Neutral tech experts must mediate Montero issue

By Tessa R. Salazar December 02,2015

WE SAW this coming as early as four years ago.

In 2011, this author wrote an Inquirer Motoring article about the need for an independent technical body in the local automotive sector, much like that of the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), to investigate malfunctioning motor vehicles (see https://business.inquirer.net/19007/clamor-for-indie-body-to-look-at-‘lemons’-growing).

This neutral technical body would have come in handy nowadays, now that the controversy surrounding dozens of Mitsubishi Montero units suspected of undergoing sudden unintended acceleration (SUA)—not unlike that of some Toyota units in the United States a few years ago—have exploded to near-uncontrollable proportions in traditional and social media.

Unintended mystery

As of presstime (Nov. 30, a day before the press conference scheduled by Mitsubishi Motors Philippines Corp.), the SUA issue remains in itself as an unintended mystery gnawing not only at MMPC, but on motor vehicles in general.

An independent technical body would have been best-equipped to investigate allegedly faulty, or “lemon,” motor vehicles. This investigative body would not only have provided a final say on the matter, but also be impervious to the influences of both auto manufacturers and affected motorists.

An NHTSA-like body, aside from investigating traffic accidents, would also set standards in highway and motor vehicle safety, and would be responsible for mandating vehicle recalls based on accumulated complaints.

In 2011, this author wrote how MMPC engineers’ findings didn’t satisfy Montero owners’ complaints. These engineers were dispatched by Mitsubishi Motors of Japan to investigate the case. This team subsequently released its findings (see the Mitsubishi statement at business.inquirer.net/18179/montero-sport-found-safe) that concluded that the parts in question were operating normally within specifications. In other words, the engineers found nothing wrong with the Montero.

In the 2011 article, Arlan S. Reyes, MMPC assistant manager for advertising and promotions, admitted that these findings wouldn’t sit well with the complainants. “We were hoping for an independent committee of engineers, not employed by us, to also oversee the investigation so it would not be viewed with suspicion. Unfortunately, there’s none.”

He then added, “Someone like Alex Loinaz would have been the next best thing to head this technical team, but he is understaffed and underequipped.”

Clamor from social media

Echoing Reyes’ sentiments, social media users have also clamored for such an independent body to investigate allegations of vehicle anomalies.

Auto expert Alexander P. Loinaz currently chairs the technical committee on road vehicles, known as TC 44, a parallel committee of ISO TC-22 on road vehicles.

Inquirer Motoring has asked motoring experts: If the Philippines had a government agency like that of the US NHTSA (composed of auto engineers not affiliated with car manufacturers), would controversies such as the SUA  be addressed objectively and not result in confusion and distrust among the drivers/consumers and carmakers?

Loinaz replied: “I have been proposing for the creation of an [NHTSA-like body] for a very long time, and the creation of a Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) which assists the NHTSA in monitoring such problems and the creation of a Forensic Crash Investigation Agency that when vehicle accidents occur, this agency can determine whether it was caused by a vehicle defect, driver error, or road design deficiency.”

Niky Tamayo, Top Gear Philippines’ contributor, agreed. “Definitely. The Department of Trade and Industry had no choice but to accept Mitsubishi’s verdict after the first round of cases because they had no experts to call on,” Tamayo said.

“And then now, we’re hearing word from them regarding the stopping of sales, and even then, they have done no forensic investigation into the matter, even with the wide variety of experts available, and are allowing the broadcast media to run the situation like a circus with wild accusations and speculation,” Tamayo added.

“In the end, the only expert testimonies we will have will be (from) Mitsubishi, who cannot be accepted as an impartial witness, and ‘experts’ who have not investigated the affected units firsthand, and with no expertise in modern direct injection diesel systems,” Tamayo said.

Another motoring expert, who refused to be named due to the sensitivity of his position, said: “If we could have top-caliber electronics, mechanical, and automotive engineers in that body, (then) I would definitely go for the creation of this independent body.”

For several years, Loinaz has been proposing that a bill be filed creating the BAR, which would look into consumer complaints in the auto industry. “I’ve sent the proposal to several senators, but I don’t think they really understood it,” he told Inquirer Motoring in 2011.

In the 2011 motoring article, the author made several calls to the DTI’s Bureau of Trade Regulation and Consumer Protection, and learned that the staff members were not knowledgeable in matters concerning motor vehicles.

“They have a testing facility for appliances, but none for cars. When they can’t handle a complaint, they ask the tech committee, which then leads to me,” Loinaz quipped. He said he had been sought by the department several times to mediate on cases involving motor vehicles.

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.