Posts Tagged ‘ Defective Product ’

ADT Alarm Failure Deadly in Minnesota, Leads to ADT Settlement

October 3rd, 2011. By AbiK

Who ya gonna call? Well, if you’ve had an ADT alarm system installed, you’re proababy thinking you don’t need to call anyone if someone should break into your home. After all, ADT is supposed to be right on it, detecting a break-in and alerting the police who should then get to your home more quickly than if you had detected the break-in yourself and tried to dial 911.

Right?

Unfortunately, a for a couple in Minnesota, things didn’t turn out that way. Their ADT alarm system failed—when they needed it most.

In 2006, Teri Lee had been afraid that her ex-boyfriend, Steven Van Keuren, might cause trouble—he’s the reason why she purchased an ADT system for her home. Sadly, Lee’s worst fears came true when Van Keuren entered Lee’s home and shot both her and her new boyfriend, Timothy Hawkinson. Both Lee and Hawkinson died.

Lee’s estate filed a lawsuit against ADT, and recently reached a confidential settlement.

Loss of life by murder is surely what we’d hope would be a freak accident as the alleged result of an alarm system failure. But it’s not all that far out there to envision, is it?… A break-in happens…should be your run-of-the-mill burglary…maybe the thief is looking for some jewelry, or cash…but maybe he finds the homeowner instead…unexpectedly. The outcome could be all the same—death—except legally we just call it different things…it’s a matter of degrees.

But what if it could’ve been prevented? What if there were a reasonable expectation—heck, a contractual expectation—that an installed alarm system should function properly and the would-be victim were still alive? No alarm system that touts itself as your security blanket and knight in shining armor should fail in your hour of need.

Over the past year and a half, LawyersandSettlements.com has received a number of complaints from individuals stating that their ADT alarm systems failed—or that the ADT response time was inadequate. Thankfully, they are all alive to tell their stories.

And, if we go back to 2007, there actually had been a lawsuit filed against ADT alleging slow response times—and it was seeking class action status.

Tags: ADT alarm failure, ADT alarm system, ADT lawsuit, ADT Security, Defective Product
Posted in Defective Products, Emerging Issues, Settlement | 17 Comments »

Understanding what’s Defective in Defective Products

August 25th, 2010. By Kristine B

It’s a phrase we hear thrown around all the time in relation to lawsuits, and it’s one that many people vaguely recognize but may not fully understand: defective product. This week, Pleading Ignorance examines defective products.

A defective product is one that doesn’t work as expected and puts the user at risk of unexpected danger. Defects can occur in how the product is designed, how it’s manufactured or how it’s marketed (if the advertising for a product gives unreasonable expectations for how safe the product is).

Defective products can be any product a person buys: medications, medical devices, furniture, food, toys, automobiles…you get the picture. Even if the consumer doesn’t purchase the specific component but purchases a product that involves the defective component (think here of defective automobile brakes, where the consumer purchases the car, which includes the brakes), the product is still defective. In such cases, the victim may be able to sue the manufacturer of the defective component part and the maker of the overall product (in this example, the maker of the brake and the vehicle manufacturer).

Now—and this is important—the product must be used in the manner it was designed for. Using the product in an unintended manner and hurting yourself doesn’t make the product defective. So, if you use a knife to pick a lock and cut yourself, that doesn’t mean the knife is defective. Likewise, if you buy something from, say, IKEA (see photo above) and think that you know better than their engineers and you go and toss the supplied instructions for a more aggressive (and truly) DIY approach, don’t go crying “defective product” later when whatever you’ve built doesn’t quite “work”.

Also, there are some products that are inherently dangerous (chainsaws, explosives and so on). People claiming that these are defective have to show that there was a lack of proper warning about the safety related to the product or they have to show that the product malfunctioned even though they followed all instructions. If an explosive works as intended, it’s going to explode. But, if there weren’t adequate safety warnings about how to safely set off the explosive, or if the explosive went off before it was meant to, through no fault of the user, then the explosive could be a defective product.

Products that do not carry adequate warnings about their use or the risks involved in their use may also be considered defective. This is where some drug liability lawsuits come in. A drug may work exactly as intended but if the drug causes serious side effects and users aren’t warned about those side effects, then the drug could be considered defective.

To protect yourself, always read the safety warnings and instructions with any product you purchase and be sure to use the product only in the manner it was intended to be used.

Tags: Defective Product, Pleading Ignorance
Posted in Defective Products, Pleading Ignorance | No Comments »

Need a Job? What about Full-Time Plaintiff? Cha-ching!

July 6th, 2010. By Hunter West

Today, I am embarking on a career change: 

FULL-TIME PLAINTIFF.

I may not be around as much, as I will always be in court—and my name will be in the news a lot, so at least you’ll know what I’m up to. I won’t have to blog as frequently, to keep you apprised of life in the Hunter household. 

You will salivate at the size of my bank account, even after legal fees are deducted. Of course, the strategy is to sue for legal fees, too. 

What set me on this course to dramatically improve my fortune? 

Look north, to Canada, and you will see what opened my eyes. 

Last week, two sets of parents sued the Greater Toronto Hockey League, one of its clubs and four coaches for $25,000 each for the heinous act of cutting their sons from a midget junior ‘A’ team during tryouts in April. 

“Their direct actions have caused irreparable psychological damage to [plaintiff’s] self esteem as an impressionable teenager and demoralized [plaintiff] as an athlete and team hockey player with his peers,” one claim reads. “The conduct by all defendants destroyed the dignity of my son, whom in good conscience gave his team nothing but his best efforts.” 

Statement of claim 2: “When [plaintiff] was advised of his termination by my wife and I, he vowed never to play the game he loved since childhood. And, moreover, his misguided group of defendants demoralized my wife and I, whom had gone well beyond the call of duty as parents in support of the [defendant] for two seasons.” 

That was the clincher, dear friends—although I’ve been giving this career change serious thought for some time…ever since I heard of the Canadian lawsuit back in the winter by a woman who is suing her mobile phone service provider for ruining her life. How? Well, due to a billing change by the service provider, the plaintiff’s husband Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Defective Product, Lawsuit, Lex Levity
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Lex Levity | No Comments »

Zhu Zhu Pooh-Poohed

December 10th, 2009. By Hunter West

They’re easily the hottest item on children’s wish list this year: The Zhu Zhu Hamsters. Every kid wants ‘Chunk,’ or ‘Pipsqueek,’ or ‘Num Nums’ under the tree this year. They are the 2009 version of Tickle-Me-Elmo, or the Cabbage Patch Dolls of years gone by. They’re not expensive, retailing for $8 to $10 each. But that’s if you can find them. There’s been a rush to buy them, the US-based manufacturer has cranked up production in China and opportunists—sensing a wave—have bought them up by the box load and have put them up on eBay selling for up to four or five times what they’re worth at retail. 

Little wonder. Did I mention Tickle-Me-Elmo? When your kid wants something sooooooooo badly, and between you and Santa nary a Zhu Zhu can be found, the internet may be your only savior. And there’s no price too high to delight your little girl, or boy Christmas morning. 

The big difference between the Tickle-Me-Elmo phenomenon and this time was the allegation from a consumer watchdog that the Zhu Zhu hamsters are unsafe. GoodGuide, a not-for-profit group with ties to the University of California at Berkeley, rocked the must-have toy world last Friday with allegations that testing done on ‘Mr. Squiggles,’ the light-brown member of the Zhu Zhu quartet, Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: China, Defective Product, Zhu Zhu
Posted in Defective Products | No Comments »