Automotive Archive
Is Your Car’s ‘Black Box’ Data Fair Game In An Accident?
July 16th, 2012. By AbiK
Bet you didn’t even realize your car might have a ‘black box’—one of those event data recorders (EDR) that you usually hear in reference to rescue workers mining through some airplane wreckage after a flight’s gone down. Well, while it’s not required by law, if your car has airbags, there’s a very good chance it also has an EDR in it (you can check your owner’s manual to find out, though the NHTSA states 91.6 percent of light vehicles already had them as of 2011).
And, depending on what state you live in, the information that could be recorded on your EDR in the event of a car accident could virtually be fair game for police or insurance companies.
The name ‘EDR’ comes from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) where a car EDR is defined as:
“A function or device installed in a motor vehicle to record technical vehicle and occupant information for a brief period of time (seconds, not minutes) before, during and after a crash for the purpose of monitoring and assessing vehicle safety system performance. For instance, EDRs may record (1) pre-crash vehicle dynamics and system status, (2) driver inputs, (3) vehicle crash signature, (4) restraint usage/deployment status, and (5) post-crash data such as the activation of an automatic collision notification (ACN) system.”
While a lot of folks refer to the EDR as the more commonly heard ‘black box’ from airplanes, trains and ships—there is a difference. A black box data recorder records information continuously during the entire time the airplane or train is in operation. By contrast, a car’s EDR only records the brief period of time just before an accident would occur.
So speaking of a possible car crash, who exactly has access to that EDR data if you should have a car accident? Currently, 13 states have privacy laws in place that protect EDR data. However, according to the NHTSA, “Courts can subpoena EDR data through court orders, and some States collect data under their existing State laws governing crash investigations. Some insurance policies may have contract terms related to data collection from EDRs.”
And EDR data has been used in some court cases as evidence.
But car accident lawyer Rex Parris, of R. Rex Parris Law Firm in Lancaster, CA doesn’t think EDR’s are a bad thing. Parris, who’s also the mayor of Lancaster, CA, was recently interviewed by KTVU Channel 2 News on the subject. According to the KTVU interview, Parris says, “It gives us a lot of information that would shorten trials, and—in many, many cases—remove the necessity of a trial.”
“It has the effect of keeping people honest,” said Parris. ” You know, you’re not gonna lie about your speed. You’re not gonna lie about what happened, because there’s evidence saying what happened.”
California, the state in which Parris practices law, is one of the 13 states with laws protecting EDR data privacy. California law prohibits any download of that data without the owner’s permission or a court order. Aside from California, the other states with such privacy laws are: Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, North Dakota, New Hampshire, Nevada, Oregon, Texas, Virginia and Washington.
But state laws vary and there is currently no standard for car manufacturers regarding which event data the EDRs should record. As such, there is a bill winding its way through Congress right now—Senate Bill 1813 (Section 31406)—aka MAP-21—that seeks to not only mandate installation of EDRs in all new cars starting in 2015, but also standardize which events the EDRs can capture. The bill already passed the Senate in March.
In terms of data privacy, should the bill go through, it specifies that the vehicle’s owner would have access to the data on collected on it—here are the Limitations on Information Retrieval from the bill:
(1) OWNERSHIP OF DATA- Any data in an event data recorder required under part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, regardless of when the passenger motor vehicle in which it is installed was manufactured, is the property of the owner, or in the case of a leased vehicle, the lessee of the passenger motor vehicle in which the data recorder is installed.
(2) PRIVACY- Data recorded or transmitted by such a data recorder may not be retrieved by a person other than the owner or lessee of the motor vehicle in which the recorder is installed unless–
(A) a court authorizes retrieval of the information in furtherance of a legal proceeding;
(B) the owner or lessee consents to the retrieval of the information for any purpose, including the purpose of diagnosing, servicing, or repairing the motor vehicle;
(C) the information is retrieved pursuant to an investigation or inspection authorized under section 1131(a) or 30166 of title 49, United States Code, and the personally identifiable information of the owner, lessee, or driver of the vehicle and the vehicle identification number is not disclosed in connection with the retrieved information; or
(D) the information is retrieved for the purpose of determining the need for, or facilitating, emergency medical response in response to a motor vehicle crash.
The bill, however, still needs to get through the House. So stay tuned.
