Ford audit query AQ18001
Zipcar Rental Concerns. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this audit query about the driveshaft on 3 model years (2015–2017). Opened Apr 2, 2018, closed Sep 25, 2024 after 6.5 years without a recall. closed
What NHTSA says
Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filedNHTSA opened this audit query to determine whether Zipcar, Inc. (Zipcar) complied with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act). The Safety Act requires, among other things, that a rental car company not rent, lease, or sell a recalled vehicle until the safety defect or noncompliance is remedied. 49 U.S.C. § 30120(i). Based on NHTSA’s inquiry, including information provided by Zipcar, NHTSA asserted that, during 2017 and 2018, Zipcar rented certain unremedied recalled vehicles in violation of the Safety Act. In October 2023, NHTSA and Zipcar entered into a Consent Order in which Zipcar agreed to pay a total civil penalty of $300,000. The total civil penalty included a payment of $150,000 as a Non-Deferred Amount. Zipcar also agreed to a sum of $150,000 as an Abeyance Amount, to be deferred and held in abeyance pending its satisfactory completion, as reasonably determined by NHTSA, of the requirements of the Consent Order. The requirements of the Consent Order include performance obligations that relate to process improvements to Zipcar’s recall compliance procedures and its training materials. Zipcar agreed to conduct an audit of all Zipcar vehicles with an open recall within 150 days after the Effective Date of the Consent Order. Zipcar also agreed to quarterly meetings with NHTSA staff to discuss the progress of the performance obligations and issues or concerns from either party. This audit query investigation, AQ18001, is closed. Closure of this AQ has no bearing on the terms of the Consent Order, including Zipcar’s ongoing performance obligations or other legal obligations, and does not represent a determination by NHTSA about Zipcar’s performance under the Consent Order to date.
A Audit Query is an audit of whether the manufacturer met its early-warning reporting obligations — the data and reports it must send NHTSA — rather than of a vehicle condition. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the resumes carrying the full reasoning are linked below.
The paperwork NHTSA filed
Source: every document on this action, at nhtsa.gov- Opening resume — ODI’s own summary of why it opened this — the subject, what prompted it, and the vehicles in scope.
- Closing resume — ODI’s own summary of why it closed this, and what it concluded.
| Document | Code | Filed | At NHTSA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opening resume | INOA | 2018 | |
| Closing resume | INCLA | 2018 | |
| Information request to the manufacturer | INIM | 2018 | 3 files 123 |
| Manufacturer's response — data | INRD | 2018 | |
| Manufacturer's response — full submission | INRL | 2018 | 2 files 12 |
| Memo to the investigation file | INME | 2018 | 2 files 12 |
| Memo granting a response extension | INRE | 2018 | 2 files 12 |
| Filed document | INCV | 2018 |
These are NHTSA’s own files, served from the agency’s site — the resumes are what ODI wrote when it opened and closed the action, and the rest is the correspondence behind them, including what the manufacturer sent when the agency asked. They are linked, not copied: where a document names the people who wrote in, that redaction is the agency’s to make and its copy is the one you should read.
What owners had already reported
Source: complaints on file the day it openedWhen NHTSA opened this on Apr 2, 2018, owners had filed 43 complaints with the agency about the model years above, of which 5 named the power train NHTSA went on to investigate. Owner complaints are the agency’s main early signal: ODI screens them, and a Preliminary Evaluation is usually where a pattern in them ends up.
This is what the complaint file held on that date, not a claim about which reports prompted the investigation — NHTSA’s complaint records carry no investigation number, so nobody can make that link from the data alone. The opening resume linked above names the reports ODI itself cited. Complaint records on this site begin with 2016.
What this means for an owner
Source: and what happens nextAn investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.
This one is closed. A audit query ends with NHTSA’s finding on the recall it examined — the remedy stands, is widened, or a new campaign follows; the file names the recall it concerned and NHTSA’s closing resume carries the reasoning.
Model years it names
Source: as NHTSA filed themAlso named on model years this site has no page for: 2015 Ford Transit.
A vehicle page’s investigation list carries the same action; a name here is the scope NHTSA opened, not a list of affected VINs.
Common questions
Source: NHTSA Office of Defects InvestigationIs AQ18001 a recall?
No. A audit query is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.
Is AQ18001 still open?
No. It closed on Sep 25, 2024 without a recall.
Which vehicles does AQ18001 cover?
NHTSA opened it on 3 model years: 2017 Ford Transit, 2016 Ford Transit, 2015 Ford Transit. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.