Novato Personal Injury Lawyer - Defective Products

Even Barbie's Puppy Cannot Escape Lead Paint Recall

Clayton Kent — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 16:21:52 GMT

The Mattel toy recalls have now reached Barbie. Mattel voluntarily recalled more toys as a result of lead paint posing a dangerous threat to infants and small children. Barbie's own puppy has been recalled due to toxic levels of lead paint, as have many other product lines. This is now the third recall of Mattel toys, and it includes 675,000 Barbie accessories, but for now, Barbie herself is not involved. All of the toys involved in the recall were manufactured, at least in part, in China, and sold during 2006 and 2007. It is anticipated that the recalls will continue, and that other toy manufacturers will also follow Mattel's lead and issue recalls.

For more information on this subject matter, please refer to the section on Defective and Dangerous Products.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Clayton Kent

Defective Cell Phone Battery Poses Potential for Injury

Clayton Kent — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:58:35 GMT

Nokia has issued a voluntary product advisory concerning a specific battery used in their phones, that can overheat during charging, and pose a potential for fire and injury. In August, Nokia, the leading manufacturer of cell phones, issued a product advisory for the Nokia-branded BL-5C battery. Matsushita Battery Industrial Co. Ltd. of Japan manufactured the BL-5C battery for Nokia between December 2005 and November 2006. While no serious injuries or damages have been reported, the battery is succeptible to overheating during charging due to a short circuit. This potential fire risk could affect up to 46 million cell phones.

For more information on this subject matter, please refer to the section on Defective and Dangerous Products.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Clayton Kent

Mattel Issues Recall of Defective Toys

Clayton Kent — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:47:46 GMT

For the second time in a month, Mattel, the largest toy company in the world, issued a recall of defective toys that were manufactured in China.

The company, in a statement issued from its American headquarters, said it was recalling a total of 436,000 toys marketed in the United States and elsewhere that had "impermissible levels of lead."

As a result, the export license of Lee Der International, the company that made the defective toys, has been revoked by Chinese regulators, who discovered that the company was using a fake lead-free paint pigment in the toys. This recall follows on the heels of another defective toy recall by an Illinios corporation, that recalled 1.5 million Thomas & Friends wooden railway sets due to excessive levels of lead paint.

While lead paint has long been restricted from being used in toys made for sale in the United States, Europe and even China, it remains much cheaper than lead-free paint. Companies here say lead paint is sometimes preferred because it offers richer colors, is easier to apply and easier to dry. And so some companies continued to blend it into paint supplies, according to toy consultants.

Lead has long been classified as a toxic chemical by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. It is particularly dangerous when ingested by children and infants, and has been linked to severe developmental delays.

For more information on this subject matter, please refer to the section on Defective and Dangerous Products.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Clayton Kent

Consumer Product Safety: Is Michael Baroody the Fox Guarding the Henhouse?

Laura Blatt — Wed, 23 May 2007 00:24:52 GMT

President Bush's nominee to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is none other than Michael Baroody, the vice president of the industry-driven National Association of Manufacturers. This group makes the products that the Commission regulates and its members include corporate giants such as Dow Chemical and Proctor & Gamble.

Mr. Baroody is known for lobbying against fire-safe cigarettes, improved standards for baby walkers, anti-pollution regulations and product safety. "If you want to guard the interest of the hens, you don't put the fox in charge of the henhouse," commented Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL). He has called for a "hold" on the appointment, which comes up before a Senate committee this Thursday, May 24.

Groups opposing the Baroody nomination include the Center for Environmental Health, Center for Justice and Democracy, Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Kids in Danger, Public Citizen, Saferparks and, U.S. PIRG.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Laura Blatt

Defective Products: Do You Have a "Killer Stove"?

Laura Blatt — Mon, 21 May 2007 21:50:47 GMT

"Killer stoves" have caused the deaths of 33 people and injured at least 84 others from 1980 through 2006, according to Public Citizen and the Consumer Federation of America. The groups are referring to freestanding kitchen ranges that can easily topple over, crushing their victims or causing burns from spilled hot foods.

Manufacturers began using lighter, cheaper materials in freestanding stoves beginning in the 1980s. As a result, the stoves are unstable when too much weight is applied to the oven door. Unfortunately, these defective products now reside in millions of households.

Voluntary safety standards were adopted in 1991, including the use of special L-shaped brackets to anchor down the stoves. However, consumer groups say that the anti-tipping brackets are installed only in a small minority of cases. They point to Sears, which sells about 800,000 stoves per year, as a major culprit. They also charge that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) knew about the hazard since the mid-1980s, but did nothing to warn consumers.

The sad fact is that most of the tipping incidents involve the most vulnerable in our population--small children and the elderly. They need our protection. At the very least, the CPSC should warn consumers about the problem and make the safety brackets mandatory for freestanding stoves. Even better, the stove companies should be required to go back to the drawing board and redesign a kitchen range that is safe.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Laura Blatt

Pet Food Recalled by Menu Foods

Christina Cole — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 05:45:46 GMT

Menu Foods issued a precautionary pet food recall of their dog and cat food manufactured between December 3, 2006 and March 6, 2007. The recall involves "cuts and gravy" style pet foods in cans and pouches that was manufactured at two of Menu Food's U.S. facilities. These same products are manufactured and sold as 94 different private label/national brands.

Menu Foods received several complaints in the United States (none in Canada) with concerns about the pet food manufactured in early December and the impact the food had on the renal health of pets that consumed the recalled pet foods.

After receiving the first complaint, which would later turn into thousands, Menu Foods initiated a battery of technical tests that were conducted by internal and external specialists. They were unable to identify any issues with the foods in question. However, they discovered the timing of the production along with the complaints, coincides with the start of an ingredient from a new supplier.

"We take these complaints very seriously and, while we are still looking for a specific cause, we are acting to err on the side of caution" said Paul K. Henderson, President and CEO, Menu Foods. "We will do whatever is necessary to ensure that our products maintain the very highest quality standards."

In addition to changing suppliers, for production after March 6, the Fund has increased testing of all raw materials and finished goods. It is also working closely with regulatory authorities and its customers to learn more and will take whatever additional actions are appropriate. The Fund estimates that based on currently available information, this recall could cost between $30 million and $40 million, which will be financed from a combination of internally generated cash flow and bank credit facilities. Furthermore, the Fund is aggressively producing product, utilizing a different supplier for the ingredient in question, to replenish customers as quickly as possible.

Since the initial recall was announced there have been many changes and additions to the recall and the foods affected by the recall. You can stay up-to-date by visiting the Menu Foods website.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Christina Cole