DSMLVR
07-23-2005, 08:48 AM
Switch manufacturer named in Ford cruise lawsuit
Posted Jun 17, 2005, 8:32 AM ET by Eric Bryant
Related entries: Trucks/Pickups
A new lawsuit has been filed that blames a woman’s death on a defective Texas Instruments cruise-control switch inside her 1996 Ford F-150. Darletta Mohlis died in a house fire in May while her truck was parked inside her garage. Ford claims the fire started elsewhere and that the truck was not the cause. Where the lawsuit gets a bit absurd is that DuPont has also been named, as they supplied raw materials (Kapton and Teflon) for the switch.
I understand that it’s typical to name every party that may have some vested interest when filing such a lawsuit, but it’s highly unlikely that DuPont will be found liable. What is likely is that they’ll burn through hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process of defending themselves, which doesn’t seem like a good use of their resources.
TI’s liability (assuming the switch was at fault) is a more difficult question, as Tier 1 suppliers (who ship directly to the OEM) are usually deeply involved in the design and validation process. If Ford under-specified the switch and TI met the inadequate specifications, then the burden should fall on Ford’s shoulders. On the other hand, it’s possible the TI delivered a part that did not meet all of the requirements, in which case they will feel some pain.
Some investigative reporting by WXYZ, the ABC affiliate in Detroit, includes an interview by a TI representative that pins the blame on Ford’s usage of the switch (of course). The fact that TI has paid out millions of dollars in out-of-court settlements, usually after being called into court by Ford as a third-party defendant, would seem to imply that TI is at fault. The failure mode - brake fluid enters the switch from the master cylinder, causing a short that ignites a fire - certainly seems to be a result of a switch design flaw. TI, however, claims that Ford powered the switch from a 15-amp circuit but specified it for only 1 amp, and additionally powered the switch from a Hot At All Time feed (instead of a switched ignition circuit) that left the vehicle vulnerable to the failure even once the ignition was switched off and the owner had walked away. The contention here is that while TI built a defective product, Ford applied it in such a manner that turned a benign failure into a catastrophic one.
The bottom line is that there’s been property damage and loss of life due to what was probably regarded at the time as a simple component in a well-developed subsystem. It goes to show the difficulty in producing a large number of complex and safe vehicles when cost is such a critical parameter. Sometime, sweating the details means more than making a rattle-free piece of interior trim.
Ford Recall, Part II
By Steve Wilson
February 28, 2005
Ford owners are shocked by the Action News investigation into a defective part related to fires that have destroyed vehicles, and even burned down houses. A few weeks ago, the automaker recalled nearly a million vehicles to address this problem, but as chief investigator Steve Wilson reported, the problem may involve more than 10 times as many cars.
The vehicles in question possibly number about 8-10 million Fords of all kinds, not just the 800,000 pickups and SUV’s the company recalled last month.
The owners of one home say a defective cruise control switch under the hood of a Ford parked in their garage sparked an inferno that destroyed virtually everything they had.
Our Action News Investigation confirms this is not an isolated case.
Yet another home burned to the ground, allegedly started by a faulty switch built into that garaged Ford, which was destroyed along with everything else.
"We had nothing but the clothes on our backs. We lost everything," Ford owner Charlie Everts explains.
Meanwhile in rural Munith, Michigan north of Jackson, Bill Lantis suspects the fire that destroyed his pole barn and everything stored inside was sparked by a defective switch in the Ford pickup he parked inside.
If you missed it in part one of our Action News investigation, the small switch we’re talking about shuts off your cruise control when you tap your foot on the brake. That in turn sends brake fluid surging up into the switch, and when it reaches the electrical contacts on top, it switches off the cruise control.
Fire investigator Jeff Morrill has seen plenty of failures that fit a pattern.
Wilson to Jeff Morrill/Fire Investigator: And you’re saying the problem is that there’s supposed to be seals here that keep brake fluid from getting to the electrical portions when you don’t want it to?
Morrill: Absolutely.
Wilson: And the seal breaks down, the fluid leaks from here to the electrical part and causes a short of some kind.
And why are houses burning?
Morrill: It normally happens after the vehicle’s shut off.
