Recall 13C07 caused my accident!

[Brazen]

Ok, so really my own stupidity caused my accident.  Here's how it went down...

 

I was in my C-max, about to back out of my driveway, when I realized I forgot something.  I open my door and hop out and the car starts backing up without me.  Before I can get back in and put on the brakes, the open door catches on something and bends the door backwards.  Apparently, I had already put the car into reverse and released the parking break.  *sigh* 

 

Now, if not for the issue covered by 13C07, a warning buzz/beep should have occurred when I opened the door while the car that was started and in reverse.   With a hybrid, it seems like such a warning is even more necessary, since it is harder to tell if the engine is running.   I contend that a warning sound when I opened the door might have been enough to save me from my idiocy.

 

Thoughts?  Any chance I can get Ford to cover the damages?  

 

Should I even try?  This seems to be veering into the area of "You sold me hot coffee and then I spilled it on myself, so I'm going to sue you."

 

Brazen

 

P.S.  I'm totally pissed at myself for damaging my baby.

[fotomoto]

 Ugg, so how bad is the damage?

[Brazen]

$2,800.

 

*double sigh*

[fotomoto]

YEOW-SUH!  

 

Don't feel too bad.  As a kid, I did the same thing to my parents '68 Pontiac GTO LeMans.  I was trying to "help" my mom by pushing the car out of the garage in neutral (slight down slope) and got the open drivers door wedged between the garage and a small tree right next to it.   It seemed like a good idea at the time.   :lol:  :confused:

 

Back to this thread, it's a slippery slope between personal and corporate responsibility.  Tough call but I'm going to "vote" that you have the majority of the blame in this case.  

[ptjones]

I think this comes under "Murphy's Law " It's a mine field out there just waiting to happen. :sad: 

 

Paul 

[Adair]

I did exactly the same thing with my Jeep Liberty...........except that I was trying to get away from a bee in the car. :spend:  :doh:  :confused:  :censored:

[raymond963]

I didn't catch the door on anything but I knocked over a street sign once when a gigantic hairy spider crawled up my leg, inside my pants, while I was driving. It was at least two inches across...well...maybe only one inch...which is still gigantic in my book! I'm sure I was quite entertaining to anyone who saw me jumping around outside the car and dropping my pants in the street.

[plus 3 golfer]

Brazen, the manufacturer is required to reimburse an owner for damages caused by a safety defect. So yes, you should try to get VW to pay.  

 

The legal issue (if any) might be that the safety recall has been out for a month or so and the owner should have been made aware of the defect by the manufacturer.  However, it's not the owner's responsibility to know of the defect.  It's the manufacturer's responsibility to notify owners of the safety recall.  AFAIK, a safety recall does not expire.  But there may be a time limit associated with reimbursement for damages occurring after a safety recall.  

 

I would file a report with NHTSA on the incident and contact VW.  You could also call NHTSA (# below) and ask about the manufacturer's liability for reimbursement of damages caused by the safety defect.

 

Here's the Safety Recall: 

 

Report Receipt Date: OCT 17, 2013 

NHTSA Campaign Number: 13V475000 
Component(s): ELECTRICAL SYSTEM , EQUIPMENT 

All Products Associated with this Recall 

 

Details  4 Associated Documents 

 

Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company

 

SUMMARY:Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2012-2013 Focus Electric vehicles and 2013 C-Max vehicles equipped with the Intelligent Access Push Button Start System. In the affected vehicles, there is no audible chime when the vehicle is operational and the driver's door is opened. Thus, these vehicles fail to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 114, "Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention." CONSEQUENCE:Without an audible door chime, a vehicle owner may open the door and exit the vehicle without being reminded that the vehicle is still operational, leaving the vehicle susceptible to theft. REMEDY:Ford will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the door chime, free of charge. The recall began on October 30, 2013. Owners may contact the Ford customer relationship center at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's recall number is 13C07. NOTES:Owners may also contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or go to www.safercar.gov.

 

[fbov]

I've got one better... a friend of ours ran herself over - she got out while backing up, the door knocked her over, and naturally her leg landed in the path of the front wheels. No lasting injury or we wouldn't laugh about it.

 

Have fun,

Frank

[Sparky]

My lawn tractor shuts down if I get off the seat.

[Bill-N]

If you've been notified about the recall but have yet to have it performed, then I think this is your fault.  If you have not yet been notified, or had the fix performed and there was no chime (i.e. the fix didn't work), then I think Ford is partly to blame.

 

My 2 cents worth.

[HPRifleman]

I'm not seeing how this was the fault of the car or the manufacturer. The driver got in the car, started it, put it in reverse, and then got out of the car while it was still in reverse.

