2005 Ford Focus Zx4 Sedan 4-door 2.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Enterprise customer billed $47k for Mustang stolen from rental lot

A weekend rental of a Ford Mustang GT Convertible sounds like a nice, relaxing way to burn some gas, but one Nova Scotia woman's two-day rental is turning into a months-long headache. In early October, Kristen Cockerill picked up the Mustang from Enterprise Rent-A-Car, and she returned it the following day as stipulated by the rental contract. Unfortunately, she dropped the car off on a Sunday - a day on which the particular Enterprise office is closed - and the car ended up being stolen overnight.
Now, two months later, CBC reports that Cockerill received a bill from Enterprise for the full replacement of the car totaling $47,271 (a base 2014 Mustang GT Convertible currently costs $40,349 in Canada). As it turns out, the fine print in the contract says that the renter is responsible for cars dropped off after hours until it can be inspected the next business day - this is also reflected on the key drop seen in the news report video, which states "vehicles returned after hours are the responsibility of the renter until inspected on the next business day."
It's not clear how much, if any, of that amount Cockerhill will be responsible for once her insurance company gets involved, but if the insurance company refuses to pay, Enterprise will bill the amount to the credit card she provided during her rental. While this ordeal is far over for Cockerhill, it's a good reminder for the rest of us to always read the fine print.

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

Ford forced to recall Escape over fire risk yet again

Recalls happen. Automakers hope they won't, but they do. And that's alright, for the most part, because cars are designed (and to a large degree still made) by humans, and humans make mistakes. So we forgive them, as long as the problem is resolved. Only in the case of the Ford Escape, the problem seems to keep coming back.
That's why Ford is calling in the Escape yet again due to fire concerns. The issue revolves around problematic fuel lines in 9,469 units manufactured between October 5, 2011, and July 11, 2012, all of which use the 1.6-liter EcoBoost inline four-cylinder engine.
As you yourself may recall, the Escape was subject to a string of recalls last year that resulted in a $17 million fine. One of them was over this very same issue, which Ford apparently didn't rectify the first time around. Let's hope this time is the last time.