On Sun, 23 May 1999 Ajhsys@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/22/99 10:12:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> mkris@sprynet.com writes:
>
> << If the company was required to replace the seatbelts, then they should.
> Otherwise a simple cost benefit analysis would dictate every company send
> unsafe
> items into the market, and only replace the smallest mumber of units,
> thereby
> increasing profit at the expense of consumer safety. As it is, companies
> bank on
> a low recall number and time. >>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> I hate to get back into this thread, but I think there may be a statute of
> limitations on these recalls. The recall is meant to replace parts deemed
> defective at the time of manufacture. Now these cars are over 20 years old.
> Many of the seatbelts are not working properly due to years of
> mis-use/non-use/lack of proper maintenance, etc.
>
> I think that it will be difficult to prove that your belts were defective as
> of the date of recall, due to the original defect. Maybe a lawyer out there
> in list land can look into what the time limit is on recalls.
>
> Allen Hefner
> '77 Midget
> '92 Mitsubishi Expo LRV Sport
>
Actually safty knows no bounds. Servel wich stopped making gas
refrigerators in the 1950's has a recall in progress tht pays $100 dead or
alive for one of their refrigerators. Bernzo-Matic also has a recasll for
small heaters that were made in the 60's. If the product is dangerous it
needs to be recalled.
...Art
|