Defective Products Archive

Lawyer to Discuss Defective Car Seats on FOX 11 Ten O’Clock News LA

May 19th, 2010. By AbiK

Given all the news over the past few months about sticking accelerator pedals, floor mat problems or defective brakes, it’s easy to see how an issue like defective car seats can get lost in the mix. And, in truth, you don’t hear about defective car seat stories too often in the news. Sadly though, it appears to be a growing problem and when there is a car accident involving a defective car seat, it’s often with fatal results.

Attorney Brian Chase is scheduled to appear on FOX 11 Ten O’Clock News Los Angeles at 10:00 pm tomorrow night (Thursday, May 20) as part of a special report on the issue. Chase’s firm, Bisnar Chase, has handled defective car seat lawsuits and Chase will discuss two of these cases.

One case involves a woman who sustained catastrophic injuries that rendered her quadriplegic due to a defective seat. The other case involves a woman whose seven-year-old daughter was killed as the result of a defective seat that careened backwards, crushing the child’s chest and causing her to sustain fatal injuries.

Chase is also set to discuss what’s described as “an inadequate, 40-year seat manufacturing standard that provides pathetic occupant protection in rear-end collisions—a standard that desperately needs changed.”  What’s more, he’ll speak about side-by-side crash tests that prove more rigid seat designs would offer significantly better occupant protection than “soft” designs currently being manufactured by a majority of today’s automakers.

Tags: Bisnar Chase, Brian Chase, Defective Car Seats, Fox News
Posted in Accidents, Automotive, Defective Products | 1 Comment »

Pampers Moms Pissed, Want Answers

May 11th, 2010. By AbiK

Skip the puns here—there’s none intended. Moms are pissed, and rightfully so. Tried and true diaper brand Pampers has come out with a “new and improved” diaper–this time with “Dry Max” technology. It’s in their Swaddlers and Cruisers sizes…those for newborns and those starting to “cruise”.

Only problem is this Dry Max seems to generate Diaper Rash Max. And apparently not the “oh, throw some White’s A&D or Butt Paste on it and give it a couple of days” type.

There are stories circulating on the web right now…Facebook, Mommy Forums…about “burning” rashes. And “bleeding”. And “welts”. You’re not going to be putting Butt Paste on that—that’s when it becomes time for a trip to the pediatrician. And, I know I don’t have to tell any moms it also means diaper changes that are akin to a living hell and some (more) sleepless nights.

Of course, there’s seemingly little coming out of the Pampers (P&G) camp on the issue. Though some folks on Facebook—hard to say whether they’re plants which is always the risk with social media—are saying that P&G is responding if you email them; you get “paperwork” to fill out. I haven’t emailed or called—yet. You can also fill out a complaint with the CPSC if you’d like.

If you go to the Pampers site, however—home to tug-at-the-heartstrings promotional headlines like, “Pampers Swaddlers and Cruisers with Dry Max, Caring for the world the way a mom would”—there’s no mention that anything may be out of sorts. Ditto the P&G site. They’ve got a PR mess on their hands and where’s the statement?

Meanwhile, you’re sitting at home trying to blow on your infant’s bottom as you change her just to try to ease her agony. You know something’s out of sorts.

Mind you, the Pampers site is more of a community. Called Pampers Village. Remember Hillary’s “it takes a village?” If this is the village that’s opening its arms for my baby, no thanks. And you have to Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Cruisers, Diaper Rash, Diapers, P&G, Pampers, Procter & Gamble, Swaddlers
Posted in Defective Products | 5 Comments »

Guidant Forced to Toe the Moral Line

May 1st, 2010. By Hunter West

Tuesday a federal judge in Minneapolis rejected a plea deal arrangement that would have seen Guidant, the medical device manufacturer acquired by Boston Scientific about four years ago, plead guilty to a couple of misdemeanor charges and pay a fine. A big fine, mind you—$296 million, described as the largest fine ever thrown down in front of a medical device manufacturer. The relatively small fine paid by Toyota for leading the feds down the garden path is niggly in comparison. 

But that’s not the point. Given the risks associated with playing in the medical devices sandbox, one can assume that the players plan for this sort of thing. Their revenues are staggering as it is. And a plea of guilty to two misdemeanors, when the company knowingly vended life-saving devices that were faulty and led to the deaths of at least six individuals, just seems so wrong. 

A judge agreed, and rejected the deal. Donovan W. Frank noted in his ruling that the deal allowed the company to escape accountability. 

