Bulletins
| Bulletin | Bulletin date | Replacement Bulletin | Item no. | Summary | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STRUCTURE - BODY - HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE | |||||
| TSB-12-4-3 | 04/03/2012 | 10044854 | Ford: vehicle's liftgate is difficult to open or difficult to close. *pe | 08/01/2012 | |
| TSB-10-22-10 | 11/09/2010 | 10039131 | Ready | 07/11/2011 | |
| TSB-10-22-10 | 11/09/2010 | 10039131 | Ford:the liftgate window glass may break in cold temperatures. 2010-2011 escape/mariner. *rm | 07/11/2011 | |
| TSB-11-2-9 | 02/11/2011 | 10039080 | Ready | 07/07/2011 | |
| TSB-11-2-9 | 02/11/2011 | 10039080 | Ford: the liftgate window glass may break in cold temperatures. 2010-2011 escape/mariner. *rm | 07/07/2011 | |
Investigations
| NHTSA ID | Manufacturer | Date open | Date close | Subject | Recall campaign | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STRUCTURE - BODY - HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE | ||||||
| PE11016 | FORD MOTOR COMPANY | 04/27/2011 | 08/18/2011 | Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage | ||
| In its response to the agency, ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (my) 2010 to early-build my 2011 subject vehicles.the incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends odi investigates) that could explain the reports.it did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.starting at my 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in october 2010, during my 2011 vehicle production.odi's review of ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, odi identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.all the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see pe04-045, my 2002 ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in nhtsa safety recall 04v442). in november 2010 ford issued technical service bulletin (tsb) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all my 2010 vehicles, and my 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.the tsb enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.a safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.accordingly, this investigation is closed.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances. | ||||||
| PE11016 | FORD MOTOR COMPANY | 04/27/2011 | Liftgate Window Glass Breakage | |||
| Odi has received eighteen consumer complaints concerning liftgate window glass breakage on 2010-2011 ford escape and mercury mariner vehicles. the complaints alleged that the liftgate window glass shattered spontaneously, while opening the liftgate or while closing the liftgate. in one alleged injury incident, the complainant and her 10 year old son were cut by glass fragments.many of the incidents occurred during cooler temperature operation.ford issued tsb 10-22-10 dated november 22, 2010 titled broken liftgate window glass - built on or before 10/15/2010 for the subject vehicles.the issue section of the tsb states some 2010-2011 escape and mariner vehicles built on or before 10/15/2010 may experience the liftgate window glass breakage, typically when colder ambient temperature are present.this pe investigation is opened to ascertain the extent of the issue. | ||||||
| STRUCTURE - BODY - HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE - HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS | ||||||
| PE11016 | FORD MOTOR COMPANY | 04/27/2011 | 08/18/2011 | Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage | ||
| In its response to the agency, ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (my) 2010 to early-build my 2011 subject vehicles.the incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends odi investigates) that could explain the reports.it did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.starting at my 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in october 2010, during my 2011 vehicle production.odi's review of ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, odi identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.all the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see pe04-045, my 2002 ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in nhtsa safety recall 04v442). in november 2010 ford issued technical service bulletin (tsb) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all my 2010 vehicles, and my 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.the tsb enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.a safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.accordingly, this investigation is closed.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances. | ||||||
| PE11016 | FORD MOTOR COMPANY | 04/27/2011 | Liftgate Window Glass Breakage | |||
