Jaguar Land Rover recalls 21,000 vehicles in the US
In some cases, the torn airbag could also leak hot gas, raising the chance of burns. It marks the second time in a week that a major car manufacturer has recalled vehicles. Last week, Ford issued a warning over fears its engines could stall. A total of 20,999 Range Rover Evoque SUVs, spanning model years 2021 through 2025, are impacted.
Although no injuries or crashes have been reported so far, the British car giant is urging owners to book into dealers for a free fix. The fault was first flagged in May 2023 when abnormal airbag deployments were reported during testing.
Dealers will replace the airbag module free of charge. Retailers will be notified by July 21, with letters being sent to owners from August 29. Customers who have already paid for repairs may be eligible for reimbursement.
Owners can check whether their vehicle is affected by entering their VIN on the NHTSA recall website or via JLR's official portal. This is the second time in recent weeks that Jaguar Land Rover has faced scrutiny in the US.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Tesla ordered by Florida jury to pay $243 million in fatal Autopilot crash
Aug 1 (Reuters) - A Florida jury on Friday found Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab liable in the 2019 fatal crash of an Autopilot-equipped Model S and ordered Elon Musk's automaker to pay $243 million to the family of a deceased woman and an injured survivor. Jurors in Miami federal court awarded the estate of Naibel Benavides Leon and her former boyfriend Dillon Angulo $129 million in compensatory damages, of which Tesla is responsible for 33%, plus $200 million in punitive damages, according to a verdict sheet. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the trial was the first involving the wrongful death of a third party resulting from Autopilot. The plaintiffs had sought $345 million. Tesla has faced many similar lawsuits over its vehicles' self-driving capabilities, but they have been resolved or dismissed without getting to trial. A judge rejected Tesla's efforts to dismiss the case earlier in the summer, and experts said this may encourage other litigants against the EV maker. 'I think it's a big deal," said Alex Lemann, a professor at Marquette University Law School, who said this may make future settlements more expensive for Tesla. "This is the first time that Tesla has been hit with a judgment in one of the many, many fatalities that have happened as a result of its auto-pilot technology." Friday's verdict could impede efforts by Musk, the world's richest person, to convince investors that Tesla can become a leader in so-called autonomous driving for private vehicles as well as robotaxis it plans to start producing next year. Shares fell 1.8% on Friday. Tesla plans to appeal, according to published reports. The Austin, Texas-based company and its lawyers did not immediately respond to several requests for comment. The trial concerned an April 25, 2019 incident where George McGee drove his 2019 Model S at about 62 mph (100 kph) through an intersection into the victims' parked Chevrolet Tahoe as they were standing beside it on a shoulder. McGee had reached down to pick up a cellphone he dropped on his car's floorboard and allegedly received no alerts as he ran a stop sign and stop light before hitting the victims' SUV. "We have a driver who was acting less than perfectly, and yet the jury still found Tesla contributed to the crash," said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor and expert in autonomous technology. "The only way the jury could have possibly ruled against Tesla was by finding a defect with the Autopilot software. That's a big deal." Benavides Leon was allegedly thrown 75 feet to her death, while Angulo suffered serious injuries. "Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. "Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries," he added. Last month, Tesla posted its biggest quarterly sales decline in more than a decade, and profit fell short of Wall Street forecasts.