Wilson: You park it, you put it in the garage, you take the keys, you go inside and current is still flowing through that switch.
Morrill: Current still has the ability to flow.
Safety experts are seriously concerned, because the same or substantially similar switch design is built into in 8 million or more Fords -- perhaps 420 models, 1992’s through some ‘04’s -- yet the recall covers only three 2000 year models, and a few 2001 model pickups.
Morrill: I’ve seen fires in 97’s and 98’s, all the way up through ’01 and ’02 of a similar nature.
Wilson: And you think they know that this very same switch or substantially similar switch in so many other cars is a serious risk, and they’re just not telling us?
Morrill: Yes. Dollars and cents. It’s dollars and cents.
And that’s where our investigation leads us now: Just how long has Ford known more about this potentially deadly defect than the automaker’s been telling?
Clarence Ditlow/Center For Auto Safety: I’ve seen this countless times by Ford Motor Company, where they try to limit it to a certain model or a certain model year and the name of the game is "let’s not do a 10-million or 2-million vehicle recall, let’s do a few hundred thousand vehicle recall."
Clarence Ditlow says Ford is again employing the same so-called "containment strategy" it used in an earlier recall of cruise control switches back in 1999. Now, we’ve obtained evidence that Ford knew—or certainly should have known long ago -- that the switches are prone to catch fire the way they’re used.
Action News has acquired footage of testing by Texas Instruments, the company that produced the switches, and more testing by Ford technicians themselves who saw this problem long ago.
When seals inside fail and fluid touches the electrical contacts, intense heat builds up, until smoke pours from the switch and ultimately it spits out fire.
The date is December 17, 1999, and Steven Beringhause is testifying under oath. Beringhause, a Texas Instruments engineering manager, was educated at MIT and was responsible for production of the cruise control switches that were catching Fords on fire and wreaking damage back in the 90’s.
In addition to his testimony, which Ford heard more than five years ago in a lawsuit filed by a Ford owner in wake of a fire, Action News has also acquired internal memos from inside Texas Instruments describing "dismal results" of switch testing way back in 1992, when these kinds of fires were first reported.
"All 12 (switch) devices failed..." says one memo.
Beringhause says when T-I produced the switch, nobody at Ford ever mentioned what seems to be a critical factor, that electric current—and lots of it—flows through the switch even when cars were off and sitting parked.
Beringhause testimony: We were surprised that the switch was continuous powered in the system.
He says the switch was never tested for 15 amps that were running through it once Ford installed it on vehicles.
Beringhause: The testing on the switches has never been tested that high that I’m aware of. It’s probably tested to around one amp.
So, what did T-I tell Ford—more than five years ago—that could be done to possibly avert the fires?
Beringhause: Based on some of the tests results that we ran, we recommended that the amount of power that potentially could be applied to the switch should be decreased and limited, current limited.
At the time he testified, he said he was not aware Ford had made any changes, and a spokeswoman for the automaker tells us today:
"Discussions between Ford and our suppliers are private matters..."
Ford has refused to discuss the issue publicly. When our investigation continues Tuesday on Action News at 6, Ford has been down this road before.
Clarence Ditlow: Ford took the exact same strategy in the ignition switch fires in the earlier 90’s. These are the people who are doing a cost-benefit analysis and they’re seeing whether it is cheaper to stonewall than recall.
Also, we’ll tell the story of John Dodson, who says his parents died as a result of Ford’s footdragging in recalling other defective cars, and the internal Ford memos which show he may be right.
bizjournals.com
Lawsuit blames TI, Ford in woman's death
Thursday June 16, 5:01 pm ET
A lawsuit filed by the family of an Iowa woman who died in a fire last month claims Ford Motor Co. and Texas Instruments Inc. are guilty of negligence.
The lawsuit claims that the death of Darletta Mohlis, who died from injuries from a fire in her home May 2, was the result of the failure of a cruise control deactivation switch inside her 1996 F-150 truck that was made by Texas Instruments.
The suit, filed in a Harris County District Court, also names Wilmington, Del.-based E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. (NYSE:DD - News), which made the Kapton and Teflon coatings used in the switch.