| Odi has received eighteen consumer complaints concerning liftgate window glass breakage on 2010-2011 ford escape and mercury mariner vehicles. the complaints alleged that the liftgate window glass shattered spontaneously, while opening the liftgate or while closing the liftgate. in one alleged injury incident, the complainant and her 10 year old son were cut by glass fragments.many of the incidents occurred during cooler temperature operation.ford issued tsb 10-22-10 dated november 22, 2010 titled broken liftgate window glass - built on or before 10/15/2010 for the subject vehicles.the issue section of the tsb states some 2010-2011 escape and mariner vehicles built on or before 10/15/2010 may experience the liftgate window glass breakage, typically when colder ambient temperature are present.this pe investigation is opened to ascertain the extent of the issue. | ||||||
| STRUCTURE - BODY - HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE - SUPPORT DEVICE | ||||||
| PE11016 | FORD MOTOR COMPANY | 04/27/2011 | 08/18/2011 | Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage | ||
| In its response to the agency, ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (my) 2010 to early-build my 2011 subject vehicles.the incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends odi investigates) that could explain the reports.it did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.starting at my 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in october 2010, during my 2011 vehicle production.odi's review of ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, odi identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.all the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see pe04-045, my 2002 ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in nhtsa safety recall 04v442). in november 2010 ford issued technical service bulletin (tsb) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all my 2010 vehicles, and my 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.the tsb enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.a safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.accordingly, this investigation is closed.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances. | ||||||
| PE11016 | FORD MOTOR COMPANY | 04/27/2011 | Liftgate Window Glass Breakage | |||
| Odi has received eighteen consumer complaints concerning liftgate window glass breakage on 2010-2011 ford escape and mercury mariner vehicles. the complaints alleged that the liftgate window glass shattered spontaneously, while opening the liftgate or while closing the liftgate. in one alleged injury incident, the complainant and her 10 year old son were cut by glass fragments.many of the incidents occurred during cooler temperature operation.ford issued tsb 10-22-10 dated november 22, 2010 titled broken liftgate window glass - built on or before 10/15/2010 for the subject vehicles.the issue section of the tsb states some 2010-2011 escape and mariner vehicles built on or before 10/15/2010 may experience the liftgate window glass breakage, typically when colder ambient temperature are present.this pe investigation is opened to ascertain the extent of the issue. | ||||||
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| STRUCTURE - BODY | |||
| 01/09/2013 | 19464 | 1 | |
| It was about 30 degrees and my 13 year old daughter went to put a item in my 2011 ford escape parked in my drive way. upon closing the rear lift gate the glass shattered into tiny pieces. this caused scratches and other body damage to the vehicle when the hydraulic arms and wiper blade assembly gave way when the glass shattered. the vehicle is 2 years old and under warranty. i called the dealer where i purchased it and was told to turn it into my insurance. no other help was offered!!! mind you its 30 degrees out and i have 2 young children and live in a rural area. i did as i was told and reported to my insurance co. they tried to hook me up with several glass places with no luck. the closest was 35 miles away and said it would be about 2 weeks to get the glass because its not something they have in stock. i had to drive to a local mechanic with no rear window in the middle of winter with two kids just to get it covered with plastic so i could have a car to drive. am i wrong to think ford could have done more to help???? *tr | |||
| 01/09/2013 | 19464 | ||
| It was about 30 degrees and my 13 year old daughter went to put a item in my 2011 ford escape parked in my drive way. upon closing the rear lift gate the glass shattered into tiny pieces. this caused scratches and other body damage to the vehicle when the hydraulic arms and wiper blade assembly gave way when the glass shattered. the vehicle is 2 years old and under warranty. i called the dealer where i purchased it and was told to turn it into my insurance. no other help was offered!!! mind you its 30 degrees out and i have 2 young children and live in a rural area. i did as i was told and reported to my insurance co. they tried to hook me up with several glass places with no luck. the closest was 35 miles away and said it would be about 2 weeks to get the glass because its not something they have in stock. i had to drive to a local mechanic with no rear window in the middle of winter with two kids just to get it covered with plastic so i could have a car to drive. am i wrong to think ford could have done more to help???? | |||
| 01/06/2013 | 24500 | 1 | |