Auto Blog
2 hours ago
- Auto Blog
Federal jury finds Tesla partly liable for fatal Autopilot crash
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. The Macan will return with gas power, only it won't be the Macan at all. Tesla Could Now Be On The Hook For Other Autopilot Cases A jury in Miami has determined that Tesla should be held partly liable for a fatal 2019 crash involving the automaker's 'Autopilot' driver-assist system, and is requiring Tesla to pay $329 million in damages to the family of the deceased and an injured survivor, multiple news outlets reported Friday. Previous Pause Next Unmute 0:00 / 0:10 Full screen Rivian R1T delivers on this EV feature that Tesla forgot Watch More The payout includes $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages against Tesla, according to CNBC, while attorneys for the plaintiffs had asked the jury to award damages of around $345 million. The trial, which began in the Southern District of Florida July 14, is the first involving an Autopilot-related case in a federal court. Technological Vs. Human Error Source: Tesla By providing your email address, you agree that it may be used pursuant to Arena Group's Privacy Policy. The case involved an April 2019 crash in Key Largo, Florida. A Tesla Model S driven by George McGee sped through a stop sign and struck Naibel Benavides and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. Benavides was killed, while Angulo was left with a traumatic brain injury and broken bones. The couple were standing near their parked car stargazing as McGee approached in his Tesla with the 'Enhanced Autopilot' system engaged. He had dropped his phone and was trying to pick it up. During the trial, McGee reportedly said he believed Enhanced Autopilot would brake if an obstacle was in the way. Instead, the Model S continued at over 60 mph, striking the car and its owners, according to testimony. Tesla has argued that the fatal crash was wholly due to driver error, and continued to argue that its driver aids were safer than manual driving even as the trial went on, but the jury did find the automaker partly responsible in the end. More Trouble For Tesla? Source: Tesla Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. As CNBC notes, the verdict could set a precedent for other Autopilot-related suits against Tesla. There are currently around a dozen cases in progress alleging that Autopilot or Tesla's 'Full Self-Driving' system contributed to fatal or injurious crashes. The California DMV has also asked a state court to suspend Tesla's sales license for 30 days and levy financial penalties against the automaker due to alleged misleading promotion of its driver-assist tech. The DMV is reportedly concerned not only with names like Autopilot and Full Self-Driving, but also Tesla statements implying capabilities these systems don't have, such as one claiming that they are 'designed to be able to conduct short and long-distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver's seat.' All of this comes as Tesla CEO Elon Musk doubles down on promises that the future of the company lies in automation, and that it can pivot from being primarily an automaker to operating fleets of autonomous vehicles. Musk has been making similar promises for at least nine years, but Tesla's declining sales and minimal product updates indicate very little effort is being put into the existing parts of its business. About the Author Stephen Edelstein View Profile
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Tesla ordered to pay $243m over Autopilot deaths
Tesla has been ordered to pay $243m (£183m) in compensation after a jury ruled that its Autopilot technology was partly to blame for a fatal crash involving one of its cars. A Miami jury on Friday held that Elon Musk's company bore significant responsibility for the death of a young woman and serious injuries to her boyfriend because its technology had failed. They assigned blame even though a reckless driver of a Tesla Model S admitted he was distracted after dropping his mobile phone. He rammed into the couple, Naibel Benavides Leon and Dillon Angulo, who were standing next to their parked Chevrolet. 22-year-old Ms Benavides Leon died following the crash. Tesla has now been ordered to pay $43m in compensatory damages and $200m in punitive damages to Mr Angulo and the family of Ms Benavides Leon. The verdict is the latest setback for Mr Musk, who is under mounting pressure as a result of falling sales and share price at Tesla. The billionaire's ill-fated alliance with Donald Trump has done significant damage to the electric car company's brand image and critics say Mr Musk has lost his focus. Autopilot is a driver-assistance system that Tesla says is intended to reduce a driver's 'overall workload'. However, it has faced repeated investigations in the US over its safety record and has not been cleared for use on British roads. Dan O'Dowd, a road safety campaigner who has long questioned Tesla's technology, said: 'Today's ruling is a heavy blow to Elon Musk and Tesla.' The Miami decision ends a four-year long case that was remarkable not just in its outcome but in the fact it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed or settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. The trial itself was contentious. Lawyers acting for the victims claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. The plaintiffs hired a forensic data expert who dug it up key evidence. Presented with the findings, Tesla said it made a mistake and claimed the failure to present the evidence was an honest mistake. A Tesla spokesman said: 'Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology. 'We plan to appeal given the substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.'
