New Lawsuit targets Ford and Mach-E Safety over high voltage battery main contactor issue

[kdonnel]

Lawyer money grab. I will feel vindicated by the 5 cents I will receive in compensation

Being a named plaintiff in the case means you will get more when it is settled.

Named plaintiffs generally are given an incentive award as well as the same compensation as the class.

The idea is that the lead/named plaintiffs are those that were injured the worst and have the highest damages. They also participate much more in the case oftentimes being deposed and being involved in deciding to accept or deny a settlement offer.

The judge could award nothing extra, a few thousand or as much as $100,000.

Sponsored

 

[Fairleighs]

I believe your assumption is incorrect. The software fix is to detect a contactor in danger of failing, which will then be replaced with a new HEEBYJEEBY thingy. It's reasonable to think Ford knew there could be an issue (pushing a lot of amps through those things) and needed the field test to know for sure.

The lawsuit strikes me as grandstanding and pretty silly.

I posted on another thread. Got the software update from dealer last Tuesday...drove it hard to see if there was a drop in performance (was none). Wife drove it to work the next day and was passing someone at WOT and got the HVBJB warning and service vehicle soon. Was able to drive it to the dealer to get the HVBJB replaced. It is currently there now. The car didn't brick hammering it, the software flagged the car might brick if I keep driving it the way I had post recall. Instead, it got me to a dealer safely. It cut power to the vehicle while the codes were present to prevent me from WOTing it back to the dealer. I was still able to drive at >70mph with the wrench.

 

[Bigfeets]

They have, in fact, not only replaced the part but replaced the replacement already. There is a part ending in -B (the initial replacement) that was almost immediately replaced in inventory with a part ending in -C. If you get the warning and are told to service your vehicle, you SHOULD be getting a replacement part that is re-engineered. We don't have a lot of people on the forums that have gone all the way through that process yet to confirm what part they got. But I think I saw at least one on here.

This whole thing is still freshly developing.

Is this "replacement" part identity and introduction to assembly addressed in a thread that you can refer to? What is the basis for this "fact"? Is there a way that someone waiting for delivery of their MME order can determine what "part" is installed in the MME they are imminently to buy? Are MME built 25 May and after getting new hardware or "recall" software? Evidence for "proof" that the purported replacement part actually eliminates the "welding contactor" issue is, so far, lacking because such "fixed" MMEs have yet to actually get into service? I assume by your latter sentences that these are actually still open questions. Yes?

 

[dml105]

The idea is that the lead/named plaintiffs are those that were injured the worst and have the highest damages.

Correct.... but we know that isn't true. Their cars haven't been bricked, or turtled, or anything. They would appear to me to be pretty poor representatives of the class, because they *haven't* been harmed -- their harm is purely speculative.

 

[kdonnel]

Correct.... but we know that isn't true. Their cars haven't been bricked, or turtled, or anything. They would appear to me to be pretty poor representatives of the class, because they *haven't* been harmed -- their harm is purely speculative.

I agree.

They appear to be poor representatives of the class.

 

[ctenidae]

Is this "replacement" part identity and introduction to assembly addressed in a thread that you can refer to? What is the basis for this "fact"? Is there a way that someone waiting for delivery of their MME order can determine what "part" is installed in the MME they are imminently to buy? Are MME built 25 May and after getting new hardware or "recall" software? Evidence for "proof" that the purported replacement part actually eliminates the "welding contactor" issue is, so far, lacking because such "fixed" MMEs have yet to actually get into service? I assume by your latter sentences that these are actually still open questions. Yes?

I recommend you cancel your order, if these are your true concerns. Wait, and get a 2024.

 

[ctenidae]

I posted on another thread. Got the software update from dealer last Tuesday...drove it hard to see if there was a drop in performance (was none). Wife drove it to work the next day and was passing someone at WOT and got the HVBJB warning and service vehicle soon. Was able to drive it to the dealer to get the HVBJB replaced. It is currently there now. The car didn't brick hammering it, the software flagged the car might brick if I keep driving it the way I had post recall. Instead, it got me to a dealer safely. It cut power to the vehicle while the codes were present to prevent me from WOTing it back to the dealer. I was still able to drive at >70mph with the wrench.

Hold on here - if I am reading this correctly, you're saying that the software fix doesn't neuter the car, that the recall software performed as it was supposed to, and your vehicle is now being repaired , and not only did no one die in a fiery blaze of lithium fueled glory, but you were able to meet your wife at home and drive the car to the dealer?

This sounds suspiciously like a recall that operated exactly as one would hope and expect. Weird.

 

[ctenidae]

They appear to be poor representatives of the class.

Based on a read of the complaint, I think they are poor representatives of class, in general.

