Tires: what the notices said, and what they say now

We hold 453 recall notices whose authority record names a fault in tires. Grouping them that way is not the point: the regulator already does it. What follows is what happened to those notices after they were published, which nothing else keeps.

What these notices told owners about the letter

A recall notice is not the recall. What reaches the driveway is a letter, and the notice is where the manufacturer says when that letter is coming. Of the 453 notices whose record names tires:

117 named a date and said owners were expected to be notified on it.
309 said the letters had already been sent.
27 said nothing about a letter at all.

That last figure is the one worth sitting with. 6 per cent of the notices in this group leave an owner with no date to hold anyone to. Nothing requires one, and nothing anywhere counts them, which is why we do.

The dates that have passed

12 of the 117 notices that named a date named one that has since gone by. That is not proof the letter never arrived: it is proof the date the notice gave is now in the past, which is the point at which an owner who has heard nothing has a reason to ask.

A notice is counted late here only where it said a letter was expected to be mailed on a stated date and that date has passed. Notices saying letters were already mailed are never counted, and neither are notices that gave no date.

Which of these notices were rewritten after they were published

None. We fingerprinted the defect, consequence and remedy text of every one of these notices the first time we read it and have compared them on every read since. No regulator keeps the earlier version, so a rewrite anywhere else goes unrecorded; the ones we have caught are on the changes page.

How long owners waited to hear about it

Measured from the day the defect report reached the regulator to the owner notification date the register carries. For the 450 notices in this group where both dates exist, the median wait was 34 days, against 39 days across the whole register, 5 days quicker than the record as a whole.

The law allows sixty days from the filing of the report. 50 of these notices (11 per cent) sit on the far side of that line, against 18.4 per cent across every campaign we can measure. Sixty days to tell you sets out the rule, the method, and the three reasons a notice past the line is not by itself a breach.

Who filed them

152 filers appear across these notices. The count is of notices, not of vehicles: one notice can name a single van or two million cars, so a long list here is not the same as a large recall.

Filed by	Notices in this group
Forest River	26
Chrysler (FCA / Stellantis)	17
General Motors	16
Goodyear	13
Keystone	11
DTNA	10
Michelin	9
Continental Tire	9
Honda	8
Sumitomo	8
Jayco	7
Continental	7

140 further filers hold the remaining 252. Every filer has its own page under the manufacturer index, and how long each of them takes to warn owners (across all of its notices, not only these) is measured on the notification-lag page.

What the remedy is

Read out of the remedy text of each notice, not assumed from the part. A software remedy on a mechanical part is common and is exactly the kind of thing an owner wants to know before booking a day off work.

Remedy	Notices
replace	249
inspect-then-replace	84
other	50
software	29
install	19
money back	13
inspect	5
repair	4

How this page is built

The part and the remedy are read out of the authority record for each campaign, one campaign at a time, and stored as they are read. All 15,233 campaigns in the register have been read. The rewrite record and the promised-letter record are ours: no regulator publishes either. How we work sets out the whole method, and anything we have got wrong is listed on the corrections page.

Every part we group this way · Check a car · What to do about a recall

What changed

Registers

Studies

Data