[plus 3 golfer]

I'm not seeing how this was the fault of the car or the manufacturer. The driver got in the car, started it, put it in reverse, and then got out of the car while it was still in reverse.

It appears that a proposed rule on FMVSS No. 114  would warn the driver of this situation has yet to be adopted.  Comment period supposedly ended in March 2012 and I guess NHTSA is taking their time in proposing a final rule (if at all).  NHTSA summarizes complaints that are similar to Brazen's experience in the proposed rule. Thus, it also appears that Safety Recall 13C07 is moot but it doesn't hurt to ask NHTSA about applicability of 13C07 to such a complaint. 

 

Since the existing FMVSS 114 apparently doesn't cover the issue, there is no safety requirement for manufacturers to meet that covers this issue.  But I would still file a report with NHTSA as others have done on this issue to support the proposed rule.

 

Bottom line: IMO, Safety Recall 13C07 did not cause Brazen's accident! :) (Maybe a title change is in order) ;)

[drdiesel1]

 

Bottom line: IMO, Safety Recall 13C07 did not cause Brazen's accident! :) (Maybe a title change is in order) ;)

+10000000000000000000 Brazen caused, Brazen's problems and now he's hoping to have someone else pay for his mistake :drop: 

 

Your insurance should cover it, even if they raise your rates :spend: 

Accountability comes to mind, even if you had a temporary lapse of it when this event took place :doh:

Edited November 22, 2013 by drdiesel1

[Brazen]

+10000000000000000000 Brazen caused, Brazen's problems and now he's hoping to have someone else pay for his mistake :drop:

 

Your insurance should cover it, even if they raise your rates :spend:

Accountability comes to mind, even if you had a temporary lapse of it when this event took place :doh:

 

Um, yeah, I kinda admitted that when I said it was my own stupidity.  Maybe you missed that?    :noobie:  :)   :banghead:

 

Just trying to get some opinions.  Thanks for yours.

B

[drdiesel1]

Um, yeah, I kinda admitted that when I said it was my own stupidity.  Maybe you missed that?    :noobie:  :)   :banghead:

 

Just trying to get some opinions.  Thanks for yours.

B

Don't get mad about it :victory:

[wab]

I've got one better... a friend of ours ran herself over - she got out while backing up, the door knocked her over, and naturally her leg landed in the path of the front wheels. No lasting injury or we wouldn't laugh about it.

 

Have fun,

Frank

 

My nephew's wife ran over herself, almost killed her.

Drug her down a hill, put her in the hospital for weeks, scalped her, broke her back and leg, etc., etc...BAD!

[ArizonaEnergi]

Yeah, I think you own this one by leaving it in reverse while getting out.  Just one of those oops moments we all have throughout our lives.  Did everyone see the story about the girl that was killed last week by a truck left in reverse?  Ran over three times by it before someone could stop it.

[plus 3 golfer]

I think people are missing the point of this thread which is not whether Brazen had a lapse in judgement (he admits that in the first post) but whether Ford's safety recall 13C07 for failure to implement certain aspects of FMVSS 114 is a means for Brazen to be reimbursed for the damages. 

 

As it turns out the current FMVSS 114 (which Ford failed to follow) apparently does not cover this situation.  But, if one READS the proposed changes to FMVSS that I linked to in another post, one will see NHTSA believes what Brazen and others have done could result in harm to life and limb and propose to modify FMVSS 114 to warn of such lapse in judgement through a different, louder alarm and so forth as stated in the proposed rule to hopefully prevent injury.  NHTSA cites the advent of keyless ignition and push button start / stop as a contributing toward such incidents.

 

IMO, the issue that should be discussed is how far does NHTSA go to try to protect oneself and others from their own stupidity (lack of judgement).   Had NHTSA's proposed rule on FMVSS 114 been adopted and implemented in Brazen's car, my bet is his accident would not have occurred.

 

The proposed rule: 

addresses safety issues arising from 

increased availability of ignition 

systems that do not use physical keys to 

start and stop passenger motor vehicles’ 

engines or other propulsion systems. At 

issue are drivers’ inability to stop a 

moving vehicle in a panic situation, and 

drivers who unintentionally leave the 

vehicle without the vehicle 

transmission’s being locked in ‘‘park,’’ 

or with the engine still running, 

increasing the chances of vehicle 

rollaway or carbon monoxide poisoning 

in an enclosed area.

