The Different Types of Product Liability Claims

Do you know thousands of people every year get injured due to defective products? Possibly, you’ve also bought several products with the expectation that they will perform as advertised. But you face disappointment later and at times even worse happen- you or someone you love gets injured due to that product. Sometimes a sunscreen may cause skin burns or a new vehicle may have defective airbags.  When people get injured or suffer other damages because of a product they wonder if there is any recourse.

In the Canadian legal system, if you are injured by a defective product then you have a right to sue the manufacturer for compensation. This is known as product liability claims. The product liability claim can be made against the designer, manufacturer, wholesaler, distributor, importer, or retailer- whoever in the chain of distribution is liable for injury caused by a defective product.

Products containing inherent defects that can cause harm to the consumer are subject to a product liability claim. However, to receive compensation the plaintiff must prove that the product is defective. To prove this you will need to consult an experienced personal injury lawyer . But before you file your lawsuit, it’s best to first understand what types of product liability claims you can file suit for. There are a few different ways to prove that the product in question caused the damage or injury. There are three main ways that product liability claims can be approached:

  1. Design Defects
  2. Manufacturing Defects
  3. Marketing Defects

 

Design Defects

A product is first designed and then manufactured and marketed. Sometimes, a product is poorly designed or not properly tested which results in producing a faulty and dangerous product. Design defect product liability claims are those where damage is caused due to the product’s flawed design. In this type of products liability claim, the error is not caused at the manufacturing stage. Here the design of the entire line of products was inherently defective. When the design of a product is defective it poses a threat to consumers. For instance, the airbags of a car model are not thick enough to absorb the impact of a collision. Or maybe, its steering doesn’t work when the car is put into reverse. These are design defects that can cause severe harm to customers.  In such cases, if you are involved in an accident and you sustained severe injuries, you will need to prove that the product is dangerous by design and that your injuries resulted from your use of this product.

Manufacturing Defect

Sometimes, product design is flawless but the error is made during the manufacturing process. When the manufacturer intentionally or unintentionally strays from the design it results in producing flawed products. This means that the product was properly designed but when these designs were assembled, an error was made. In such a case if a consumer suffers injury or any harm, he/she may file a claim against the manufacturer. In this type of product liability claim, the product that causes the injury differs slightly from all the identical products of its type that were being sold. Some manufacturing defects include using expired components, attaching parts incorrectly or faulty electric circuitry. For example, the bicycle you purchased had a cracked frame which injured you while riding it. This problem was in your bicycle and not in others because of the manufacturer’s negligence. Other examples of a manufacturing defect could be a defective batch of cough syrup or a car manufactured with defective tires.

To file a manufacturing defect product liability claim, you would need to prove that the injury has been caused by the manufacturing defect. It is noteworthy here that the manufacturer may not be accountable if the plaintiff altered the product which resulted in causing the injury. For instance, if you suffered an injury in a car accident due to a tire blowout, you would have to prove that the accident was caused because of defective tires and not due to your negligence.

Marketing Defects

When a company fails to provide proper warning about a product to their consumers, they may face a product liability lawsuit. Such product liability claims are known as product marketing defects or failure to warn. Here an error is made in the way a product is marketed to the public. When a product doesn’t provide enough warnings or instructions regarding how to use it with precaution, consumers may sustain an injury while using it. When the company prints proper directions of using a product, the consumers exercise extra caution while using it. However, when instructions and warning labels are absent, consumers may get harmed by the product and such claims fall into the category of marketing defects. Suppose, you fell ill because the energy drink you consumed reacted with your subsequent alcoholic drink. If an energy drink might cause harmful side effects when taken in combination with other alcoholic beverages, the company must mention this on the label. Similarly, you may file a failure-to-warn claim if a product is not safe for consumption by pregnant or lactating women.

The cases of failure to warn involve two basic components. The first one is insufficient instructions which might result in mishandling the product. The second type includes side effects of using a product such as medicines or beverages. In both cases, manufacturers have a responsibility to warn consumers about the dangerous characteristics of products. According to the legal guidelines, every company must clearly indicate the dangers involved in using their products. When a product doesn’t provide enough warnings or instructions and you sustain an injury due to this reason, you may file a case against the company.

Providing effective advocacy in product liability issues

On behalf of Rooz Law posted in Product Liability on Friday, December 5, 2014.

If you’ve been injured or your property has been damaged because of a defective product, you may be able to pursue compensation for your losses. Serving clients in Toronto and the surrounding areas, our team of experienced personal injury attorneys are effective advocates when it comes to the rights of consumers regarding product liability claims.

When it comes to the issue of product liability, a plethora of services and products can lead to various injuries and damages. We understand each client has unique circumstances surrounding a claim. Whether your injury involved a defective vehicle, drug, home appliance or any type of equipment that was incorrectly repaired, our goal is to ensure that your rights are fully protected through our effective litigation procedures.

A case begins with an analysis in order to determine the party who may be responsible for your losses. Liable parties may include companies or service technicians who repaired, cleaned or maintained the particular product in question, the product’s manufacturer, vendors who sold the defective product or provided poor quality parts for the product.

