Blog Topic

Sears to Fix 4 Million Stoves as Part of Settlement
February 22, 2008

Sears has agreed to fix more than 4 million stoves it sold over the past few years that have been found to be particularly vulnerable to tipping. The entire exercise is expected to cost Sears $500 million. The stoves have already injured or killed more than 100 people by tipping over and exposing people to scalding. There have also been instances of a tipped over stove crushing people to death.

Consumer groups have applauded the settlement but have voiced strong criticism of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which they say has long been aware of the problem, but took no action against the company. Further, these consumer groups allege the Consumer Products Safety Commission has neglected to warn millions of households across the country of the danger that could arise from these stoves tipping over.

Raven Holbert's family knows exactly how great the danger from the stove is. Their three-year-old child, Raven, felt the full impact of the stove in December 2001 when she opened the stove door in her family's kitchen to reach for a jar of cookies placed on the countertop. The stove collapsed under her weight trapping her beneath. She was rushed to a hospital, but had suffered massive injuries to her chest. She died three days later.

The stoves that were commonly used back in the seventies and eighties were sturdy contraptions that were hardly likely to tip over. Newer stoves however are made of lighter material to cut costs, and have proven deadly in some situations. Cooks have been injured while cooking on these by hot liquids and foods tipping over with the stove.

Throughout all this, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has been a mute spectator. Let alone taking action against Sears, the agency hasn't even bothered to mount a nation-wide awareness campaign about the dangers posed by these stoves. Consumer rights groups claim that millions of people are using these stoves without any knowledge of their potential dangers. To make matters worse, Sears and other retailers often neglect to secure brackets on the stoves that could prevent them from tipping over. Consumers say that contractors tell them it's not really necessary to secure the brackets.

This is gross negligence on Sears' part. It should have had better installation procedures in place for the stoves it sold, and it should have strictly enforced installation procedures for contractors. It seems like there was more cost cutting going on, and not just in the material used in the stoves.

The CPSC says it has on record instances of 33 deaths and 84 injuries relating to a stove tipping over. Consumer groups say that the figures are higher because many injuries go unreported. According to the settlement, Sears will install anti-tip devices in over 4 million stoves that have been sold from July 2000 to September 18, last year. Households that have already purchased anti-tip devices will be compensated $100.

We hope this settlement will force other retailers to look into their installation procedures and ensure that proper securing and safety precautions are followed.

If you have been injured by an unsafe product or a family member has been killed, you need the help of a top California personal injury law firm. Contact a lawyer at The Reeves Law Group for a free consultation.

Permalink

Father Sues Crocs after Escalator Accident
February 13, 2008

The father of a three-year-old child, whose toes were seriously injured when they were caught in an escalator at LaGuardia airport, is suing the company that made the child's clogs, Crocs, for a sum of $7 million. Jeffrey Hochberg filed the lawsuit on behalf of his daughter Emma whose injuries, he contends, were caused by her wearing the trendy and hugely popular clogs.

This isn't the first incident of Crocs being responsible for the mangling of kids' feet. In fact if you do a Google search on "crocs injuries" you'll get a grand total of 170,000 results. Since their introduction a couple of years ago, the bulky looking clogs with multiple holes have been popular with adults and kids alike. The bright colors and comfort factor have made them a popular choice with children, which account for a large part of Croc's business.

Crocs unique selling points are its loose design that allows feet to breathe freely in them, and its tight grip that prevents slipping and accidents. It's these two features that also cause Crocs to be such dangerous footwear for little kids. The rubber material that Crocs are made of helps with traction but it also grabs hold of other materials, like the steps of an escalator for instance, and refuses to let go. Add to this the fact that these shoes are made to be too big for the feet and you have the potential for a tragedy. The sides of the escalator can easily grab hold of the clog and drag the child's foot with it.

This is what seems to have happened in the case of Emma Hochberg. In other cases, kids have had their toes ripped out while riding on an escalator.

Clearly, there seems to be a pattern here, and the all-important question is, why is no action being taken? Many malls have put up signs saying Crocs are dangerous on their escalators, but it's far from a universal thing. The Washington Metro has a sign asking its subway riders to avoid stepping on moving machinery like escalators while wearing these clogs. Crocs aren't mentioned by name, but the signs have a picture of the shoes, and an image of a crocodile.

There are those who claim that escalators are dangerous for kids and that parents should watch their children when they are on any sort of moving machinery. These people either have no kids or have never been on an escalator. If you're carrying bags in your arm, you are obviously not going to be in a position to carry your 3-5 year old child. Malls are always exciting places for kids and getting your kids to stand at the center instead of the sides of the escalator can be a challenge. When these shoes prove such a major safety hazard on escalators, why make them in the first place?

