Safety Recall 22S41 - 2021-2022 Mach E - HVBJB Recall [high voltage battery main contactors may overheat]

[kennethjk]

Nothing to do with commendable and more to do with corporate liability. Hard to stand up in court and say you knew about it but did not warn their father and hence he dead. Professional liability is a tricky thing that can max out liability insurance pretty quick if your negligent about public safety. I have been informed here that ford runs everything thru legal and I am sure they understand. Not everyone one is a boogie man.

I realize they all go they legal. I know all too well but a corporations first response is usually to circle the wagons to minimize costs and publicity.

that’s why there are courts and discovery to find out what they knew and when. How often do we find out that they knew much more than they let on to.

Sponsored

 

[Shayne]

I realize they all go they legal. I know all too well but a corporations first response is usually to circle the wagons to minimize costs and publicity.

that’s why there are courts and discovery to find out what they knew and when. How often do we find out that they knew much more than they let on to.

Pretty sure the nhtsa knows exactly what and when Ford knew. Also nhtsa is most likely involved in directions/decisions at this point. You may look for demons where they do not exist and could count on people being better sometimes. I normally take that for face value until given a reason not to. Met a bolt owner at a DCFC and he was just tickled pink that he got a new battery after 5 years. Told me he never had a problem with the car or the old battery him but he toke the new one.

 

[Neil4Real]

Pretty sure the nhtsa knows exactly what and when Ford knew. Also nhtsa is most likely involved in directions/decisions at this point. You may look for demons where they do not exist and could count on people being better sometimes. I normally take that for face value until given a reason not to. Met a bolt owner at a DCFC and he was just tickled pink that he got a new battery after 5 years. Told me he never had a problem with the car or the old battery him but he toke the new one.

I highly doubt the first part of your post. This is a voluntary recall, Ford is for sure running the show to avoid a mandatory recall. Mandatory recalls will involve significantly more input/direction from the NHSTA than a voluntary one. I bet they'll just say shows us the fix when you got it and check a box that it is good to go.

 

[kennethjk]

Pretty sure the nhtsa knows exactly what and when Ford knew. Also nhtsa is most likely involved in directions/decisions at this point. You may look for demons where they do not exist and could count on people being better sometimes. I normally take that for face value until given a reason not to. Met a bolt owner at a DCFC and he was just tickled pink that he got a new battery after 5 years. Told me he never had a problem with the car or the old battery him but he toke the new one.

Contrary to what you think, and you have no idea how I think other than in this situation, I do not look for demons. I am a very trustworthy person when it comes to individuals. large Companies a different story In situations like this. If people weren’t reporting these issues to the NHTSA do you think Ford would have the recall at this point Or waited as long as possible. I guess we will never know.

I happen to trust my dealership implicitly Because they earned that trust. Many people don‘t trust their dealer and for good reason.

 

[Shayne]

I highly doubt the first part of your post. This is a voluntary recall, Ford is for sure running the show to avoid a mandatory recall. Mandatory recalls will involve significantly more input/direction from the NHSTA than a voluntary one. I bet they'll just say shows us the fix when you got it and check a box that it is good to go.

A recommended voluntary recall at this stage is my guess. Another demon hunter that believes professionalism and integrity are dead. Everyone is out to get you better watch out and enjoy life. It is a car and no the sky is not falling. If we hear about deaths due to this things may change but to date nope. Not worried about nothing at this stage that is for sure. I will wait for facts before slinging too much mud.

 

[VegStang]

Update on my vehicle. The dealer received the new part yesterday (exactly 3 weeks in) and has started work today, with the hope to have the HVBJB install finished by Friday afternoon. I noticed that after they started the vehicle to move it today a new OTA update is in the queue

 

[yngwenli]

Well compared to the Bolt, all they said was don’t park in your garage? Did they also say , never drive the car as it may explode with you in it? I don’t know since I don’t have one.

With the Bolt, it was don't park in the garage, don't charge indoors, I think it was also don't leave the charger plugged in, an executive also said to park 50 feet away from any other car/person/structure and to only park on the top floor of parking lots, but they walked that back a little bit afterwards (maybe that was the "truth", but since that sounds so bad, it was walked back)...concerns were pretty high overall and a lot (in the thousands/tens of thousands?) had it repurchased.

One of the possible lingering main downsides with the Bolt is it was banned from parking at a lot of private parking lots. Various airports came to mind, Soldier Field, various malls, etc...

Cars are not a protected class so they can be discriminated against

 

[JSW]

All this talk about legal departments makes me smile. I was an attorney on the Legal Staff of a Ford competitor in the early 90s and I have some perspective. Generally, significant liability flows from affirmative answers to the following questions - Given your claim history: was it foreseeable this part would fail with greater than random frequency? was it foreseeable that it could fail while the car is in motion? Was it foreseeable that it could fail in a manner that would strand the owner? Etc. The main issue driving significant liability in these and other scenarios is that the failure comes without notice and surprises the owner.