According to the suit, Dallas-based TI (NYSE:TXN - News) and Ford (NYSE:F - News) were aware of more than 200 previous incidents in which engine-compartment fires resulted from speed control deactivation switch failures, but limited a recall to certain model-year vehicles to save money.
Ford, in a statement to the Dallas Business Journal Thursday, said remnants of the switch were found at the scene by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Ford investigators and the switch was ruled out as the fire's cause.
Ford said the evidence suggests the fire started elsewhere in the garage and spread to the truck and the home.
The company said it extends its condolences to the Mohlis family and continues to cooperate with NHTSA on its investigation of the incident.
TI spokeswoman Sharon Hampton said Texas Instruments would have supplied the switch in that vehicle but the switch is just one component in the cruise control deactivation switch system.
"We don't believe there's a safety defect with the switch," she said.
The suit announced Thursday isn't the first time TI and Ford have been sued over the cruise-control deactivation switches. According to a Sept. 28, 2001, Dallas Business Journal article, nearly a dozen federal lawsuits were filed between 1996 and September 2001 in which Ford and Texas Instruments together were defendants.
Typically the plaintiffs have named Ford, which in turn has brought in TI as a third-party defendant. Though several such suits were thrown out by judges, TI and Ford settled some of them.
At the time of the 2001 article, TI had lost more than $2 million because of the federal lawsuits because the switches allegedly caused underhood fires, according to documents and interviews.
While the lawsuits claim fires took place between 1996 and 2001, TI said in a court filing that most of the fires allegedly occurred in 1998. In May 1999 Ford recalled 262,695 of those vehicles, warning that a "defective" switch could short-circuit.
DuPont spokeswoman Cathy Andriadis said the company has not seen a copy of the Houston lawsuit and was not in a position to comment on the allegations. However, she did say through a written statement that DuPont was not involved in the design and construction of switches, wires and circuits regarding cruise control mechanisms.
"We supply raw material films to our customers, who, in turn, work with their customers on specific applications that may utilize DuPont's film," Andriadis said. "How and when the film is used in a given application is determined by the device maker, not DuPont."
The lawsuit is seeking punitive and compensatory damages. It also seeks to recover the costs of the suit and attorneys' fees.
Web sites: www.ti.com and www.ford.com.
Posted Jun 17, 2005, 8:32 AM ET by Eric Bryant
Related entries: Trucks/Pickups
A new lawsuit has been filed that blames a woman’s death on a defective Texas Instruments cruise-control switch inside her 1996 Ford F-150. Darletta Mohlis died in a house fire in May while her truck was parked inside her garage. Ford claims the fire started elsewhere and that the truck was not the cause. Where the lawsuit gets a bit absurd is that DuPont has also been named, as they supplied raw materials (Kapton and Teflon) for the switch.
I understand that it’s typical to name every party that may have some vested interest when filing such a lawsuit, but it’s highly unlikely that DuPont will be found liable. What is likely is that they’ll burn through hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process of defending themselves, which doesn’t seem like a good use of their resources.
TI’s liability (assuming the switch was at fault) is a more difficult question, as Tier 1 suppliers (who ship directly to the OEM) are usually deeply involved in the design and validation process. If Ford under-specified the switch and TI met the inadequate specifications, then the burden should fall on Ford’s shoulders. On the other hand, it’s possible the TI delivered a part that did not meet all of the requirements, in which case they will feel some pain.
Some investigative reporting by WXYZ, the ABC affiliate in Detroit, includes an interview by a TI representative that pins the blame on Ford’s usage of the switch (of course). The fact that TI has paid out millions of dollars in out-of-court settlements, usually after being called into court by Ford as a third-party defendant, would seem to imply that TI is at fault. The failure mode - brake fluid enters the switch from the master cylinder, causing a short that ignites a fire - certainly seems to be a result of a switch design flaw. TI, however, claims that Ford powered the switch from a 15-amp circuit but specified it for only 1 amp, and additionally powered the switch from a Hot At All Time feed (instead of a switched ignition circuit) that left the vehicle vulnerable to the failure even once the ignition was switched off and the owner had walked away. The contention here is that while TI built a defective product, Ford applied it in such a manner that turned a benign failure into a catastrophic one.