When you manufacture a product for kids, you need to make sure it's safe to use in all kinds of situations. Blaming parents just doesn't cut it.

One hopes that this lawsuit will be the final straw that forces the company to come up with better alternatives or safety features.

If you have a child that has been injured by a dangerous product, you need the help of a top California personal injury law firm. Contact a lawyer at The Reeves Law Group for a free consultation.

Permalink

Lead Found in Baby Products
February 12, 2008

2007 will go down as the year when the presence of lead in toys became a national and global concern. Since the first recalls of lead-coated toys were announced in the middle of the year, millions of toys manufactured by the likes of Mattel and RC2 have been yanked off store shelves. The toy industry reeled under the impact of high quantities of lead found in the surface paint of its toys.

Lead is back in the New Year, and this time, it's suspected that baby products are at risk for contamination. The findings were announced by a California-based environmental group, which also blew the whistle on the lead paint story. This time, the findings have sparked off a dispute among critics of these products and those who say they do no harm.

The Center for Environmental Health, which conducted the tests, found increased quantities of lead in baby products made of vinyl plastic. Prominent among these are the Medela cooler for storing breast milk, another cooler manufactured by RC2, a baby bottled cooler by Playtex and a vinyl pacifier carrying case manufactured by Skip Hop.

The tests were conducted by a hand metal detector and were then sent to a laboratory to confirm findings. The results show that the products had between 1,100 parts per million and 5,500 parts per million of lead.

The lead quantity in the products are on the higher side, but surprisingly the issue has not raised a hue and cry, unlike the lead paint toys which child health experts and doctors were united against. In fact, the plastics and baby product industry is expected to criticize these findings widely. The reason for this is that there is no law yet that bans the presence of lead in baby products. Lead in toys is covered under a ban, but so far there has been no movement calling for a ban on lead in all kinds of baby products.

Do we really need to wait until babies begin to fall sick from lead in their coolers or pacifier cases before we begin taking stringent actions? Lead paint in toys was linked to a number of kids becoming sick all over the country, and it took nationwide outrage to force the authorities to introduce safety checks. Do we have to wait until something similar happens to babies who are exposed to lead in their products? How can we assume that something that is universally acknowledged as dangerous to kids when it forms a layer on their toys is safe for little babies?

The Center for Environmental Health maintains that no amount of lead in any kind of product used by children should be tolerated. Thankfully, legislators are now considering the possibility of banning the lead in any kind of baby product, no matter what the material.

The story gets murkier. The Vinyl Institute is surprised at the finding of the Center for Environmental Health. According to them, the use of lead in plastic products has been discontinued for a number of years and substitutes like calcium or zinc were being used in its place.

If you have a child that has suffered negative side effects from a dangerous toy, you need the help of an experienced California personal injury plaintiff's lawyer. Contact an attorney at The Reeves Law Group for a free consultation.

Permalink

Phthalates Found in Baby Care Products
February 05, 2008

It's high time we stopped introducing chemical additives to products before they have been adequately tested, instead of using the public as human guinea pigs.

A recent study suggests that harmful chemicals called phthalates are present in baby lotions, shampoos and powders. According to the tests, babies who had recently been shampooed, bathed or powdered with baby products had a higher concentration of phthalates in their urine. There is enough data to suggest that we should be taking evidence of such a study seriously. It's quite fashionable these days to dismiss any sort of studies that come up regarding the harmful effects of chemicals or other substances, and while there may be chemical contaminations that have very low likelihood of danger, these baby products don't fall in that category.

When you have young babies in the equation, you are looking at possible health risks or complications that will only increase as the babies get older. Something like phthalates contamination could have serious health repercussions.

There is still no solid evidence of what dangers these phthalates could cause to a baby's health but animal studies have shown a link between exposure to phthalates and reproductive issues in both boys and girls. These problems could include early puberty in girls.

The environmental group that's behind the study says there isn't any real need for all kinds of fancy soaps, lotions and small quantities of water and soap are more than enough to get a baby clean. They warn against the indiscriminate use of baby products that have potentially risk-causing health effects.

The Food and Drug Administration has said they don't find the data compelling enough to take any action.

If you or a loved-one has been injured by a dangerous product, you need the help of an experienced California personal injury law firm. Contact an attorney at The Reeves Law Group for a free consultation.

Permalink