The software update mitigates this liability by providing notice to the owner/Ford of an impending failure. In this regard, the software update constitutes risk/liability mitigation, and is not, itself, a “fix.” A fix would be replacement with a properly robust part.

That said, my guess is that when the software detects an impending failure, Ford will authorize the replacement/substitution of a more robust part. If this is the process, then from my/the owner’s perspective, what I’m getting is notice (so I’m not stranded/crash) and a replacement part as/when necessary.

While I understand the desire of people to rush in (at their convenience) and get a more robust part prophylacticly, the attorney in me believes as long as there is a safe process to replace the part prior to total failure, then the approach is adequate.

 

[Ford Motor Company]

I was wondering, I have a 2021 MME Premium with extended range battery, I took delivery Jan 3, 2021. Two days after taking delivery I got a warning in the car, "service soon" and the Ford App said; "Powertrain malfunction/Reduce Power". The next day when I took it to the dealer to have it checked out the warning in the can and the Ford App were gone, saying no active alerts. The dealer checked for error codes with their OBD2. They came back with no error codes. The dealer said not to worry if the warnings reset them selves then you should be o,. Over the next 6 months the same thing has happened 6 more times and the warnings in the car always went away. I got myself a BlueDriver OBD2 so that I could check for error codes myself and there has never been any.

I don't drive the car hard, no full open throttle events and I've only charged at a DCFC 2 times. Is it possible that they warnings I'm getting are a bug in the software and not caused by the problem in the recall? Thanks

Hey there! I can look into your Mach-E’s error message concerns on my end if you’d like. Will you send us a message with your VIN and dealership info?

 

[scoopman]

All this talk about legal departments makes me smile. I was an attorney on the Legal Staff of a Ford competitor in the early 90s and I have some perspective. Generally, significant liability flows from affirmative answers to the following questions - Given your claim history: was it foreseeable this part would fail with greater than random frequency? was it foreseeable that it could fail while the car is in motion? Was it foreseeable that it could fail in a manner that would strand the owner? Etc. The main issue driving significant liability in these and other scenarios is that the failure comes without notice and surprises the owner.


The software update mitigates this liability by providing notice to the owner/Ford of an impending failure. In this regard, the software update constitutes risk/liability mitigation, and is not, itself, a “fix.” A fix would be replacement with a properly robust part.

That said, my guess is that when the software detects an impending failure, Ford will authorize the replacement/substitution of a more robust part. If this is the process, then from my/the owner’s perspective, what I’m getting is notice (so I’m not stranded/crash) and a replacement part as/when necessary.

While I understand the desire of people to rush in (at their convenience) and get a more robust part prophylacticly, the attorney in me believes as long as there is a safe process to replace the part prior to total failure, then the approach is adequate.

Former practicing lawyer here -- what's your opinion on the potential exposure for another set of claims where the software mitigation here takes away performance (either in speed or charging time) that was claimed by the OEM and provided to the owner, especially on a performance model?

 

[JSW]

Former practicing lawyer here -- what's your opinion on the potential exposure for another set of claims where the software mitigation here takes away performance (either in speed or charging time) that was claimed by the OEM and provided to the owner, especially on a performance model?

If it’s temporary so that the vehicle can be safely driven to the dealership for repairs, there should be zero liability. If it is for an indefinite duration and materially impacts performance, there will certainly be repercussions. If it’s between these extremes, TBD.

 

[lasher914]

As someone whose car was built may 23rd, the incredibly frustrating thing to me is that they knew about the issue and had a fix in mind to avoid recall, but kept building cars with the issue knowing they wouldn't be deliverable. It's absurd that if my car was built two days later, it would have been fine and deliverable. Why would they continue building cars incorrectly knowing they had a fix two days or even a couple of weeks out? To me, it's inexcusable. Especially with things like the tax rebate on these cars.

Let's say there's a delay in the fix. Now orders after mine could in theory get a full tax rebate but mine won't (I know this is unlikely.) This will be my first ford, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't shopping around for other options because of this. I hope it's resolved in mid July but it's infuriating they'd continue building cars that need a recall with a fix a couple days or weeks down the road.

My MME was built 2 days after the supposed cut off line (5/26) and my VIN still shows up on the NHTSA website as being part of the recall so I thing the "cars built after 5/24 being fine" stuff is absolute BS!!

 

[GreaseMonkey]

If it’s temporary so that the vehicle can be safely driven to the dealership for repairs, there should be zero liability. If it is for an indefinite duration and materially impacts performance, there will certainly be repercussions. If it’s between these extremes, TBD.

Thank you for providing thought leadership on this issue. Your response is extremely helpful and makes perfect sense.

From a purely speculative perspective, many see the software update as more than an early warning system, rather a preventative measure that will slow charging or reduce power delivery afterwards for some period of time. I for one have never thought about the possibility of the update being a way to warn the driver of a potential future issue so the part itself can be replaced.

Sponsored