting for” some things to make cars and roads safer, other people are fighting against them.

Imagine.

See http://annaleahmary.com/2016/07/casualties-of-the-car-safety-wars/

And Marianne Karth asks:“So why is protection from vehicle violence not listed on the Democratic Party Platform?

The 2016 Democratic Party Platform is quite lengthy and I am sure contains many things of interest to many Americans. But the federal government has one role that is unquestionable: to protect its citizens.

. . . the right to protection was not merely a matter of constitutional theory, but a doctrine with concrete legal meaning. In the common law tradition, the protection of the law implied both the recognition of fundamental rights by law, and the enforcement of such rights by government. The paradigmatic instance was the government’s duty to protect individuals against violence. By the middle of the nineteenth century, this duty was understood to include not only the enforcement of civil and criminal law with respect to injuries already committed, but also the responsibility to prevent violence before it occurred. THE FIRST DUTY OF GOVERNMENT: PROTECTION, LIBERTY AND THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

So why is the protection of American citizens from vehicle violence not listed on the Democratic Party Platform? 2016 Democratic Party Platform July 21, 2016″

Violence

See  http://annaleahmary.com/2016/07/so-why-is-protection-from-vehicle-violence-not-listed-on-the-democratic-party-platform/

Marianne’s questions are aimed at making us all safer.  She knows the tragedy of vehicle violence first hand.
I trace the preventability of her tragedy to the first days of the Reagan Administration when NHTSA work on truck underride guards was demoted in the name of “deregulation”.  Reagan appointed Raymond Peck, a former coal industry lobbyist.  NHTSA staff were demoted and reduced by 33% or about 300 people out the door (Now an industry Revolving Door).  And the airbag rule was rescinded.  It took a better Supreme Court than we have today to overturn the Reagan rescission with the words “For nearly a decade, the automobile industry has waged the regulatory equivalent of war against the air bag and lost — the inflatable restraint was proved sufficiently  effective.”  Story at Car Safety Wars, p. 163. Seehttps://www.amazon.com/Car-Safety-Wars-Technology-Politics/dp/1611477476/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1469371675&sr=1-1&keywords=car+safety+wars
Disclosure:  I had the honor, working under Joan Claybrook, to have a role in writing and editing the 1980 NHTSA Report “Automobile Occupant Crash Protection, Progress Report No. 3” that the Supreme Court cited.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/1980fullreport.pdf
Hopefully Marianne’s  writings will help our future be safer.
Lou Lombardo

____________________Lou Lombardowww.CareForCrashVictims.com

____________________Lou Lombardowww.CareForCrashVictims.com

White House Petition To End Preventable Crash Fatalities

Dear Care For Crash Victims Community Members:

Marianne Karth has started a petition we all can sign.

In his final months as President, there is a chance we can get President Obama to act on the people’s behalf.

Please see, sign, and share the Karth family petition at:http://annaleahmary.com/2016/07/whitehouse-gov-petition-end-preventable-crash-fatalitiesappoint-natl-traffic-safety-ombudsman/

“Every average day in the U.S., 100 of our loved ones die in crashes and 400 more suffer serious crash injuries–along with $2 Billion in crash losses.

We propose that the President establish an independent Office of National Traffic Safety Ombudsman to be an advocate to eliminate preventable crash deaths and serious injuries.

We need someone who has a mandate to advocate on behalf of the victims, someone who is not compromised by competing interests. We call on the President to take this action to protect our families and loved ones from one of the leading causes of preventable death.

Traffic Safety has not been a national priority. Without this Presidential action, too many lives will continue to be lost to vehicle violence.”

The Karth family has already been successful in obtaining 20,000 signatures on a previous safety petition.  Let’s help with this too.

Lou

____________________Lou Lombardowww.CareForCrashVictims.com