Delphi tells investigators GM knew ignition switches didn't meet specifications

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2014 2:16 AM GMT
    Could have the, at the time, forthcoming bankruptcy affected someone's decision?
    http://www.freep.com/article/20140330/BUSINESS0101/303300138/


    Configuration Principles and Engineering Change 101:

    ALWAYS change the part number when redesigned
    ALWAYS do a new PPAP for the redesigned part
    ALWAYS segregate old from new in your inventory

    Somebody is in big trouble for approving the original PPAP with known defective switches icon_evil.gif


    Apparently GM and Delphi did neither, with the bankruptcy just around the corner and the dropping of some brands, it would have been too expensive, although, they could have stopped it during the just- in- time delivery schedules, little did the engineers (Management) know at the time, a government ballout would be also forthcoming. There must have been some tremendous pressure to cut costs and corners leading up to bankruptcy, so sad lives have been lost

    None of these cars on the recall list, I would have bought anyway, I will never own another GM, '98 was my last icon_lol.gif

    http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140331/AUTO0103/303310091/Dems-want-know-why-GM-approved-faulty-ignition-switches



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2014 2:39 AM GMT
    GM, however, could still enjoy protection on any claims against it for crashes involving the vehicles prior to July 2009. As part of its bankruptcy reorganization, product claims were separated from the new company’s liabilities. Lawyers, however, could try to get that shield removed if it can be shown that GM officials knowingly misled the bankruptcy court about the threat posed by the switches.


    Bastards icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2014 3:45 AM GMT
    GM avoided defective switch redesign in 2005 to save a dollar each
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-avoided-defective-switch-redesign-015031821.html

    The document showed that the part number did not change, when redesigned, an issue which GM said hampered its own internal investigation.

    "It is inconceivable," Barra said, when asked about the design change without a corresponding change in part number. "It is not our process."



    icon_lol.gif



    Ignition Switch In Deadly Recalls Was Secretly Designed In House Because GM Felt They Could Do A Better Job
    http://www.autospies.com/news/Ignition-Switch-In-Deadly-Recalls-Was-Secretly-Designed-In-House-Because-GM-Felt-They-Could-Do-A-Better-Job-80714/
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS7SYrShmhkDRz8z7Aafbu
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2014 6:45 AM GMT
    They ALL have their problems

    http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/hyundai.htm
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Apr 02, 2014 5:13 PM GMT
    GM started Delphi and was spun off, so it was the same lousy managers involved
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2014 2:36 AM GMT
    GM validation sign off
    http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/sites/default/files/documents/GM-Commodity-Validation-Sign-Off-2006-4-26.pdf


    I see what happened, if I were to do a cause, corrective action, it would be this, now if anyone important can see this, I know what I am talking about, this is what I do, although I cant find what is on page 2 of the form icon_rolleyes.gif


    Cause- Improper use of this form, form lacking for data

    *The original drawing and the new drawing on the same line in this form
    *Since resubmit for engineering change box checked, only the new drawing should be indicated
    *Since resubmit for engineering change box checked, only the new part number should be indicated
    *Purchase order missing, should be new purchase order number for new part/drawing/parts list number,
    *Validation engineer signature missing- needed to verify test pass of new part but no where on form to check
    *Engineering change level is missing, should be Revision - (release) for new part number only
    *Old part, part number and drawing not captured to be obsoleted when new drawing released, should be noted in comments
    *Form lacks any Quality Assurance oversight at GM/prime, sole responsibility is suppliers


    Corrective Action- Training, modification and review

    *Review internal procedure in the use of this form and provide training records from supplier and prime
    *Review form format, add test requirement sign off, if so required for engineering changes
    *Recommend form overall, add QA check and retraining in its use, GM engineers and its suppliers


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2014 3:26 AM GMT
    Karma icon_razz.gif


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2014 8:00 PM GMT

    And why was top management NOT found at fault again? I am so glad this information has come out, a bit disappointing, but really not surprised, at the cover up culture at GM, I still will never buy one again icon_twisted.gif




    A Top GM Quality Manager Warned The Board Of 'Unsafe Vehicles' In 2002
    http://www.businessinsider.com/r-exclusive-gm-board-warned-of-serious-problems-by-quality-manager-in-2002-2014-20


    The letter from William McAleer shows that GM's directors and top management were told about serious safety defects in vehicles that were coming off the company’s production lines more than 11 years before GM recalled millions of vehicles for faulty ignition switches linked to at least 13 deaths

    McAleer said he was transferred out of his quality job in late 1998. Court records show he unsuccessfully sued GM at least four times, primarily seeking whistleblower protection.