The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
n is expanding its probe into 286,000 General Motors vehicles in th
eU.S. over a possible engine failure issue, the safety regulator said on Monday, following several complaints, despite a recall.
The NHTSA said the issue stems from engine bearing failures in GM’s L87 6.2-liter engine installed in mo
dels such as the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and Cadillac Escalade.
The regulator opened a preliminary investigation into the issues in January, which led to a recall in April.
GM had said the connecting rod and crankshaft engine components may have manufacturing defects that c
an lead to engine damage or failure, boosting the risk of a crash.
The NHTSA on Monday upgraded the probe to an engineering analysis on the basis of 1,157 reports of engine bearing failure.
The regulator will also assess the potential safety-related issues of vehicles built outside the recall scope.
(Reporting by Nandan Mandayam in Bengaluru; Editing by Janane Venkatraman and Shinjini Ganguli)
What prompted this month’s column was an agent inquiry about an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (I
See more beautiful photo albums Here >>>
CE) raid on a processing plant that results in food spoilage and likely a business interruption claim when 80% of the p
lant's workforce might need to be replaced and retrained in order to reopen. The claim in this case was facing a
denial citing the Government Action exclusion in his causes of loss form.
This happened at the same time that I was preparing to participate as a presenter in a webinar for at
troneys on the Government Action exclusion found in ISO commercial property causes of loss forms, homeowners forms, and their personal auto policy. The tw
o other presenters were defense attorneys who worked primaril
y for insurers. I was asked to present from a policyholder perspective
I couldn't argue the application of the exclusion which virtually all courts had found to be clear and unambiguous.
I could only challenge the absolute nature of the exclusion as being overly broad.
As best as I can tell, these exclusions were added to ISO’s commercial property line in July 1988 and to their hom
eowners program in October 2000. A limited version of t
he exclusion was added to their personal auto policy
in December 1989 and broadened significantly in June 1994. Oddly, the exclusion does not appear in ISO's primary business auto coverage form.