The bottom line is that there’s been property damage and loss of life due to what was probably regarded at the time as a simple component in a well-developed subsystem. It goes to show the difficulty in producing a large number of complex and safe vehicles when cost is such a critical parameter. Sometime, sweating the details means more than making a rattle-free piece of interior trim.
Ford Recall, Part II
By Steve Wilson
February 28, 2005
Ford owners are shocked by the Action News investigation into a defective part related to fires that have destroyed vehicles, and even burned down houses. A few weeks ago, the automaker recalled nearly a million vehicles to address this problem, but as chief investigator Steve Wilson reported, the problem may involve more than 10 times as many cars.
The vehicles in question possibly number about 8-10 million Fords of all kinds, not just the 800,000 pickups and SUV’s the company recalled last month.
The owners of one home say a defective cruise control switch under the hood of a Ford parked in their garage sparked an inferno that destroyed virtually everything they had.
Our Action News Investigation confirms this is not an isolated case.
Yet another home burned to the ground, allegedly started by a faulty switch built into that garaged Ford, which was destroyed along with everything else.
"We had nothing but the clothes on our backs. We lost everything," Ford owner Charlie Everts explains.
Meanwhile in rural Munith, Michigan north of Jackson, Bill Lantis suspects the fire that destroyed his pole barn and everything stored inside was sparked by a defective switch in the Ford pickup he parked inside.
If you missed it in part one of our Action News investigation, the small switch we’re talking about shuts off your cruise control when you tap your foot on the brake. That in turn sends brake fluid surging up into the switch, and when it reaches the electrical contacts on top, it switches off the cruise control.
Fire investigator Jeff Morrill has seen plenty of failures that fit a pattern.
Wilson to Jeff Morrill/Fire Investigator: And you’re saying the problem is that there’s supposed to be seals here that keep brake fluid from getting to the electrical portions when you don’t want it to?
Morrill: Absolutely.
Wilson: And the seal breaks down, the fluid leaks from here to the electrical part and causes a short of some kind.
And why are houses burning?
Morrill: It normally happens after the vehicle’s shut off.
Wilson: You park it, you put it in the garage, you take the keys, you go inside and current is still flowing through that switch.
Morrill: Current still has the ability to flow.
Safety experts are seriously concerned, because the same or substantially similar switch design is built into in 8 million or more Fords -- perhaps 420 models, 1992’s through some ‘04’s -- yet the recall covers only three 2000 year models, and a few 2001 model pickups.
Morrill: I’ve seen fires in 97’s and 98’s, all the way up through ’01 and ’02 of a similar nature.
Wilson: And you think they know that this very same switch or substantially similar switch in so many other cars is a serious risk, and they’re just not telling us?
Morrill: Yes. Dollars and cents. It’s dollars and cents.
And that’s where our investigation leads us now: Just how long has Ford known more about this potentially deadly defect than the automaker’s been telling?
Clarence Ditlow/Center For Auto Safety: I’ve seen this countless times by Ford Motor Company, where they try to limit it to a certain model or a certain model year and the name of the game is "let’s not do a 10-million or 2-million vehicle recall, let’s do a few hundred thousand vehicle recall."
Clarence Ditlow says Ford is again employing the same so-called "containment strategy" it used in an earlier recall of cruise control switches back in 1999. Now, we’ve obtained evidence that Ford knew—or certainly should have known long ago -- that the switches are prone to catch fire the way they’re used.
Action News has acquired footage of testing by Texas Instruments, the company that produced the switches, and more testing by Ford technicians themselves who saw this problem long ago.
When seals inside fail and fluid touches the electrical contacts, intense heat builds up, until smoke pours from the switch and ultimately it spits out fire.
The date is December 17, 1999, and Steven Beringhause is testifying under oath. Beringhause, a Texas Instruments engineering manager, was educated at MIT and was responsible for production of the cruise control switches that were catching Fords on fire and wreaking damage back in the 90’s.
In addition to his testimony, which Ford heard more than five years ago in a lawsuit filed by a Ford owner in wake of a fire, Action News has also acquired internal memos from inside Texas Instruments describing "dismal results" of switch testing way back in 1992, when these kinds of fires were first reported.
"All 12 (switch) devices failed..." says one memo.