Our attorneys have a thorough understanding of product liability laws and your rights along with the skill to negotiate a resolution with companies who try to deny liability for damages. In some cases, they may claim that they are not liable for damages caused by a product that was incorrectly repaired or maintained.

As a consumer, you have a right to be protected for faulty products and services that you have paid for. If you’re seeking information on what you should do after suffering damages from a defective product, please visit our page on product liability.

Source: Rooz PC Law, “Product Liability Lawyer For North York”, December 04, 2014

The danger of rebuilt air bags

On behalf of Rooz Law posted in Product Liability on Tuesday, November 18, 2014.

Individuals in Ontario might have heard that there may be danger in rebuilt air bags installed in vehicles. They may cause injuries to the head and upper body. National Sacs Gonflables Inc. is the company responsible for the rebuilt air bags, and they may be in any car that has had its air bag replaced since 1998. Vehicle diagnostic systems that would normally indicate a problem with the air bag cannot identify this particular defect. Only a qualified repair shop can determine whether a car’s air bag is rebuilt.

While the rebuilder was supposed to pay for the costs of air bag replacement, it filed for bankruptcy in 2001. Air bag replacement can cost around $1,000 or more. Individuals also have the option to have the air bag deactivated. The Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec recommends deactivation and replacement, but Transport Canada can provide a packet regarding the possibility of leaving the air bag permanently deactivated.

There may be product liability issues with the air bag. An individual who is injured in such circumstances may sometimes file a lawsuit against the company responsible. However, in this case, because the manufacturer is bankrupt, the case may be more complex. Individuals who are injured by air bags may wish to consult a lawyer about what steps they might be able to take.

For example, an individual might have a used car and not know that the car was involved in an accident several years earlier and that the air bag was replaced. The individual might then be injured when an air bag deploys improperly. A lawyer might be able to suggest the best course of action if it is not possible to get a settlement from the air bag manufacturer.

Source: Ontario Ministry of Transportation, “Air Bags”, November 17, 2014

HP power cords recalled due to possible fire hazard

On behalf of Rooz Law posted in Product Liability on Wednesday, September 3, 2014.

Ontario residents may be interested to know about a recall issued by Hewlett Packard Aug. 26 for certain notebook power cords that could potentially overheat and cause a fire. Hewlett Packard has received 29 reports of cords overheating and two reports of minor burns. They also have received 13 reports of minor property damage associated with use of the cords. One confirmed and one unconfirmed report of overheating has been received in Canada. However, no injuries have been reported to Health Canada related to use of the cords.

1.37 million GM vehicles recalled in Canada, U.S. for bad switch

On behalf of Rooz Law posted in Product Liability on Thursday, March 6, 2014.

General Motors vehicle owners in Ontario may be among those being notified under a recall announcement if they have one of the following models in their garage: a 2006-07 model year Chevrolet HHR, a 2006-07 Saturn Sky, a 2007 Pontiac Solstice or a 2003-07 Saturn Ion. GM has been under fire lately from product liability and safety advocates because it admitted it had known as far back as 2004 that an ignition switch malfunction in certain vehicles could slip from “run” to “accessory” mode while the car was in motion, exposing drivers and passengers to serious injury or death in an accident.

The U.S. National Highway Safety Administration linked the switch problem to 31 crashes and 13 deaths involving drivers and front-seat passengers. The malfunction was believed to be especially deadly because the ignition switch moving into a mode other than “run” while the vehicle is in operation would shut off the engine as well as the cars’ electrical system. Without an operational electrical system, cars’ front airbags will not deploy in an accident. It would also be more likely for motorists to get into a crash when the engine shut off in traffic since the auto would stop, and other drivers might run into it at full speed.

The four models above were added to an earlier announcement from the automaker that covered 780,000 Chevrolet Cobalts and Pontiac G5s manufactured and sold for the 2005-07 model years. With the additions, the total of vehicles being recalled was last counted at 1.37 million, with 235,855 of those reportedly in Canada.

An automobile with faulty parts is not the only dangerous product threatening lives in Canada. Everything from dangerous children’s toys to defective industrial equipment might expose their manufacturers to product liability lawsuits from injured parties. A personal injury lawyer may be able to evaluate the case of someone seriously injured by such a device to look for a pattern of negligent manufacturing on the part of the manufacturer. If one exists, the lawyer may recommend a personal injury claim or class action.

Source: CBC News, “GM adds 4 models to ignition switch recall”, February 26, 2014

Courts agree to auto recall settlement

On behalf of Rooz Law posted in Product Liability on Monday, March 24, 2014.

Ontario residents who have been following the news concerning the Toyota recalls may be interested to know that four provincial courts have agreed to a proposed settlement with the company. According to the terms of the agreement in this product liability case, Toyota has agreed to provide $600,000 in scholarship funds to five engineering schools and reimburse plaintiffs for a number of the costs they incurred throughout the course of litigation. In addition, many affected Toyota owners can expect to receive up to 10 years of coverage for some vehicular component maintenance and repair procedures as well as a complementary brake system upgrade.