CONSUMER NEWS RECALLS COMPLAINT FORM SCAM ALERTS

Small Claims Guide \| Class Actions \| Lemon Law \| FAQ \| Resources \| Newsletters \| Spanish
Automotive Education Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Shopping Travel

Ford Faces Mountain of Explorer Suits

February 5, 2005
Ford lawyers will be busy this year defending more than two dozen civil suits attacking the safety of the popular Explorer sport utility vehicle.

Rollovers

• Feds Delay New Roof-Crush Rule til October
• Report: NHTSA Seeks More Time for Roof-Crush Rule
• Senators Seek Delay in New Roof Strength Safety Rules
• Senators Question Roof Strength Safety Rules
• Nader Protests Feds' Roof Crush Plan
• Treacherous Treads Still Taking Lives
• Ford Class Action Settlement Leaves Consumers in the Dust
• Feds' Roof Crush Rule Inadequate, Critics Charge
• New Study: Stronger SUV Roofs Save Lives
• Ford Loses $82 Million Rollover Verdict Appeal
• Feds Delay Roof Strength Rule Again
• Ford Settles Explorer Rollover Lawsuits
• Safety Crusaders Seek Action on Roof Crush Injuries
• Roof Crush Summit Highlights Safety Shortcomings
• Feds Ignore Roof Crush Conference
• Feds Delay New Roof Strength Rule
• GM to Offer Rollover Airbags, Ford to Strengthen Roofs
• Safety Groups Want Earlier Stability Control Rule
---
• More about Rollovers ...

Plaintiffs in those cases, and hundreds more, are using internal Ford documents released after the Firestone tire crisis in 2000 to back claims that the Explorer is defective and that Ford balked at making crucial changes.

Attorneys suing Ford have developed a network for sharing the documents among hundreds of court cases.

The documents include a recommendation in 1993 by Ford engineers that the Explorer's roof supports be strengthened to prevent the roof from collapsing in a rollover crash.

Ford did not make the changes because the roof support met government standards.

There is also a 1999 warning by Ford engineers in Venezuela that rollover crashes in Explorers related to suspension flaws, caused nine deaths. In 1996, Ford engineers wrote that the issue could be taken care of by moving the shock absorbers closer to the wheels.

The change was not made.

Ford cites government data that shows the death rate in rollover crashes is lower for the Explorer than the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Chevrolet Blazer.

Ford lost two Explorer lawsuits last year -- one in San Diego with a $369 million judgment that was later reduced to $150 million, and one in Fort Myers, Fla., with a judgment of $5.3 million. Ford settled the Florida case for an undisclosed amount.

In its financial reports, Ford does not estimate how much all these lawsuits would specifically cost the company.

In 2001, in one of the biggest recalls in U.S. history, former Ford CEO Jacques Nasser announced that the automaker was spending $3 billion to replace all 13 million Firestone tires on Explorers at the time.

More than 270 highway deaths were reported from accidents resulting from the separation of the vehicle's tire treads.

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

September 7 2008

FREE CONSUMER NEWSLETTERS

The Daily Consumer
Afternoons M-F
Sign up now!

Consumer News & Alerts
Every Sunday
Sign up now!

Knowledge is free.
Knowledge is power.

Back to the top |

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice. ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof.