Month: September 2022

Kia is Recalling Certain 2016-2022 Sorento, 2021-2022 Sorento Hybrid (HEV), 2022-2023 Sorento Plug-In Hybrid (PHEV), and 2017-2022 Sportage Vehicles

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V703000

Manufacturer Kia America, Inc.

Components TRAILER HITCHES

Potential Number of Units Affected 70,887

Summary

Kia America, Inc. (Kia) is recalling certain 2016-2022 Sorento, 2021-2022 Sorento Hybrid (HEV), 2022-2023 Sorento Plug-In Hybrid (PHEV), and 2017-2022 Sportage vehicles equipped with a tow hitch harness installed as original equipment, or purchased as an accessory through a Kia dealership. Debris and moisture accumulation on the tow hitch harness module printed circuit board (PCB) may cause an electrical short, which can result in a fire.

Remedy

Owners are advised to park outside and away from structures until the recall repair is complete. The remedy is currently under development. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed November 14, 2022. Owners may contact Kia customer service at 1-800-333-4542. Kia’s number for this recall is SC249.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Forest River is Recalling Certain 2022-2023 Coachmen Freelander, Leprechaun, and 2023 Coachmen Prism Motorhomes

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V694000

Manufacturer Forest River, Inc.

Components EQUIPMENT

Potential Number of Units Affected 284

Summary

Forest River, Inc. (Forest River) is recalling certain 2022-2023 Coachmen Freelander, Leprechaun, and 2023 Coachmen Prism motorhomes. The auxiliary LPG quick disconnect may be improperly tightened, causing a gas leak.

Remedy

Dealers will inspect the quick disconnect, and tighten if necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed October 26, 2022. Owners may contact Forest River customer service at 1-574-825-8602. Forest River’s number for this recall is 210-1556.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Micro Bird is Recalling Certain 2018-2019 G5 Electric School Buses

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V692000

Manufacturer Corp. Micro Bird, Inc.

Components ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

Potential Number of Units Affected 7

Summary

Corp. Micro Bird Inc. (Micro Bird) is recalling certain 2018-2019 G5 electric school buses. Electrical wires in the vehicle charging port may have been improperly crimped.

Remedy

Owners are advised not to drive these buses until the repair has been completed. Micro Bird will work coordinate with the manufacturer of the charging port, Ecotuned, to replace the charging port and the air conditioning refrigerant, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed on November 1, 2022. Owners may contact Micro Bird’s customer service at 1-819-477-2012. Micro Bird’s number for this recall is 22-095-CUS.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Ford is Recalling Certain 2022 Explorer and Ranger Vehicles

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V685000

Manufacturer Ford Motor Company

Components FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE

Potential Number of Units Affected 69

Summary

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2022 Explorer and Ranger vehicles equipped with 2.3L engines. The fuel line may be loose due to improper tightening of the fuel line connection.

Remedy

Ford will inspect and replace the fuel line assembly, if needed, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed October 3, 2022. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford’s number for this recall is 22S60.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Nissan is Recalling Certain 2022 Rogue vehicles

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V660000

Manufacturer Nissan North America, Inc.

Components FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE

Potential Number of Units Affected 190

Summary

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2022 Rogue vehicles. The fuel tank may have been punctured when vehicle modifications were performed.

Remedy

Dealers will inspect and replace the fuel tank as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed September 23, 2022. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669. Nissan’s number for this recall is PC912.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Mercedes-Benz is Recalling Certain 2022 C300 vehicles.

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V678000

Manufacturer Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

Components ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

Potential Number of Units Affected 6,752

Summary

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2022 C300 vehicles. Moisture accumulation in the trunk may leak into the signal acquisition module (SAM), causing an electrical short circuit.

Remedy

Dealers will install a cover for the SAM, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed November 11, 2022. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC is Recalling Certain 2021 GLB250 Vehicles

NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V679000

Manufacturer Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

Components ELECTRONIC STABILITY CONTROL

Potential Number of Units Affected 4

Summary

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2021 GLB250 vehicles. The Electronic Stability Program (ESP) unit may be damaged, which can result in disabled anti-lock brakes (ABS), disabled electronic stability control (ESC), and an electrical short circuit.

Remedy

Dealers will replace the ESP unit, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed November 11, 2022. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372.

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.nhtsa.gov.

