By on June 5, 2015

2014 Jeep Cherokee Limited V6 Exterior-013

Though FCA insists its compliance with the NHTSA over its recalls no longer merits a hearing, the agency will press forward with its order.

The automaker is set to meet the agency for a special hearing July 2 to discuss its handling of 20 recalls covering 11 million vehicles since 2013, Detroit Free Press reports, and was sent a 12-page questionnaire to answer by June 1. FCA sent an 18-page response back to the NHTSA, giving details on its safety record, repair completion rates, and how it will handle safety concerns moving forward.

Thus, FCA believes a meeting the NHTSA is no longer necessary. However, NHTSA representative Gordon Trowbridge said the hearing will go on as planned, explaining the procedure “is a part of the process for determining whether the company has met its obligations.”

The agency itself praised FCA Thursday for its compliance with the order and thoroughness it was undertaken, while the automaker said it has taken a number of actions to improve product safety, including reviews of the recall process and creating a stand-alone organization to help with safety and compliance.

[Photo credit: Alex L. Dykes/The Truth About Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

5 Comments on “FCA Set To Meet NHTSA Over Recalls Despite Desire To Cancel Hearing...”

  • avatar

    Payback for the fuel tank pushback? I’m not sure if that’s the case or if this is just the new normal for an empowered nhtsa.

  • avatar

    No, the first response of the NHTSA is the correct one: It’s part of the process. Even though every element of the response to the questionnaire can be checked independently, the process requires a hearing to go over every item. I spent years working for a state government in transportation. The process checks all the boxes to provide maximum butt-cover. In government, the process is everything.

  • avatar

    Chrysler has put profits over safety.
    Instead or replacing or retrofitting this gas tanks, they took the cheap route and put hooks on back. They didn’t want to spend or lose allot of money.

    • 0 avatar

      They installed trailer hitches which act as guards. It was a reasonable action for what should have been a non-issue. The vehicles exceeded the design standards from when they were built and are safe when compared to their peer group.

      It’s not feasible to relocate the fuel tank, so they did the next best thing.

      • 0 avatar

        Absolutely right! Typical regulatory mentality is to do the physically impossible at any expense so it appears that the “heavy hand” of regulation has saved the day.

        Behind rear axle fuel tanks have existed since the 1940’s and as long as there was a perimeter frame the tank was protected. With today’s platform architecture, it’s clearly not a good idea but FCA’s response was measured an replicates the effect of the missing frame member.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • 285exp: @Lou, people of the left have recently embraced the right of private companies to allow or disallow whatever...
  • ajla: This was my source. I believe it is just “personal computer” ownership in general....
  • FreedMike: I was an EV skeptic as well until I drove one – it was a Model 3 with the dual motor setup. You can...
  • ajla: The biggest trouble with EV trucks right now is that they use very large capacity batteries. A 140kWh-250kWh...
  • FreedMike: Define “adoption” – are you talking about the market share of PCs versus Macs in 2000,...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber