
Frank of Montgomery, TX on June 11, 2007
I am a senior mechanical engineering major at Texas A&M University. Using my best deductive reasoning and engineering judgment I am confident in saying that I was a victim of a fire caused by a faulty cruise control switch. Many of Ford Motor Company’s vehicles have this switch and have been recalled because of the many fires that the switch has caused; however, my vehicle, a 2001 Explorer XL/Sport 4WD, VIN number is 1FMYU70E81UB34529, along with many other models was left off of the recall list despite containing this same faulty switch.
I arrived at work at 8:00 AM on May 31st, 2007. At approximately 8:30 AM a co-worker informed me that my SUV was on fire in the parking lot. I was unable to open the hood to extinguish the fire because the cable that releases the hood had melted. I was forced to sit and watch my car burn until the Dow fire department arrived and used an axe and other instruments to cut through the hood and extinguish the fire. Mr. Gordon Huntington at (979) 238-9404 was taking notes as they inspected the remains. He was in charge of the fire brigade. After the fire ended, I lifted the hood and assessed the damage. All non metal components are completely melted, the battery exploded, the electrical system is fried, the paint bubbled and peeled off many areas at the front end of the car, and the hood is destroyed. As far as the engine goes, I feel it will never be reliable again because it has been exposed to the sulfuric acid from the battery. It is common knowledge that acid changes the material properties of metals. If the engine is used again it is possible that it would develop stress fractures in areas not typical of model and eventually fail.
It is my understanding that the switch causes the fires in the following manner. The switch is installed to shut off the cruise control when the brake is applied. Therefore, the switch is mounted on the master cylinder and attached to the cruise control system on the other side. For reasons unknown to me, the wire connecting the two systems is “hot� at all times, even when the car is off and the key is removed. Further, this wire runs underneath a reservoir of a flammable, corrosive liquid commonly known as break fluid. The switch is known to be faulty because inside the switch, a thin film barrier separates brake fluid from the switch's electrical components. The barrier is known to corrode over time, exposing the live wire to the flammable break fluid. The result is a fire that quickly spreads to all areas underneath the hood. Further, I have found that consumers, whose cars were on the recall list, could look for the following symptoms: Cruise control is not working properly; brake fluid is leaking around the switch; fuses are blown near the switch; or the fuse for the speed control cannot be opened.
The consumers could look for these symptoms to know if they were in immediate danger of a fire. I, however, was uninformed, because my model was left off of the recall list for an unknown reason, and therefore did not know that I was at high risk of a fire for more than 4 months. My cruise control stopped working last winter. However, I did not feel it was worth my time to get it fixed because I primarily use the vehicle for intra-city travel. Further, my brake fluid level was low on two separate occasions in the past 6 months. The levels were never significantly low and my brakes were completely re- worked in August of 2006, so I assumed this was just a gradual settling of the system. In hind site, it is obvious that the leaking brake fluid and a faulty cruise control switch were to blame for two seemingly minor car maintenance issues.
If Ford Motor Company had recalled my vehicle, I would have been notified of the potential danger, and would have used common sense to link the two as a potentially deadly hazard. After doing some research I have found that Ford Motor Company is aware of this problem, but did not recall all vehicles with the faulty $21.00 part for unknown reasons. If my car had ignited just hours earlier there is a strong possibility that 3 lives including my own could have been lost due to Ford’s negligence. My car was parked beneath the dry, wooden deck of a beach house. When ignited, the fire would have quickly engulfed the wooden house while my roommates and I were sleeping.
Further, I am currently employed as an intern at the Air Liquide hydrogen processing plant that is located on the Dow Chemical, Oyster Creek plant facility. The address is Dow Chemical, 1499, FM 523, Freeport, TX 77541. My vehicle was on fire within feet of highly pressurized hydrogen gas lines placing the safety of hundreds of employees at risk. One could argue that the vehicle is 6 years old and therefore it is not Ford’s responsibility because older cars are more subject to system failures. I find this absurd because many of the models on the recall list are far older. These consumers were all made aware of the danger that they were in. T
hese models include: Cars 1992-1993 Ford Crown Victoria 1992-1993 Lincoln Town Car 1992-1993 Mercury Grand Marquis SUVs 1994-1996 Ford Bronco 1997-2001 Ford Expedition 1998 Ford Explorer 1998 Mercury Mountaineer 1998-2001 Lincoln Navigator 2000-2001 Ford Excursion Pickup Trucks 1994-2001 Ford F-150 1994-2001 Ford F-250 1994-2001 Ford F-350 1994-2001 Ford F-450 1994-2001 Ford F-550 1994-2001 F-Super Duty 2001 F-Series Super Crew Vans 1994-1996 Ford Econoline 1996-2001 Ford E-450 In fact, most cars that were included on the recall list are far older than my 2001 Explorer XL/Sport 4WD. This renders the argument that Ford is not responsible for past warranty vehicles with potential hazards useless in a court of law.