A manufacturing defect affecting airbags will have a small number of 2008-2017 Buick Enclave and 2013-2017 Chevrolet Traverse owners returning to their dealerships for repairs.

In July 2015 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE15-027) into ARC Automotive Inc. (ARC) air bag inflators after receiving reports about two injury incidents involving a driver air bag inflator rupture. One incident involved a 2002 Chrysler Town & Country that had a dual-stage air bag inflator and the other involved a 2004 Kia Optima with a single-stage inflator. Both air bag inflators were manufactured by ARC.

During the evaluation the ODI gathered information from ARC about which air bag module manufacturers used the subject ARC inflators and requested information from the identified air bag module manufacturers about which vehicle manufacturers used modules with the subject ARC inflators. That process identified additional affected vehicle manufacturers, including General Motors.

According to the defect report, GM will be recalling certain 2008–2017 Buick Enclave and 2013-2017 Chevrolet Traverse vehicles for front driver airbag inflators which may have been installed either as original equipment or as part of a replacement driver airbag module during service. These airbags could contain a manufacturing defect that may result in an inflator rupture during deployment. If the inflator ruptures it could cause metal fragments to pass through the airbag and into the vehicle, potentially causing injury or death to vehicle occupants.

Dealers will inspect and replace the driver’s air bag module as necessary. GM’s number for this recall is N212349040 and the NHTSA campaign number is 21V-782.

General Motors has decided that a defect relating to vehicle safety exists in certain 2021-2022 Chevrolet Silverado 2500/3500 and 2021-2022 GMC Sierra 2500/3500 trucks.

GM first became aware of the problem in September 2021 when two 2021 GMC Sierra 2500 vehicles experienced under hood fires at the assembly plant. Both vehicles were parked outside awaiting shipment and had been exposed to heavy rainfall the day before. Using X-ray and CT scans on the vehicles showed a gap between the bolt head and brake pressure modulator valve (BPMV), indicating that the assembly had not been properly sealed to prevent water intrusion. Both vehicles had been subject to temporary production process changes that involved offline replacement of the electronic brake control module (EBCM), which is a sub-assembly of the BPMV. Analysis of the vehicles also found that the fire started in this area.

According to the defect report, bolts attaching the BPMV may have not been properly tightened, failing to create the seal between two sub-assemblies that is intended to prevent water intrusion. If water becomes trapped in the BPMV, it could result in a short circuit, which could lead to an under hood fire.

Owners of these trucks are advised to park outside and away from other structures until the recall repair is completed. Dealers will correct the problem by replacing the BPMV assembly.. GM’s number for this recall is N212349181 and the NHTSA campaign number is 21V-758.

In September 2019, the NHTSA was asked to initiate an investigation into certain Tesla Model S and Model X vehicles that received a revised battery management software update in one or more over-the-air updates from Tesla, beginning in May 2019. The petitioner based his request on vehicle fires that took place worldwide and over the air software updates Tesla made to the Battery Management System (BMS) of certain Tesla vehicles that resulted in loss of available vehicle mileage range and increased charging duration’s.

The five non-crash fires referenced in the petition include two fires that occurred in China in early 2019 involving vehicles that:

  • Had recently completed Supercharging sessions.
  • Were at a high state-of-charge (SOC) of the HV battery.
  • Were parked with the battery cooling system shutoff.
  • Had histories of high-stress usage for the HV batteries.

The three fires that occurred outside China did not involve the same patterns regarding vehicle state and charging history. The two fires that occurred in the United States include one involving a vehicle with no Supercharging history that was driving when the fire occurred and another in which the origin of the fire was external to the HV battery. The fifth fire, which also originated external to the HV battery, involved a vehicle in Germany that had been parked at a low SOC for an extended period. To date, incidents of fires involving parked vehicles with recent Supercharging and histories of high-stress use have only been observed in China, where high-stress use factors appear to be more common.

Given the absence of any incidents in the United States related to fast charging, and the absence of any such incidents globally since May 2019, the petition has been denied. The denial of this petition does not stop the Agency from taking further action if future findings find that a safety defect exists based on additional information received. NHTSA could initiate a recall if they find a defect in the design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle that presents an unreasonable risk to safety.

The NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation have opened an investigation to whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal air bag inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will include information on the Takata production processes, a study of inflators in the field, lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them.

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate (PSAN) propellant – propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants.

“Takata have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts are ongoing and to date, none have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L. “

NHTSA Action Number: EA21002

Click Here to see the complete list of vehicles involved in this investigation.