CarFax Consumer Fraud? You be the Judge
May 3rd, 2012. By AbiK
This kind of thing can really tick a person off—when a website does a bait and switch with you. Check out CarFax—the ‘vehicle history reports’ website. Folks go to CarFax with pretty much one purpose in mind—to look up a car’s VIN number (the Vehicle Identification Number) in order to find out the car’s repair history—or what problems that particular car might have. Here’s the CarFax homepage:
You’ll note—how can you not?—the khaki-clad Car Fox inviting you to do a “Free Vehicle Search”. Talk about a wolf (ok, a fox) in sheep’s clothing. No asterisks. No disclaimers. Just a couple of fields that you can input either a car’s VIN number or the license plate number and state where it’s registered and…bingo!…you should get some car info. For free, right?
No, not right. Here’s what you get on the next screen:
Want any actual information about the car—it’ll cost you $34.99. See it’s a “vehicle” search—not a “vehicle information” search.
Now, I knew this already—trying to get a vehicle history report online for free is like trying to get blood from a stone. But at least on sites like Vin Central you get a portion of the history report and then there is a fee if you want the whole report. The key, however, is that Vin Central never says or implies upfront that you’ll get anything for free. So with Vin Central, you at least feel that the company hasn’t tried to bamboozle you.
But CarFax? When it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck…and this duck looks and walks like false advertising. And sadly, just a quick search on LawyersandSettlements.com shows that CarFax false advertising complaints are not new.
If you scroll to the very bottom of the CarFax homepage, to the list of links there, you’ll see “FREE SERVICES”. And yes, you can find out whether a car has been identified as a lemon or not. For free. You can also conduct a CarFax “Record Check”—which, ironically, is basically the same thing as the “Free Vehicle Search” above—you get a “search” but no “search results“. The Record Check tells you how many records have been found and then if you want to actually see those records, well, you need to hand over that $34.99. But at least you know you were only supposed to get a record check—not necessarily the records AND the information found in those records.
So is this CarFax consumer fraud? It certainly looks like a bait and switch to me, but you be the judge.
Are You Part of Ford Spark Plug Class Action? Read on…
September 16th, 2011. By AbiK
The video above, which shows some broken Ford spark plugs–or more specifically, broken spark plugs from a 2004 Ford F150 Triton 5.4L V8–also shows what the recent Ford spark plug class action lawsuit is all about. A quick surf around the internet found that Ford owners who’ve had this problem have paid bills of a few hundred dollars to $750 to $4,500 and who knows how much more to get the spark plug problem fixed.
So what’s the deal with the Ford spark plug class action lawsuit? Here’s the lowdown…
Reason for Ford Spark Plug Class Action Lawsuit
The Ford spark plug lawsuit claims that spark plugs in certain Ford models break during replacement. As a result, broken pieces or fragments of the defective spark plugs get stuck in the cylinder head, which has led to expensive repair shop bills in order to remove the broken spark plug pieces and/or repair damage to engines. The Ford spark plug class action lawsuit is a defective product lawsuit.
Ford did issue a Technical Service Bulletin (08-7-6) in 2008 which provided instruction (11 pages!) on how to properly remove the spark plugs.
Ford Models included in the Ford Spark Plug Class Action Lawsuit
The “class” for this lawsuit would include owners of the following Ford, Lincoln and Mercury models:
Ford
- 2005-2008 Mustang
- 2004-2008 F-150
- 2005-2008 Expedition, F-Super Duty
- 2006-2008 Explorer
- F-53 Motorhome Chassis
- 2007-2008 Explorer Sport Trac
Lincoln
- 2005-2008 Navigator
- 2006-2008 Mark LT
Mercury
- 2006-2008 Mountaineer
To File a Ford Spark Plug Class Action Complaint
Fill out and submit your complaint form.
Distracted Driver Alert: Keep your Hands off My Ford Touch
June 13th, 2011. By Hunter West
The distracted driver is becoming just as serious a problem as drunk driving used to be before society woke up, looked in the rear view mirror and saw themselves as the pariahs they had become. People still drive drunk—or tired, which is almost as bad—but the penalties for a DUI have increased and there is no longer any tolerance for it.
Distracted driving is the new battleground. The other day near where I live an 18-year-old plowed head-on into a transport truck with his small car. He didn’t stand a chance; the tragedy is that he had been texting while driving. His phone records indicate he had sent a text to a friend just seconds before his promising life came to a tragic end, in an instant.
