General Motors reveals it knew about ignition switch issues in 2001
GM announced through regulators that the company has known about faulty ignition switches in its vehicles since 2001 and has yet to determine the full scope of the problem.
March 13, 2014 at 09:13 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
General Motors Co. has already gotten in hot water over faulty ignition switches that have been linked to accidents resulting in deaths, but after documents released by federal safety regulators on March 12, the heat on the company may go from hot to sweltering.
GM announced through regulators that the company has known about faulty ignition switches in its vehicles since 2001 and has yet to determine the full scope of the problem. Previously, the company had only announced recalls on vehicles manufactured in 2004 or after.
In addition, Delphi Automotive PLC announced that its faulty ignition switches would only take a few minutes and between $2 and $5 to switch and replace, which may provide the ammo that regulators need to question why GM did not take care of the problem sooner.
The new release outlines a 2001 report which encountered a problem with the ignition switch for the company's Saturn Ion before the production of the vehicle for sale. In another new document from 2003, GM notes that a service technician observed an Ion that stalled while driving. At the time, The Wall Street Journal notes, GM believed that having “several keys on the key ring” had worn out the ignition switch due to the additional weight. The auto maker also released reports of customer complaints about starting Ion engines.
General Motors had already recalled 1.6 million cars with possible ignition issues, and more could be on the way. Accidents caused by the faulty ignitions have already been at the center of three separate investigations, including a criminal probe.
Chevrolet Cobalt and the Pontiac G5 cars manufactured between 2005 and 2007 were the original cars recalled after an internal investigation found issues with the ignition. GM opened an engineering inquiry into the issue, but the company says it was later closed when deemed too expensive to fix. Despite overhauling the design of the ignition switch in 2007, GM did not issue recalls on the defective switches until February 2014.
Any owners unhappy with their recalled vehicle are eligible for a $500 cash allowance to buy or lease a new GM product.
Is your company facing a similar problem? Learn how to mitigate the risks of public litigation with InsideCounsel.
GM announced through regulators that the company has known about faulty ignition switches in its vehicles since 2001 and has yet to determine the full scope of the problem. Previously, the company had only announced recalls on vehicles manufactured in 2004 or after.
In addition, Delphi Automotive PLC announced that its faulty ignition switches would only take a few minutes and between $2 and $5 to switch and replace, which may provide the ammo that regulators need to question why GM did not take care of the problem sooner.
The new release outlines a 2001 report which encountered a problem with the ignition switch for the company's Saturn Ion before the production of the vehicle for sale. In another new document from 2003, GM notes that a service technician observed an Ion that stalled while driving. At the time, The Wall Street Journal notes, GM believed that having “several keys on the key ring” had worn out the ignition switch due to the additional weight. The auto maker also released reports of customer complaints about starting Ion engines.
Chevrolet Cobalt and the Pontiac G5 cars manufactured between 2005 and 2007 were the original cars recalled after an internal investigation found issues with the ignition. GM opened an engineering inquiry into the issue, but the company says it was later closed when deemed too expensive to fix. Despite overhauling the design of the ignition switch in 2007, GM did not issue recalls on the defective switches until February 2014.
Any owners unhappy with their recalled vehicle are eligible for a $500 cash allowance to buy or lease a new GM product.
Is your company facing a similar problem? Learn how to mitigate the risks of public litigation with InsideCounsel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
5 minute readIn-House Lawyers Are Focused on Employment and Cybersecurity Disputes, But Looking Out for Conflict Over AI
Trending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250