In July 2021 General Motors (GM) opened an investigation into fuel pump failures after a review of warranty data from certain 2021 GM full size SUVs. The data showed that there was a higher than expected rate of fuel pump control modules replaced for vehicles built within certain months. As part of the investigation, GM looked at the returned parts replaced in warranty claims and found the condition was caused by a manufacturing issue at the Tier 3 supplier.

According to the defect report, certain 2021 Cadillac, Chevrolet and GMC full size SUVs may have been manufactured with fuel pump power control modules which contain a defect that can cause the fuel pump to fail or operate intermittently. When this happens, fuel flow to the engine will be interrupted and the vehicle could unexpectedly stall.

The Vehicles Affected Include:
2021 Cadillac Escalade
2021 Cadillac Escalade ESV
2021 Chevrolet Suburban
2021 Chevrolet Tahoe
2021 GMC Yukon
2021 GMC Yukon XL

Owners receiving notices will be asked to return to their dealers to have the fuel pump power control module replaced. GM’s number for this recall is N212332040 and the NHTSA campaign number is 21V-739.

In December 2020, Fox Factory received its first reports that certain GM vehicles fitted with Tuscany lift kits could experienced partial or complete wheel separation while in operation. Fox began reviewing field data and started a safety investigation to assess the failure mode, the failure rate and potential causes of the problem. By September 2021 Fox identified 28 warranty claims and field or service reports potentially relating to this issue and decided to initiate a voluntary safety recall.

According to the defect report, “Accelerated wear on the vehicle OEM installed ball joint in the front upper control arm can result in premature ball joint failure and a front wheel separation while the vehicle is in motion .”

Failure of a ball joint in a front upper control arm may be preceded by noise and / or a feeling of clicking in the steering, abnormal front tire wear and abnormal steering.

The Vehicles Affected Include:
2019-2021 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
2019-2021 GMC Sierra 1500

New Tuscany front upper control arms will be installed in place of the GM front upper control arms. The fix will include upgraded front upper control arms with stronger and less corrosion sceptible ball joints. NHTSA Campaign Number: 21V718.

Our client purchased a new 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee.

The first visit for service was on January 8, 2018 because the regeneration light was turning on and off and they needed to replace the key battery.

The next visit was on February 5th as the vehicle was still regenerating and having fumes coming into the cabin. The vehicle had regenerated 4 times in less than 1000 miles.

On May 22nd the Exhaust regeneration message came on the dash.

The Jeep Grand Cherokee was back in the shop on June 5th because after performing an oil change the vehicle was being prompted to regenerate after 150 miles.

Our client was back at the authorized dealership on September 18th for service as the Check engine light was on.

November 3rd the check engine light was on again, the throttle light was on and the exhaust filter was 100% full.

The last visit was on November 27th and the check engine light was on again and the message, “The exhaust filter is nearly full” came on.

It was at this point that our client looked into the California Lemon Law and called our firm, The Law Office of Barry L. Edzant and spoke with the attorney. He requested that some documents be emailed over for his review. After discussing the potential Lemon Law case with the gentleman, he decided to sign a retainer agreement.

A demand letter was sent to FCA, USA to buy back the 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee under the California Lemon Law. FCA, USA decided to buy it back and reimbursed the client for their down payment, any payments made thus far, registration and pay off the balance of the loan minus a usage fee the manufacturer is entitled to under the Lemon Law. They also paid attorney fees.

Our client was very happy with the buyback. If you are having problems with your vehicle and think you may be driving a lemon, please contact our offices at 888-395-3666.

Our client purchased a 2017 Jeep Grand Cherokee.

On September 28, 2018 he took his Jeep Grand Cherokee in for service because the A/C was not blowing cold air.

On March 19, 2019 he brought it back to the dealership because the A/C was not blowing cold air again.

On June 14th it was back at the dealership because there was a Freon or a chemical type smell upon turning the A/C on. The A/C was also making a loud hissing sound and would not get cooler as the day got hotter. Sometimes the A/C would not even turn on at all.

July 15th he brought it back to the dealership because the A/C would stop working after about an hour and there was still a hissing sound coming out of it.

It was at this point that he called our office for a free consultation with California Lemon Law Attorney, Barry L Edzant. After speaking with Mr. Edzant he sent in some paperwork to be reviewed. He signed on as a client and a demand letter was sent in to FCA, USA.

FCA, USA decided to buy back the vehicle under the California Lemon Law and reimbursed our client for his down payment, all payments made, his registration and paid off the vehicle minus a usage fee that manufacturer is entitled to under the law. They also paid the attorney fees. Our client was very happy with the result.

If you are having problem with your vehicle and have questions about your rights and the California Lemon Law, please call our office at 888-395-3666.