 

[drdiesel1]

They should have a fog horn in every car to warn you if you're being forgetful. That way, they could avoid all this operator error

and the world would be a safer place. Better yet, install a tazer to hit you with 50K volts if you do something wrong and expect

the manufacture to pay for your inability to properly operate your car :happy feet: Outlawing gum would help too ;)

Edited November 25, 2013 by drdiesel1

[salprint]

Brazen...you're very lucky..let me tell you a little story:

A few years ago, My wife's sister had just acquired a new pickup and was still getting used to where things were.  She was parked in a driveway on a slight incline, and her girlfriend was in the passenger seat.  They were about to leave, and my sister in law put the truck in reverse and realized she had the emergency brake on.  She reached under the dash to release it, but instead of pulling the brake release, she pulled the hood release.  Realizing the hood was unlatched, she got out of truck to close it.  Now remember...she still had the vehicle in reverse with the parking brake on.  As she was coming around the open door to get back in, her girlfriend said, "Oh look, I found the brake release."  and with that, she pulled it and released it.  The door knocked my sister in law to the ground and the vehicle ran her over as it quickly went down the driveway and across the street before coming to a stop against a tree.  My sister law never came out of the coma and died about two weeks later.  To this day...I always reprimand ANYone if they touch anything except the radio while I'm driving the car.  So...I don't know the point of my story, except as I said....you were very lucky.

Oh..but I should add that on my FFH the parking brake is electric and you can't release it without having your foot on the brake....if my sister in law had that feature, she would still be here today.  And I wouldn't feel to this day that her girlfriend is the dumbest person in the world.

Edited November 25, 2013 by salprint

[Brazen]

Wow, yes, I do realize I was lucky, but stories like this really drive it home.

 

I could easily have gotten 1 more foot away and gotten pinned between the door and our other car.  Then I could have been this year's Darwin award winner.  Not to mention my three small kids that were in the car.  Thank God for small miracles.  

 

Seriously, cost of damages aside...   my C-max alert system is very poorly implemented.  It yells at me when I have turned the car off but not put it in park, but doesn't care if I open the door when the car in in gear (or moving)???  Someone messed up.

 

B

Edited November 25, 2013 by Brazen

[plus 3 golfer]

Sad story salprint.  Had there been some type of "different warning / alarm" for parking brake on, car in neutral or gear, door open, such a tragedy may have been prevented.  The point is to  warn the driver that something is not normal and such warning is distinguishable from typical warnings / alarms.

 

Safety is not only about oneself but also about injury and harm to others that may result from a potential operational issue.  IMO, requiring reasonable measures to reduce injury and harm to oneself and others is not a joking matter ("fog horn in every car", "install a tazer, "outlawing gum"). ;)  Jesting adds no value to this discussion nor to the argument of safety requirements. Who pays for damages is a matter of law and the legal system and has no bearing on implementing reasonable safety measures.

 

Getting back to the topic,  NHTSA points out the practical issues with warning a driver of Brazen's conditions and hence any adopted warning / alarm will likely not preclude unintentional driver error and subsequent incidents. Driver's are ultimately responsible for their actions - intentional or unintentional.  We are human and make errors.  IMO, if a reasonable safety requirement can be implemented to warn of such errors and perhaps save property damage or life and limb, it should be adopted.  

[fotomoto]

Contrary to the large old school gear selector in the the CMax, gear changes in modern hybrids are done electronically.   A drivers seat sensor that reads weight, just like the passenger seat air bag sensors do, could signal the ECU to switch the vehicle to park if all three of the following conditions exists:

 

1) the accelerator is not being pressed

2) no one is sitting in the drivers seat

3) speedometer reading is under 1 mph

[plus 3 golfer]

Contrary to the large old school gear selector in the the CMax, gear changes in modern hybrids are done electronically.   A drivers seat sensor that reads weight, just like the passenger seat air bag sensors do, could signal the ECU to switch the vehicle to park if all three of the following conditions exists:

 

1) the accelerator is not being pressed

2) no one is sitting in the drivers seat

3) speedometer reading is under 1 mph

I had similar thoughts.  But NHTSA believes that it may not be appropriate to automatically put a car in "park" / shut the car off -- in essence take control away from the driver which could be a problem if the control system malfunctioned.   I can't recall if NHTSA discussed the reasons other than to some extent it becomes a timing issue (how long does one wait until any action including alarming is performed) and there may be a logical reason to not have the car in park with no one in the seat, door open, and so forth (car on jack stands).  I also believe NHTSA wants the proposed rule to apply to all types of propulsion systems the same way.  Otherwise, the alarm may not mean the same thing in different vehicles and likely only cause more confusion.

 

It seems that a different audible alarm and perhaps a warning message should at least get the driver's attention to then determine what is causing the alarm / warning.  Also, if I recall correctly the proposed duration of the alarm is very short and the alarm sound occurs outside the vehicle to warn others not in the vehicle of a potential rollaway.

 

I have read many proposed / adopted rules by a several government agencies over my career and it really is not a simple task to think / cover every conceivable situation that might occur (eg. EPA allowing in the rules Ford to use the EPA FE rating of the Fusion Hybrid for the C-Max Hybrid).