So why, are manufacturers putting more distracting technology in their vehicles? Because the other guy is, and they want to out-tech to compete? Are drivers asking for this stuff?
Has everybody gone nuts?
Consumer Reports magazine is a bastion of common sense. No ties to lobbyists or manufacturers, funded privately through subscriptions with no bias, with independent testing facilities and protocols second to none. When Consumer Reports likes, or dislikes something, there is significant weight to that recommendation or rejection.
So it is telling that Consumer Reports no longer recommends the Ford Edge Sport.
Why? Because the 2011 model has too much damned technology on board, available to the driver in the cockpit. Specifically, the issue is the MyFord Touch system.
Witness a recent summation of the system by a reviewer in The New York Times:
“Ford has added an 8-inch LCD touch screen in the center of the dash that now coordinates not only entertainment functions, like the radio, satellite radio and MP3 playback, but also phone calls, the navigation system and the climate control, as well as settings for, among many others, the traction and cruise controls.”
In other words, way too much stuff to fiddle with. Consumer Reports has come down hard on it, and cited the system as one of the reasons why the vehicle had low test scores.
There is no question that the technology is amazing. It’s just out of place. And the addition of a touch screen to the dashboard of the 2011 Ford Edge had engineers at Ford balking, arguing that it could be considered a source of driver distraction.
But Ford went ahead with it anyway, assuming presumably that such technology would make boffo TV ads. And it does. The system sounds mighty impressive.
But it’s misplaced in a car, accessible to the driver.
Here’s reviewer John R. Quain again, writing May 27th in The New York Times:
“While [the screen] has some benefits, like a crystal-clear view from the rear-facing camera, it lacks tactile feedback. So when you reach down to tap on a music selection you must take your eyes off the road or you’ll touch the incorrect tiny button…”
He also noted that the screen is about four or five inches too low, forcing the driver to look down and to the right when accessing the screen.
Which means, the driver is taking his eyes off the road—just for an instant.
That’s how long the 18 year-old took his eyes off the road to hit ‘send’ on his smartphone, a microsecond before his car slammed head-on into the transport truck.
Ford may have a techno-marvel on its hands. However, I have to disagree that the cockpit is the proper place for it. And if a family member of mine were ever to be hurt or maimed by a distracted 2011 Ford Edge driver due to the complexity and availability of the MyFord Touch system, I would make damn sure that the manufacturer that built the silly system into the car in the first place, was one of the primary defendants of my car accident lawsuit.
Dear Chevy, Check out my HHR Key Stuck in Ignition Video!
May 6th, 2011. By LucyC
Dear Chevy,
Here’s an HHR Chevy Key Stuck in Ignition video from one of our readers, Melvin. Check it out—you can even see his fingers going white in areas from the amount of pressure he’s applying to try to get the blessed key out of the ignition. What gives?
Thanks for sharing this Melvin!
ps—if you find yourself stuck in your Chevy HHR with a problem, just grab your phone, videotape it and send it to us at …we’ll be sure to post it!
Find us on
Archive by Category
- Accidents (24)
- Airlines (9)
- Asbestos Mesothelioma (262)
- Automotive (25)
- Celebrity (14)
- Class Action (84)
- Complaints/Comments (15)
- Consumer Fraud (84)
- Contest (2)
- Court of Public Opinion (5)
- Crazy Sh*t Lawyers See (61)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Defective Products (111)
- DePuy ASR Hip Recall (2)
- Discrimination (22)
- Drugs/Medical (248)
- Elder Care Abuse (4)
- Emerging Issues (462)
- Employment (54)
- Environment (52)
- Financial (28)
- Food Illness (15)
- Human/Civil Rights (4)
- Insecurities (5)
- Insurance (16)
- Intellectual Property (16)
- Internet/E-commerce (19)
- lawsuits (161)
- Lawyers (20)
- Lawyers Giving Back (43)
- Lex Levity (10)
- Personal Injury (106)
- Pleading Ignorance (53)
- Real Estate (2)
- Recall (6)
- Scam (3)
- Securities (13)
- Settlement (81)
- Tort Reform (2)
- Totally Tortelicious (81)
- Veterans (11)
- Whistleblower (9)