2 Door Coupe - Blue on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford sued over alleged 3.5-liter EcoBoost defects

Three Ford owners from Ohio have filed a lawsuit against the automaker over defects that they allege exist within the company's twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter V6 EcoBoost engine. Automotive News reports that the lawsuit claims the engine "contained serious latent design, manufacturing, or assembly defects." Those defects, the suit claims, cause the vehicle to shake, misfire and lose power quickly.
Two of the plaintiffs, a married couple, own a 2010 Ford Taurus SHO, and allege they experienced a loss of power and stalling, while the third, an F-150 owner, claims he lost power while accelerating. In addition to the Taurus SHO and F-150, the 3.5-liter V6 EcoBoost engine is also available in the Ford Flex, Explorer Sport and Lincoln MKT and MKS. Other three- and four-cylinder EcoBoost engines are not included in the suit. There have been no recalls associated with 3.5-liter V6 engine, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is currently not investigating the matter.
The plaintiffs, however, claim Ford has known about the problem, citing several technical service bulletins issued to dealers of the F-150 that suggest possible fixes. Ford had no comment for Automotive News, saying that it's yet to review the lawsuit, which was filed last Friday in Columbus, OH.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.

EU formally questions French government assistance of Peugeot's finance arm

Recently, the finance arm of PSA/Peugeot-Citroën was in such debt trouble that it was pricing itself out of the car loan market. The rates it was paying to service its debt, which was rated one step above junk, were so high that it was forced to charge car-buying customers higher rates than they could find elsewhere. This was adding to Peugeot's already impressive woes by sending revenue out the door to competitors.
Two months ago a deal was worked out with the French government whereby the state would provide 7 billion euro ($9 billion USD) in bonds to guarantee the finance arm's loans. The French government could nominate someone to join the Peugeot board, Peugeot would guarantee more French jobs, and on top of that deal, other banks would provide non-guaranteed loans. The government would take no equity stake in the car company.
Although not yet finalized, the arrangement is meant to create some breathing room for Peugeot Finance to lower its interest rates for customers, and a government-nominated board member, Louis Gallois, was recently named to Peugeot's supervisory board. The arrangement was also openly questioned by at least three competitors: Ford, Renault - which is 15-percent owned by the French government after it received state aid - and the German state of Lower Saxony, itself a 15-percent shareholder in Volkswagen.