NHTSA Complaint #10549617 — 1999 FORD F-250

I FILED A CLAIM WITH MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA, INC (MICHELIN), THAT WAS DENIED, FOR DAMAGES IN EXCESS OF $3,000.00 INCURRED BY MY PERSONAL VEHICLE RESULTING FROM THE COMPLETE TREAD DETACHMENT OF A UNIROYAL LAREDO TIRE (DOT# BFW8FEUU4107), AFTER 13,586 MILES. DETACHMENT OCCURRED AT HIGHWAY SPEED (65MPH) WITH PROPER INFLATION PRESSURE, CHECKED PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF TRAVEL. PRIOR TO COMPLETE TREAD DETACHMENT, THE SUBJECT TIRE WAS REPAIRED FOR DAMAGE INCURRED BY A COMMON ROAD HAZARD (I.E., A NAIL PUNCTURE). THIS, THE TIRE?S ONLY, REPAIR WAS PERFORMED BY A REPUTABLE SERVICE CENTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH GUIDELINES SET BY US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MICHELIN DOES NOT CALL INTO QUESTION TIRE REPAIR AS THE CAUSAL FACTOR. RATHER, MICHELIN ASSERTS THAT THEIR INSPECTION OF THE TIRE INDICATES TREAD DETACHMENT RESULTED FROM TIRE DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE PUNCTURE. AND, ?EVIDENCE OF THIS IS FOUND WHEN TRACING THE STEEL CORD PATH FROM THE PUNCTURE/REPAIR TO THE INITIAL DETACHED AREA?. MICHELIN FEELS THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES. I CHALLENGE MICHELIN?S DENIAL BASED ON (1) MICHELIN?S ADMISSION THAT THE ?INITIAL DETACHED AREA? OCCURRED AT SOME DISTANCE FROM THE REPAIR/PUNCTURE; (2) MICHELIN HAS A HISTORY OF TIRE RECALLS PERTAINING TO DEFECTS AND POTENTIAL TREAD DETACHMENT OF SIMILAR TIRES; AND (3) THE SUBJECT TIRE WAS MANUFACTURED DURING A PERIOD BOUNDED BY TWO LAREDO TIRE RECALLS, DUE TO THE POTENTIAL FOR TREAD DETACHMENT: ?SEPTEMBER 2004, UNIROYAL VOLUNTARY RECALL OF 46,000 TIRES DUE TO POSSIBLE TREAD/BELT DETACHMENT. ?JULY 2012, NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (NHTSA #12T-019) RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 800,000 UNIROYAL TIRES, DUE TO POSSIBLE TREAD BELT SEPARATION. FURTHER, A MODICUM OF RESEARCH CLEARLY INDICATES THAT INSUFFICIENT TIRE BONDING AND OTHER MANUFACTURER DEFECTS ARE THE MOST FREQUENT CAUSE OF TREAD DETACHMENT. THEREFORE, I WOULD SUSPECT COMPLETE TREAD DETACHMENT WOULD RESULT FROM A PREEXISTING TIRE DEFECT, RATHER THAN A NAIL PUNCTURE. *TR