At least there were misdemeanor charges. How often have you heard companies of any stripe pay a huge fine for a proven misdeed but admit to NO wrongdoing? 

That’s like telling a child who knowingly was responsible for bad behavior, “okay Johnny, give Mummy five bucks and we’ll forget this ever happened…” 

No parent in his, or her right mind would ever offer that deal to a child. What are we teaching them? 

And yet, it appears de rigueur in big business. Do something bad, cop a plea where you don’t have to admit to anything, pay a fine for the privilege and move on. 

It is assumed that any new deal surrounding the Guidant situation involving those defective defibrillators will include a probationary structure as recommended by the judge, together with a fine. 

How big that fine will be, remains to be seen. Perhaps the same, perhaps smaller than the original. Either way it will be in the millions. 

As for where that money goes, I profess ignorance. Maybe it goes into a specific budget line, or to general revenues. A better place would be to help pay for the nation’s health care, just as fines levied to automotive manufacturers should go to fix up our roads and bridges—or finding a way to segregate massive trucks away from smaller cars, in an effort to mitigate the carnage on America’s roads when the ever-expanding rigs meet up with an increasingly-shrinking car. 

Or how about giving that money to the families of the victims? 

Sure, fines are important—even assuming big companies build that kind of thing into their business plans. The money could benefit someone, somewhere. 

But the payment of a huge fine should not prove a whitewash for moral irresponsibility. 

That’s the point the judge was making Tuesday.

Tags: guidant, medical devices
Posted in Defective Products, Drugs/Medical | No Comments »

Coca-Cola Shareholders Spurred by Conscience or Profit?

April 26th, 2010. By janem

Coca-Cola shareholders know if their coke glass is half-full or half-empty. By that comment I mean they are aware of public concern regarding the safety of Bisphenol-A (BPA), a chemical used in the epoxy lining of Coca-Cola’s canned beverages. Yet at the same time, if something isn’t done about it, sales could potentially drop and so would their dividends. So the shareholders voted last week on a measure that will force the company to go public on plans to rid their beverage cans of BPA.

The Coca-Cola company already eliminated BPA from their plastic bottles, but the plastic used to line aluminum cans still contains BPA. Did the company think this measure would satisfy their shareholders and the public, and they would get away with just a bit of BPA? Apparently not. Shareholders say the company has “failed to provide investors or consumers with sufficient evidence that it is taking steps to address these public health concerns”—and 22% of them voted for a resolution asking the company to publish a report on how it is responding to the “public policy challenges” related to BPA and what they’re doing to come up with alternatives for their beverage cans.

Meanwhile, as reported by Business Wire, Coca-Cola’s Board of Directors today approved the quarterly dividend of 44 cents per common share, up from 41 cents. Coca-cola returned $5.3 billion to shareowners in 2009, through $3.8 billion in dividends and $1.5 billion in share repurchases.

BPA is an endocrine disruptor that interrupts hormones and has been linked with breast cancer, Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: BPA, Coca-Cola, Coke
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Defective Products | 3 Comments »

Is Your Medical Device Under Warranty?

April 26th, 2010. By Hunter West

If you buy a car and it breaks down within the warranty period, the manufacturer fixes it. If your laptop goes wonky within the first year (usually under warranty), you ship it back and they’ll send you another one, or they undertake to fix it. 

That’s what warranties are for—to protect the consumer against substandard workmanship, faulty parts, or basically a lemon. Wear-and-tear is one thing. You can’t warrant against that. But when something fails well ahead of the best-before date, somebody is made to step up to the plate and extend some responsibility. 

Why does that not happen in the medical device industry? 

Back in January, William R. Morris had to have his artificial hip replaced after just three years. The replacement surgery cost about $50,000. Lucky for Morris, much of the bill was covered through his employer’s health insurance plan. But he figures, due to co-payments and other out-of-pocket expenses, he’s out about $10,000 for his initial replacement and two additional surgeries. 

That’s right—he’s had three replacements. The first operation in 2006 replaced the original hip his creator gave him. That one lasted less than a year—so the replacement was replaced. For a year, he told The New York Times, he felt good, but then THAT hip replacement went wonky. 

This year, he had another one. 

His first artificial hip lasted one year. His second, only three. 

They’re supposed to last 15. 

The April 3^rd edition of The New York Times reported that the manufacturer of the failed hip has Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Medical Device, Warranty
Posted in Defective Products, Drugs/Medical, Emerging Issues | 3 Comments »