2016 Volvo Vnl Recalls

On October 22, 2018, an Audit Query (AQ18-005) was opened to assess the completeness and timeliness of Volvo Group's early warning reporting, safety recalls, and communications submissions to the agency.NHTSA's investigation determined that Volvo Group failed to recall vehicles in a timely fashion and to comply with other recall and reporting requirements, including notifying owners of recalls and reporting death and injury incidents.NHTSA and Volvo Group entered into a Consent Order on January 27, 2023 to resolve AQ18-005.As part of the Consent Order, Volvo Group agreed to a total civil penalty of one-hundred and thirty million dollars ($130,000,000), of which, sixty-five million dollars ($65,000,000) was paid on February 21, 2023.Also, of that total civil penalty, Volvo Group agreed to spend twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) on the specific performance obligation to create a safety data analytics infrastructure to detect and study emerging safety-related defect trends on its vehicles. The Consent Order also holds forty-five million dollars ($45,000,000) of the civil penalty in abeyance pending Volvo Group's satisfactory completion of the requirements of this Consent Order, and its compliance with the Safety Act, and regulations thereunder.The Consent Order is for a three-year term and may be extended by up to two years if NHTSA reasonably finds that an extension is warranted.In the Consent Order, Volvo Group agreed to several performance obligations, including enhanced oversight of its compliance with the Safety Act and the terms of the Consent Order through a third-party auditor and regular meetings with NHTSA.The third-party auditor will recommend and oversee implementation of process improvements to enhance Volvo Group's safety compliance processes and oversee the company's review of past recalls and submissions to NHTSA for accuracy and completeness.Also, via the Consent Order, Volvo Group agreed to create updated written policies, procedures, and training to ensure that its employees understand the requirements of the Safety Act, the regulations thereunder, and this Consent Order.Volvo Group further agreed to launch a user interface on its websites to allow users to search vehicle identification numbers (VINs) for open recalls and implement a system to support NHTSA's VIN lookup tool.Based on the Consent Order, this audit query investigation, AQ18-005, is closed.Closure of this AQ has no bearing on the terms of the Consent Order, including Volvo Group's ongoing performance obligations or legal obligations, and does not represent a determination by NHTSA as to Volvo Group's performance under the Consent Order to date.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this Defect Petition (DP) assessment in response to a defect petition received from owners of a 2015 Volvo VNL 780 tractor.Prior to submitting the letter the owners had submitted two Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQ).Their concerns included: cab sway, cab alignment , and loss of control.The petitioners further allege that due to a failure of the suspension system caused by cab misalignment one of them sustained a back injury while seated at the work station in the sleeper berth while traveling.The office received a total of six (6) complaints (1 via telephone) related to ride quality on 2013 -2016 Volvo VNL vehicles.Two (2) of the complaints were filed by the petitioners.Of the five (5) unique complaints, three (3) were received during the course of this evaluation.During this evaluation, the Owner/Operators Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) published an article in their magazine, Land Line, prompting the additional two reports.One owner reported owning three Volvo trucks, all of which had a tendency to sway and lean, yet he preferred the ride over other manufacturers peer vehicles.ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Volvo asking about the three concerns identified in the petition.The response indicated Volvo's cab air ride design has been in use since 2005.When evaluating each of the three concerns raised by the petitioners, ODI found that the complaint and warranty data did not establish existence of a defect trend for cab sway or loss of control.There were no reported injuries or loss of control events and less than 0.02% of the population had a cab sway concern.The majority of claims and complaints received involved cab alignment.The 2015 MY did stand out from the other MYs with over 1% of the 2015 population reporting cab alignment issues.This may indicate there is a defect in the design or production of the cab mounting, however there was no indication it created a safety risk.ODI test drove the petitioners' vehicle, employing an investigator with significant experience driving similar vehicles.This test drive revealed a degree of cab sway that appeared to exceed that of peer vehicles.Nonetheless, the ODI driver did not experience any difficulty controlling the vehicle.For additional details see the attached Evaluation Report.This defect petition is denied. The agency has not identified an actionable trend or unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.Should new information become available the agency will take whatever further action is appropriate.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following complaint identification numbers:10747593, 10715844, 10701592, 10781242, and 10822454