By on September 29, 2015

Mark Rosekind Circa December 2014

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles admitted Tuesday it hasn’t accurately reported required early warning report data to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The safety administration said that warning data includes “significant under-reported notices and claims of death, injuries and other information.”

According to the automaker, FCA self-reported its violations to NHTSA as part of its increased scrutiny after a record $105 million fine and consent order that FCA agreed to in July. Under the order, FCA agreed to have an independent monitor review its recalls for at least two years.

As part of the Transportation Recall Enhancement Accountability Documentation (TREAD) Act, FCA is required to file regular reports regarding safety with the administration.

“This represents a significant failure to meet a manufacturer’s safety responsibilities. NHTSA will take appropriate action after gathering additional information on the scope and causes of this failure,” NHTSA Director Mark Rosekind said in a statement.

FCA issued a statement acknowledging its failure to comply and said the issue stems from “a number of problems” with how it gathers the early warning data.

“FCA US takes this issue extremely seriously, and will continue to cooperate with NHTSA to resolve this matter and ensure these issues do not re-occur,” FCA said in a statement.

It’s unclear how many injuries or deaths went unreported or if the deaths are related to any specific recall.

According to AutoGuide, Honda paid a $70 million fine in 2015 for unreported deaths related to the TREAD Act.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

26 Comments on “Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Says They’ve Under-reported Death and Injury Claims...”


  • avatar

    I’ve personally injured a lot of feelings at the Drag strips.

    • 0 avatar
      05lgt

      what’s a grasshopper?

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Lessee, two parts gin, one part brandy, one part Creme de Menthe.

        If this were Government Motors, the Feds would say no big deal, carry on.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          That’s why the feds are looking at the Colorado/Canyon diesel emissions – because they don’t care.

          /facepalm

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            VW will end up paying 3x to 8x as much for deceiving emissions regulations than GM did for killing at least 127 people (actual number likely 5x that) and seriously injuring hundreds more (actual number likely 5x that).

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            DW, do we know how many people have been crushed to death or maimed in their Fiat 500?

            Fiatsler has admitted to underreporting claims.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            I’ve yet to hear that the Fiat 500 is less crashworthy than the typical car in its respective segment, and moreover, I’m not sure what the crashworthiness of a 500 has to do with anything.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “I’m not sure what the crashworthiness of a 500 has to do with anything.”

            It may not but IIRC the 500 is the only new vehicle that Fiatsler has introduced in America.

            Everything else was basically a carry-over from the days of Daimler-Chrysler. And all of them were crashworthy at least up until 2009.

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            @highdesertcat:

            Some of it carried over from DaimlerChrysler and Cerberus. But actually, Fiat Chrysler has released a number of all-new vehicles here in the U.S., including:

            -Fiat 500L/X
            -Jeep Cherokee
            -Jeep Renegade
            -Chrysler 200
            -Dodge Dart
            -Dodge Viper
            -Maserati Quattroporte
            -Maserati Ghibli
            -Alfa Romeo 4C (Coupe and Spyder)
            …and the new Alfa Romeo Guilia will hit our shores shortly

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Was the 8C technically released under FCA, though developed by Fiat-Alpha separately?

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            I’m guessing you mean 4C. I’m not sure, honestly.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Nope – you said 4C already! I mean 8C. It was released right around the time of Chrysler buyout, I think.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Thank you, Kyree. I didn’t know that because I thought that the Cherokee, 200, Dart and Viper were latent Chrysler designs that were pulled off the shelf after the bailout.

            The 500, Renegade and other Italian brands you listed were Fiat properties from the git-go but I didn’t know that they sold in significant numbers in the US to count as “underreported for deaths and injuries”.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          Interesting. To me a grasshopper is one part creme de cacao, one part creme de menthe, and one part cream.

          You can make it a leaping grasshopper by adding one part vodka.

  • avatar
    Dawnrazor

    At this point I’m really beginning to question whether there are ANY automakers who truly behave ethically with regard to occupant safety and environmental regulations (which are also safety issues). Do any of the “good” people at any of these companies have any authority or influence at all?

    I mean, sure, companies of all stripes will always look for an edge and are obviously under tremendous pressure to make money, but it really seems beyond the pale the way some automakers have been so brazenly playing fast and loose with human lives, they genuinely don’t seem to give a damn. I understand that a healthy degree of hubris is necessary when one seeks to climb the ladder, but the level of truly malignant narcissism and overtly sociopathic behavior we have seen from the auto execs is really amazing to behold.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      “A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one.”

    • 0 avatar

      THE PEOPLE – THE CONSUMERS choose what they want with their money. If they want something, they will buy it. If the government passes more and more regulations forcing vehicles to conform, they’ll only drive up prices. Ultimately, manufacturers like Volvo can develop vehicles based on safety, while others develop focused on fuel economy. If a vehicle isn’t safe and doesn’t have good MPG, word will get out and people won’t buy it.

