The news that Volvo...

The news that Volvo is recalling nearly half a million cars (35,000 in Britain) due to a fire risk from short-circuited radiator fan motors is just the latest safety scare. Last year, it called back 360,000 US models for engine speed control faults. But the Swedish firm is by no means an exception. In 2002, Ford recalled 600,000 mainly US Focuses over a fire safety issue and, two years ago, 360,000 models were affected by potentially faulty rear-door latches. Last year, Toyota recalled one million cars for steering problems; in the States, it called back more vehicles than it had sold. In Japan, the company became the subject of a criminal investigation over allegations that it delayed a safety recall for eight years following a steering defect on its best-selling Hilux model.

Cars do go wrong now and then, but it"s how makers deal with the problems that is important

BMW recalled 500 brand new MINIs in 2001 because of a refuelling fire risk.

And Mercedes has issued 90 callbacks in the UK since 2000, although this figure includes vans and lorries wearing the three-pointed star badge.

Since 2000, there have been 45 separate safety recalls for Audis recorded by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA), from the infamous TT Coupé handling problems to clashing windscreen wipers on the Allroad. Kia, which recently announced an extension of its seven-year warranty, is also healthily represented on the VOSA website (www.vosa.gov.uk), with recalls ranging from a driver"s seat fire risk on the Sedona to a failing handbrake on the Sportage.

It used to be Jaguars that were always being recalled. These days, while Coventry Cats are not perfect, they are much better than they were in the mid-Eighties, when thousands of XJS models had to be fixed after the cruise control refused to disengage. "Won"t that damage their sales prospects in America?" I asked the editor of a best-selling US car magazine. "No, I don"t think so. People seem to think that"s part of the fun of owning a Jag Waaa," he replied.

Yet car makers have a near pathological fear of recalls which, they seem to think, imply their entire range is tarred by the same brush. The wrangling over what actually constitutes a recall reminds me of medieval scholars arguing over how many angels you can fit on the head of a pin.

Renault"s refusal to admit that the bonnet-catch failure on ageing Clio MkIIs is a design defect is becoming near farcical, were it not for the safety implications of a bonnet flapping in front of your face at 70mph. Pursued by the BBC"s Watchdog programme, the company looks vindictive and penny-pinching as it denies a manufacturing fault that has caused a number of frightening accidents. Please try to remember, chaps, we do car safety every day, not only when we think the Press is watching us.

VOSA"s definition of a "safety defect" is "a feature of design or construction liable to cause a significant risk of personal injury or death". Yet last year we had the odd spectacle of VOSA defending the decision not to recall Saab 900s and 9-3s with bulkhead cracks around the steering column, nor Mercedes E-Classes with collapsing spring hangers.

As Mercedes UK has recently found, if you treat your customers with a straight bat, notify them of the problems, and fix them as fast as you can, they feel better about owning one of your cars and will likely come back for another.

VOSA should take a wider interpretation of its rules and encourage car makers to recall early. That would provide proof of their commitment to safety and give them a chance to repair any damage to their reputation. Maybe we all need to understand cars do occasionally go wrong, but it"s how the maker deals with such problems that"s the most important thing.

Andrew English is motoring correspondent of the Daily Telegraph