Beringhause says when T-I produced the switch, nobody at Ford ever mentioned what seems to be a critical factor, that electric current—and lots of it—flows through the switch even when cars were off and sitting parked.
Beringhause testimony: We were surprised that the switch was continuous powered in the system.
He says the switch was never tested for 15 amps that were running through it once Ford installed it on vehicles.
Beringhause: The testing on the switches has never been tested that high that I’m aware of. It’s probably tested to around one amp.
So, what did T-I tell Ford—more than five years ago—that could be done to possibly avert the fires?
Beringhause: Based on some of the tests results that we ran, we recommended that the amount of power that potentially could be applied to the switch should be decreased and limited, current limited.
At the time he testified, he said he was not aware Ford had made any changes, and a spokeswoman for the automaker tells us today:
"Discussions between Ford and our suppliers are private matters..."
Ford has refused to discuss the issue publicly. When our investigation continues Tuesday on Action News at 6, Ford has been down this road before.
Clarence Ditlow: Ford took the exact same strategy in the ignition switch fires in the earlier 90’s. These are the people who are doing a cost-benefit analysis and they’re seeing whether it is cheaper to stonewall than recall.
Also, we’ll tell the story of John Dodson, who says his parents died as a result of Ford’s footdragging in recalling other defective cars, and the internal Ford memos which show he may be right.
bizjournals.com
Lawsuit blames TI, Ford in woman's death
Thursday June 16, 5:01 pm ET
A lawsuit filed by the family of an Iowa woman who died in a fire last month claims Ford Motor Co. and Texas Instruments Inc. are guilty of negligence.
The lawsuit claims that the death of Darletta Mohlis, who died from injuries from a fire in her home May 2, was the result of the failure of a cruise control deactivation switch inside her 1996 F-150 truck that was made by Texas Instruments.
The suit, filed in a Harris County District Court, also names Wilmington, Del.-based E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. (NYSE:DD - News), which made the Kapton and Teflon coatings used in the switch.
According to the suit, Dallas-based TI (NYSE:TXN - News) and Ford (NYSE:F - News) were aware of more than 200 previous incidents in which engine-compartment fires resulted from speed control deactivation switch failures, but limited a recall to certain model-year vehicles to save money.
Ford, in a statement to the Dallas Business Journal Thursday, said remnants of the switch were found at the scene by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Ford investigators and the switch was ruled out as the fire's cause.
Ford said the evidence suggests the fire started elsewhere in the garage and spread to the truck and the home.
The company said it extends its condolences to the Mohlis family and continues to cooperate with NHTSA on its investigation of the incident.
TI spokeswoman Sharon Hampton said Texas Instruments would have supplied the switch in that vehicle but the switch is just one component in the cruise control deactivation switch system.
"We don't believe there's a safety defect with the switch," she said.
The suit announced Thursday isn't the first time TI and Ford have been sued over the cruise-control deactivation switches. According to a Sept. 28, 2001, Dallas Business Journal article, nearly a dozen federal lawsuits were filed between 1996 and September 2001 in which Ford and Texas Instruments together were defendants.
Typically the plaintiffs have named Ford, which in turn has brought in TI as a third-party defendant. Though several such suits were thrown out by judges, TI and Ford settled some of them.
At the time of the 2001 article, TI had lost more than $2 million because of the federal lawsuits because the switches allegedly caused underhood fires, according to documents and interviews.
While the lawsuits claim fires took place between 1996 and 2001, TI said in a court filing that most of the fires allegedly occurred in 1998. In May 1999 Ford recalled 262,695 of those vehicles, warning that a "defective" switch could short-circuit.
DuPont spokeswoman Cathy Andriadis said the company has not seen a copy of the Houston lawsuit and was not in a position to comment on the allegations. However, she did say through a written statement that DuPont was not involved in the design and construction of switches, wires and circuits regarding cruise control mechanisms.
"We supply raw material films to our customers, who, in turn, work with their customers on specific applications that may utilize DuPont's film," Andriadis said. "How and when the film is used in a given application is determined by the device maker, not DuPont."
The lawsuit is seeking punitive and compensatory damages. It also seeks to recover the costs of the suit and attorneys' fees.
Web sites: www.ti.com and www.ford.com.