Lawyers in class-action litigation against General Motors have significantly broadened their case against the embattled automaker, claiming that the company disregarded and concealed safety issues far beyond the defective ignition switch that is now linked to 27 deaths.

In a strongly worded complaint, filed late Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, the lawyers contend that the “new GM” that emerged from bankruptcy in 2009 so valued cost-cutting that it “produced an inordinate number of vehicles with serious safety defects,” which it has sought to remedy only this year with the recall of about 27 million vehicles in the United States.

The 700-page filing serves as a “master complaint” for a consolidation of 68 cases seeking class-action status that have been brought around the country on behalf of owners of newer-model GM cars seeking compensation for the lost value of their vehicles in light of the safety issues.

It is the latest volley in a complex game of legal maneuvering, centering on the ignition switch defect, that could continue for years.

While the complaint offered little new evidence of a vast cover-up, it heightened an already bitter confrontation — even suggesting that the company’s chief executive, Mary T. Barra, knew about one of the safety problems in a previous job.

“The array of concealed defects is astounding,” the plaintiffs’ lawyers wrote in the complaint. They added: “The defects affected virtually every safety system in GM-branded vehicles, including but by no means limited to the air bags, seatbelts, brakes, brake lights, electronic stability control, windshield wipers, sensing and diagnostic modules, and warning chimes.”

In an emailed statement, GM said that it “intends to vigorously defend against plaintiff’s claims that G.M. vehicles have reduced resale value.”

The complaint was made as part of so-called multidistrict litigation that is being overseen by Judge Jesse M. Furman, and was submitted by the three lawyers whom Furman has appointed to serve as the lead lawyers for all plaintiffs — Steve W. Berman, Elizabeth J. Cabraser and Robert C. Hilliard.

It drew much of its damaging material from the report prepared by former U.S. Attorney Anton R. Valukas for GM’s board and senior management.

That report was sharply critical of GM’s culture and described instances in which the company’s engineers, product developers and legal department overlooked or failed to act on safety concerns.