 

[Fairleighs]

Hold on here - if I am reading this correctly, you're saying that the software fix doesn't neuter the car, that the recall software performed as it was supposed to, and your vehicle is now being repaired , and not only did no one die in a fiery blaze of lithium fueled glory, but you were able to meet your wife at home and drive the car to the dealer?

This sounds suspiciously like a recall that operated exactly as one would hope and expect. Weird.

Truly!

 

[Bigfeets]

I recommend you cancel your order, if these are your true concerns. Wait, and get a 2024.

Sorry, your comment is not particularly useful.

So far, I've found a reference to a HVBJB part number that may or may not be installed in MME built after 24 May, and which may or may not need the "recall" software to assure safe operation. (NK4Z-10C666-C fits both the AWD and the GT and it replaces LK9Z-10C666-A and NK4Z-10C666-B.) So far, I've no idea how many of the thousands of MME produced after 24 May may suffer "welded contactors", probably because so few of them have even reached their end user. So far, I've no idea how to determine which HVBJB contactor part may be installed in any given MME, such as the one I may eventually be offered for purchase. (Been waiting 217 days without being scheduled, so I've probably got another couple of months to determine whether I want to buy the 2022MY Premium AWD ER red that was ordered last December.)

 

[ctenidae]

Sorry, your comment is not particularly useful.

Not sure the value of a smarmy smile, either, unless you're just trolling along.

If these are deal breaker concerns, you have two options, as I see it:

1) Ask your dealer for a parts breakdown or confirmation of the part number for the HEEBYJEEBYs put in and decide at that point

2) Don't buy the car until you are confident the car you get has the parts you want. Probably 2024, or perhaps 2025 based on your pedantic questions.

No one can answer your questions as posed to your satisfaction, I believe. If you feel unsure about an action, don't do it. Don't keep talking about it, just don't do it. Simple.

 

[MachEnthusiast]

Is this "replacement" part identity and introduction to assembly addressed in a thread that you can refer to? What is the basis for this "fact"? Is there a way that someone waiting for delivery of their MME order can determine what "part" is installed in the MME they are imminently to buy? Are MME built 25 May and after getting new hardware or "recall" software? Evidence for "proof" that the purported replacement part actually eliminates the "welding contactor" issue is, so far, lacking because such "fixed" MMEs have yet to actually get into service? I assume by your latter sentences that these are actually still open questions. Yes?

Looks like you figured it out yourself. Which I was going to tell you to do, since the smarmy gif doesn't really instill motivation of "I should go search threads for this guy."

 

[Southern92]

Hold on here - if I am reading this correctly, you're saying that the software fix doesn't neuter the car, that the recall software performed as it was supposed to, and your vehicle is now being repaired , and not only did no one die in a fiery blaze of lithium fueled glory, but you were able to meet your wife at home and drive the car to the dealer?

This sounds suspiciously like a recall that operated exactly as one would hope and expect. Weird.

Seems to me that when a recall works as one would expect, there would have been no "Service vehicle soon" warning.
However, I suppose from a certain point of view, if Ford released software eliminating Mach-e's ability to DCFC, reduced acceleration to the 0-60 in the 8 second range, and restricted it to a max speed of the posted speed limit, said software would greatly reduce the possibility "that the high voltage battery main contactors may overheat" and therefore would be considered a fix?

 

[ARK]

Seems to me that when a recall works as one would expect, there would have been no "Service vehicle soon" warning.
However, I suppose from a certain point of view, if Ford released software eliminating Mach-e's ability to DCFC, reduced acceleration to the 0-60 in the 8 second range, and restricted it to a max speed of the posted speed limit, said software would greatly reduce the possibility "that the high voltage battery main contactors may overheat" and therefore would be considered a fix?

I'd guess the service vehicle soon message comes on to manage problematic HVBJBs so they can get to a dealership without having the car bricked in the meantime.

Otherwise, why limit power at all when the service vehicle soon message comes on, you don't get that with stop safely soon - your vehicle isn't drivable.

 

[Mach1E]

Seems to me that when a recall works as one would expect, there would have been no "Service vehicle soon" warning.
However, I suppose from a certain point of view, if Ford released software eliminating Mach-e's ability to DCFC, reduced acceleration to the 0-60 in the 8 second range, and restricted it to a max speed of the posted speed limit, said software would greatly reduce the possibility "that the high voltage battery main contactors may overheat" and therefore would be considered a fix?

Exactly.

If the recall is to be considered a “success,” it has to fix the problem!

The recall, as it stands, doesn’t seem to prevent the problem, it’s more of a “problem warning and detection system.”

Not even remotely the same as a “fix.”

If you have a problem at work where every day your boss unexpectedly slaps you in the face, would the “fix” be that he/she warns you before they slap you?

Sponsored