Custom Home Development-Wide Construction Defects Evaluation

Basic Fact Pattern
  • Development of multi-million dollar custom homes, including six homeowners all suing their builder and all of his subcontractors.
  • Alleged construction defect in the varying exterior claddings resulting in systemic moisture intrusion and widespread underlying structural damage.
  • Alleged violation of building codes and consumer protection (fraud) statutes.
  • Exterior claddings included six differing combinations of hardcoat stucco, EIFS, wood trim, composite trim, brick veneer, adhered stone veneer, and custom windows.
  • Alleged damaged included complete re-cladding of all six residences, along with treble damage associated with consumer protection.
  • Minimal documentation was available from the builder, more than one decade after construction was completed.
  • First opposing expert passed away, prior to completing his work, causing a second expert to be engaged, who offered slightly differing opinions.
Investigative Actions Taken
  • Each residence was inspected inside and out, and destructively tested for moisture intrusion and associated underlying damage.
  • Interior thermal imaging and temperature and humidity surveys were conducted.
  • Re-cladding of four residences was observed.
  • Multiple code analyses were performed across the time periods from the first home to the last one.
  • Each home was 3D modeled, with material take-offs performed for individual wall panel.
  • The varying subcontractor structures for each home were reconstructed from the documentation produced by others in the matter.
  • Detailed causation and code analysis tied each individual wall panel requiring remediation back to the cause(s) of the damage and the specific subcontractors responsible for the same.
  • Extensive comparative analysis between the two plaintiff’s expert’s opinions, including completion of the training previously performed by the deceased one.
Determinations Made
  • Construction defects and code violations were variable across the six homes, but none were systemic and widespread.
  • Some interior damage was associated with maintenance, use, and building operation, rather than moisture intrusion through the exterior claddings.
  • Remediation of all wall panels on all sides of all homes was not required.
  • A customized scope of remediation was determined for each home, along with the total costs associated with performing the same.
  • Diagrams capable of allowing a lay audience to understand both causation and damage distributions were created for each side of each home.
  • All but two subcontractors were identified, with damages distributions determined for each.
Involved Experts: 

Structural A-Frame Rack Failure on a Hauling Flatbed Tractor Trailer

Basic Fact Pattern
  • During transportation of marble and granite stone slabs, a structural failure occurred.
  • The structural failure caused a complete loss of the marble and granite slabs, along with property damage associated with the spilled debris.
  • Alleged improper loading, securement, and/or transportation of the stone slabs.
Investigative Actions Taken
  • Photos of the accident scene were analyzed, along with the geometric configuration of the actual accident location and the speed and direction of travel of the vehicle at the time of the incident.
  • The collected debris from the stone slabs were inspected and analyzed for fracture patterns.
  • The A-frames were reconstructed from the debris by matching the structural weld failures.
  • The ruptures in the tie-downs were also matched back to the accident scene photos to determine the original configurations of the A-frames and the securements utilized at the time of the accident.
Determinations Made
  • The securement and transportation methods utilized were not the cause of the structural failure.
  • The A-frame racks were provided by the material supplier, not the hauler.
  • The A-frame racks lacked adequate design, construction, and maintenance for lateral loads, relying solely on increased securement for stability.
  • The inadequate welds utilized in the A-frame racks design and construction caused the failure, in combination with a lack of adequate inspection and maintenance of the same.
  • The hauler had increased the securement utilized beyond industry requirements, however, this additional redundancy, beyond normal and usual requirements, did not prevent the accident from occurring.
Involved Experts: 

Post-Tree Impact Structural Evaluation

Basic Fact Pattern
  • Large tree strike impact to the roof and stone walls of a historic home.
  • Home reportedly shook during the impact.
  • Tree limbs penetrated the clay tile roofing and the underlying roof structure.
  • The force of the tree strike into the home caused a portion of the trunk to split into two pieces.
  • Cracks and separations were noted throughout the home after the trike strike, including within the mortar joints of the historic stone walls.
Investigative Steps Taken
  • Photos of the tree on the home, as taken prior to the tree removal, were reviewed.
  • Comprehensive inspection of the home, including within the areas broken open by the tree impact, was conducted.
  • Doors and windows were operated throughout the home, along with measurements capable of detecting overall building movement.
  • All cracks, both interior and exterior, were photographed and mapped throughout the home.
  • Cracks were separated via in-field evidence into groupings of recent cracks and historic cracks.
  • Recent cracks were comparatively analyzed against the force load path from the tree strike locations to the ground.
  •  
Determinations Made
  • Structural roof members requiring repair were identified.
  • Wall elements with recent cracks consistent with the transfer of force through the structure from the tree strike were identified.
  • The cause(s) of the remaining cracks were also identified.
  • The overall structure had not experienced any global permanent movement in response to the tree impact force.
  • A scope of repairs was developed in accordance with applicable code requirements.
  •  
Involved Experts: