Archive for 2009

Do Toyota Floor Mats Mask a Larger Problem for All Manufacturers?

November 4th, 2009. By Hunter West

In late August, after an off-duty California Highway Patrol officer and three passengers were killed when their runaway Lexus crashed at speeds exceeding 120 mph, Toyota triggered the largest recall in its history and placed a focus on ill-fitting, or improperly-installed floor mats that could jam the accelerator pedal and hold it down. 

But then came the statement released yesterday by the US Department of Transportation (DOT)… 

“Toyota has announced a safety recall involving 3.8 million vehicles in which the accelerator pedal may become stuck at high vehicle speeds due to interference by the driver’s side floor mat, which is obviously a very dangerous situation. Toyota has written to vehicle owners stating that it has decided that a safety defect exists in their vehicles and asking owners to remove all floor mats while the company is developing a remedy. We believe consumers should follow Toyota’s recommendation to address the most immediate safety risk. However, removal of the mats is simply an interim measure, not a remedy of the underlying defect in the vehicles. NHTSA is discussing with Toyota what the appropriate vehicle remedy or remedies will be. This matter is not closed until Toyota has effectively addressed the vehicle defect by providing a suitable remedy.” 

The one sentence is telling: “…removal of the mats is simply an interim measure, not a remedy of the underlying defect in the vehicles.” 

What is the defect? The DOT won’t say, or doesn’t know. Meanwhile the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has done six separate investigations Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Automobile, Car, Floor Mats, Toyota
Posted in Defective Products | 3 Comments »

Asbestos News Roundup: 11.03.09

November 3rd, 2009. By LucyC

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news, asbestos lawsuits and the latest asbestos hot spots—places where asbestos has been found—and that you should be aware of.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Jefferson County, TX: The widow and daughter of a man who died from asbestos mesothelioma are suing a total of 34 companies alleging they were responsible for the development of his disease, because the failed to adequately test their products, and failed to issue warnings about the dangers of asbestos exposure.

The defending companies named in the suit are: A.W. Chesterton, American Optical Corporation, Ametek, Inc., Bayer Cropscience, Bechtel Corporation, CBS Corporation, Certainteed Corporation, Coltec Industries, Crane Company, Crown, Cork and Seal Company, D&F Distributing, Dana Companies, Fluor Enterprises, Fluor Maintenance Services, Foster Wheeler Constructors, and Foster Wheeler Corporation.

Also Garlock Sealing Technologies, General Electric Corporation, General Refractories Company, Goulds Pumps, Henry Vogt Machine Company, Honeywell International, Industrial Holdings, Ingersoll-Rand Company, John Crane, 3M, Owens Illinois, Sepco Corporation, Treco Construction Services, Union Carbide Corporation and Uniroyal. (setexasrecord.com)

Asbestos Settlements

Baltimore, MD: A woman who was diagnosed with asbestos-related cancer in 2008, as a result of exposure to asbestos fibers from her grandfather’s work clothes as a child, Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Asbestos, Asbestos Mesothelioma
Posted in Asbestos Mesothelioma | 2 Comments »

Reality TV Live from Your Baby’s Bedroom

November 3rd, 2009. By LucyC

A man in Illinois filed a lawsuit on Friday—a proposed class action—alleging that his recently purchased “Summer Day and Night Video Monitor” has broadcast capabilities he and his wife were not aware of. Oh boy… 

Wes Denkov bought the monitor for their infant son. His next door neighbors, coincidentally, had just had twins, and also have a baby monitor. One day, about six months after Wes’ son was born, his neighbors informed him that their monitor was receiving the audio and video from Wes’ baby monitor. 

Not surprisingly, the neighbor’s news set Wes’ mind racing as he realized that his wife , who would breastfeed their baby in the baby room at all hours of the day and night, could be seen and heard. Not only that, a little detective work on Wes’ part revealed that when he switched channels on his monitor he could hear and see his neighbors. Thank goodness they’re all on good terms… 

So, Wes calls the Summer Infant customer service line and is told that the device is NOT malfunctioning. And, if he wants to solve the problem, he should buy the more expensive model. (Hopefully that model doesn’t have a “record” option…) 

I couldn’t help thinking as I read this story that aside from the obvious privacy problems, what happens when you’re woken up at 3:00 in the morning—when you’re not at your most mentally alert—and you and don’t recognize the baby on the video monitor, or the person in the room with the baby? Surprise! Well, maybe that’s not a malfunction, but it could certainly cause one…

Tags: Baby Monitor
Posted in Defective Products | No Comments »

California Overtime at the Car Wash: Are Inspection Numbers for Real?

November 2nd, 2009. By AbiK

By now you’ve read the news about the California Labor Commissioner imposing close to $1 million in fines after a statewide investigation of the California carwash industry.

The investigation went as follows:

42 investigators

did

230 car wash inspections

netting

141 citations

for

103 car wash businesses 

The citations issued total $916,711.

Ok, great. There’s some progress. But here’s the part I’m having a hard time swallowing (as reported at Reuters; the bold is mine)…

Investigators found 49 businesses that failed to provide workers’ compensation coverage for their employees. Citations issued totaled $240,000 and businesses without workers’ compensation Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: California Overtime, Overtime Pay
Posted in Employment | No Comments »

Pet Turtles, Salmonella and the Ban No One Knows About

October 30th, 2009. By Hunter West

There’s a ban on small pet turtles? 

Really? 

Okay, so the ban is only on pet turtles less than four inches in diameter. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) enacted the ban after reports surfaced that children were putting the cute little things in their mouths. However, it wasn’t a choking hazard that seemed to drive the ban. 

No, it was the fact that children became sick after coming into contact with their pet turtle in such an intimate fashion. 

Sick with salmonella from turtles.  

Turtles carry salmonella, it seems—originating in their feces, according to a recent MSNBC report. So children, by placing the baby turtles in their mouths, were coming into direct contact with salmonella. 

So they were banned 34 years ago. 

Just the small ones, mind you. In 1975.

Oh, you didn’t know either? Join the club. Few consumers know about the ban—and fewer vendors appear to be enforcing the ban, or complying with it. According to MSNBC small turtles Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: FDA, Salmonella, Turtles
Posted in Food Illness, Personal Injury | 1 Comment »