Ford Motor Co.’s image is totaled.

The automaker was ordered Wednesday by a California state judge to recall as many as 1.7 million Ford cars and trucks. The ruling declared that Ford knew for nearly two decades that its ignition modules were flawed and could cause vehicles to stall but failed to correct the flaw.

Ford should have never turned its back on this potentially dangerous defect. In 1982, Ford engineers discovered that the misplaced ignition devices could cause stalling when exposed to high temperatures in more than 300 models sold between 1983 and 1995. The module was mounted near the engine block where it was exposed to excessive heat and stress.

It would have cost Ford approximately $4 per vehicle to move the module to a cooler spot. Consumers pay thousands of dollars for a vehicle, but Ford still was unwilling to sacrifice profits to make the best project. Instead, Ford sacrificed quality and safety, as well as its reputation.

Ford is already involved with a 6.5 million Firestone tire recall, as the tires were standard equipment on some models of Ford trucks and sport utility vehicles. The quality of Ford vehicles was already in question, and the California recall further tarnishes the public’s perception of the company.

What could have been a minor alteration in its vehicle design will cause the public to permanently doubt the efficiency of the company. Ford was aware of the problem for roughly 18 years, but instead of effectively dealing with it, the company chose to conceal it. By ignoring advice of its engineers, Ford demonstrated a general lack of concern for the welfare of its customers.

Wednesday’s decision was the first time a judge has ordered a vehicle recall. The decision applies only to vehicles sold in California, but similar suits are pending in Alabama, Maryland, Illinois, Tennessee and Washington. Hopefully, this unprecedented legal action will pave the way for courts to hear and rule on similar consumer rights cases.

Ford should order a recall for the entire country. It should admit its mistake as quickly as possible and try to remedy the situation. The issue should not be allowed to escalate to the inside of a courtroom again.

The ruling forces other companies to be aware of the ability of the state to stick up for consumer rights. Hopefully Ford’s situation will serve as an example for other companies about the consequences of favoring profits over the quality, as well as listening to the concerns of engineers.

The judge also should serve as an example to others for taking a stand against major corporations. The public has made it clear that companies should be held accountable for their products. Government officials are stereotyped as being controlled by major corporations and the judge should be commended for valuing the welfare of consumers.

The road to winning back the trust of customers will be a long and bumpy one for Ford.