| After unloading items from rear cargo area, tailgate was closed, and the rear tailgate window exploded in my face spontaneously. it seemed as if the reciprocating arms perhaps did not collapse completely and went through the window. an individual who assisted in cleaning up the debris was cut by the glass. *tr | |||
| 01/06/2013 | 24500 | ||
| After unloading items from rear cargo area, tailgate was closed, and the rear tailgate window exploded in my face spontaneously. it seemed as if the reciprocating arms perhaps did not collapse completely and went through the window. an individual who assisted in cleaning up the debris was cut by the glass. | |||
| 11/21/2012 | 15800 | 1 | |
| I filled my gas tank at a holiday gas station/store in escanaba, mi about 6 p.m., november 21 while traveling. i filled the tank, locked the vehicle, and went into the store for a snack. when i returned to the vehicle, an employee was sweeping up glass from my back window which she heard explode. the window was completely gone. there was nothing against the back window or the hatch back that would cause stress. fishing equipment was lying flat on the floor. i drove 200 miles home with no window. besides the employee witness, i filed a police report with the escanaba police. i contacted a ford dealership and was told to take pictures. i sent documentation along with the pictures to the dealership. that was not good enough for ford. i was told to take the car to the dealership where the body repair manager took pictures and sent them to ford who came back denying the warranty coverage on the glass because it cannot be proven that this was a ford glass defect. i drove 200 miles round trip wasting an afternoon of my time. i have contact and talked with ford customer relations a half dozen time. i asked the witness to call ford customer relations to verify that i was not even in the vehicle at the time of the glass explosion. glass few from 10 to 15 feet in small, deadly pieces. luckily, i or someone else was not standing behind the car. i have not opened the back window for months finding it easier to remove item by lifting the hatchback door. in contacting ford customer relations, i was told that once a decision has been made, it could not be reversed. i asked to speak to someone in authority and was told that once a decision was made by ford, it could not be reversed and was given an address to write my complaint. *tr | |||
| 11/21/2012 | 15800 | ||
| I filled my gas tank at a holiday gas station/store in escanaba, mi about 6 p.m., november 21 while traveling. i filled the tank, locked the vehicle, and went into the store for a snack. when i returned to the vehicle, an employee was sweeping up glass from my back window which she heard explode. the window was completely gone. there was nothing against the back window or the hatch back that would cause stress. fishing equipment was lying flat on the floor. i drove 200 miles home with no window. besides the employee witness, i filed a police report with the escanaba police. i contacted a ford dealership and was told to take pictures. i sent documentation along with the pictures to the dealership. that was not good enough for ford. i was told to take the car to the dealership where the body repair manager took pictures and sent them to ford who came back denying the warranty coverage on the glass because it cannot be proven that this was a ford glass defect. i drove 200 miles round trip wasting an afternoon of my time. i have contact and talked with ford customer relations a half dozen time. i asked the witness to call ford customer relations to verify that i was not even in the vehicle at the time of the glass explosion. glass few from 10 to 15 feet in small, deadly pieces. luckily, i or someone else was not standing behind the car. i have not opened the back window for months finding it easier to remove item by lifting the hatchback door. in contacting ford customer relations, i was told that once a decision has been made, it could not be reversed. i asked to speak to someone in authority and was told that once a decision was made by ford, it could not be reversed and was given an address to write my complaint. | |||
| 12/21/2011 | 4267 | 1 | |
| I pulled into a parking space next to the building where i work and the vehicle surged forward and hit the brick wall, broke a window and dented the building ac unit. damage to my vehicle hood, bumper and grille. cost to repair $4282.75. *tr september 25,2012 i took it to the ford dealer where it was purchased because it continues to surg forward on a daily basis. they were unable to find anything wrong with the vehicle. | |||
| 12/21/2011 | 4267 | ||
| I pulled into a parking space next to the building where i work and the vehicle surged forward and hit the brick wall, broke a window and dented the building ac unit. damage to my vehicle hood, bumper and grille. cost to repair $4282.75. september 25,2012 i took it to the ford dealer where it was purchased because it continues to surg forward on a daily basis. they were unable to find anything wrong with the vehicle. | |||
| 11/09/2011 | |||
| Rear windshield exploded when my colleague was putting his belongings in the back of my suv. brand new car and the the car wasn't turned for more than 5 minutes. | |||