      It’s called THE FREE MARKET.

      Try it.

      Instead of Crony Capitalism.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        It’s not the simple. If everyone drives around in death traps we still all pay for it:

        1) Most obvious – more accidents, more injuries, more deaths, higher insurance premiums. Not just the obvious auto insurance, but life, health, and STD and LTD. That’s more cost to me as a consumer, it is just hidden.

        2) Lost productivity and time due to red asphalt on already congested highways. Poorer quality and a let the consumer decide safety standards means more accidents, more severe accidents, which means more delays, more congestion, and in the backup behind the accident, more accidents. It hurts commerce, trade, and consumers due to lost productivity – which is already a problem.

        3) I as a consumer have a “choice” when I buy a vehicle. But I have a consumer have less choice when I get into a taxi, or on a bus, or other motor vehicle. You suggest as a consumer if the death trap taxi company stops to pick me up, I wave them off, and wait at the loss of my time and productivity until the armored taxi company drives by. What about a bus or say an even better example of no choice, a shuttle bus at the airport. If Dollar cheaps out on their shuttle bus but Avis doesn’t then what. Let’s extend that to car rentals in itself. If I have an Avis rental for a midsize, and I get to the counter and all they have left is the Death Race 3000 special in that class – then what exactly do I do? Walk? Take the Death Race 3000 SE and hope? Or pay another $100 a day for the Baby Buggy Nanny Cam Special?

        The whole idea that regulation bad – no regulation good is kind of mind blowing.

        I for one do not long for the days of metal dashboards (got my lip split open on one as a kid) no seat belts (see previous comment), lack of safety glass, and hundreds if not thousands of other improvements.

      • 0 avatar
        carlisimo

        That only works if consumers have access to good information. If manufacturers under-report issues, then we don’t.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          Asymmetrical information/data (and asymmetrical access to information/data) is a market failure, and you are correct, it is a huge advantage that automakers have relative to even well-educated, studious, diligent consumers.

    • 0 avatar
      aycaramba

      I don’t know about that. This doesn’t seem like a case of an EVIL CORPORATION being evil. Seems more likely that this was a case of poor data management and different parts of the company not talking with each other.

    • 0 avatar
      anomaly149

      http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/04/the-engineers-lament

      Auto companies are large groups of people designing cars that meet a dizzying array of laws around the world (go read a single chapter of FMVSS, you’ll see what I mean) while providing the brand name, price, styling, technology, fuel economy, safety, and drive quality (in rough order of consumer preference) customers want at a car payment of below 500$/month. You don’t get a 45 ton tank for 500$/mo., you get a car.

      And you don’t get supermen, you get normal people using standard engineering processes to try to track down problems and tackle them one at a time.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      Well, it seems a bit pessimistic, but it’s not above any one automaker to choose to release vehicles with dangerous and remediable design faults, at the expense of their customers’ safety or environmental safety. I’m sure there are all sorts of things we don’t know about. That Takata airbag thing was a nice surprise. And for all the trouble GM got into for the ignition switch, I’m sure some of the engineers were silently thanking the gods that no one caught onto the nine or ten *other* fatal problems that are probably present on the Delta I and Kappa vehicles. Ditto for any other automaker.

      Like I said, I wouldn’t put things like this above any automaker, but I guess the best thing you can do as a customer is see which company has the lowest track record of such tricks, and which one seems to have the best real-world safety ratings. I’d feel pretty safe in that new XC90, for example.

  • avatar
    GeneralMalaise

    Automakers are dealing with government activist bureaucracies that would just as soon outlaw automobiles and force us all on the bus.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      We, the people, have to assume responsibility for the representatives we vote into office that allow these activist bureaucracies to flourish.

      But if you think things have been bad up to now with Boehner as Speaker, wait until McCarthy assumes the post. The Tea baggers have already stated they will run him out of town as well.

      These are not happy times in the kingdom. The Tea baggers will not negotiate with O and the ‘crats.

      And we, the people, are responsible for the avalanche of schit that is coming our way.

      What we need is a good war to unite us all like 9/11 did. Then again, we already have O’b*m*’s War (OW!).


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ash78: Talking about Skoda in the US is like talking about the Scirocco in the US. It only works when you’re a...
  • JimZ: I was bored by most of that film, except the part when Bill Murray’s character is in the studio to shoot...
  • bikegoesbaa: “Despite being incredibly nonspecific” It’s broad by necessity. Mobility in this...
  • Nostrathomas: I wonder who the other guy is, because I’m one of the 2 then. I’d love to get my hands on...
  • highdesertcat: “Given all the negativity here for the Fit….” My 18-yo grand daughter from...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States