Matthew Ferrie, Partner, is back again to host the newest episode of the Subro Sessions podcast. Bert Davis, Principal for Romauldi, Davidson, & Associates and BDA Engineering, joins Matt for the second episode on investigating residential electrical fires entitled, “Investigating Residential Electrical Fires Part II – Arcing and Arc Mapping.” Bert and Matt dive into arc mapping and how it assists in identifying the area of origin and fire spread in subrogation cases involving residential electrical fires.
Consumer Product Safety Commission Recalls
In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On April 11, 2024, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:
- Johnson Health Tech North America Expands Recall of Matrix T1 and T3 Commercial Treadmills Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he power cord can become loose from the treadmill’s power socket, posing a fire hazard.”
- Innovative Bedding Solutions and SBL Recall GhostBed Natural Mattresses Due to Fire Hazard; Violation of Federal Mattress Flammability Regulation. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he mattresses violate the smoldering ignition requirements of the federal mattress flammability regulation, posing a fire hazard.”
- Touchat Area Rugs Recalled Due to Fire Hazard; Violation of Federal Flammability Regulations; Sold Exclusively on Amazon.com by Touchat. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he recalled area rugs violate the mandatory federal flammability regulations for carpets and rugs, posing a fire hazard.”
- Yoto Recalls Yoto Mini Speakers for Children Due to Burn and Fire Hazards. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he speaker’s lithium-ion battery can overheat and catch fire, posing burn and fire hazards to consumers.”
Consumer Product Safety Commission Warning – To Immediately Stop Using Fuel Bottles Due to Risk of Poisoning, Burn, and Flash Fire Hazards; Violation of Federal Safety Regulations for Portable Fuel Containers
In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a warning about the product at issue may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On April 4, 2024, the CPSC issued a warning urging consumers “to immediately stop using refillable fuel bottles sold by Shenzhen Pink Vine Technology.” The fuel bottles were sold Walmart.com. According the CPSC, the bottles “pose a risk of poisoning and burns to children due to lack of a child resistant closure” and “pose a flash fire hazard to all users due to lack of a flame mitigation device.” Apparently, “CPSC issued a Notice of Violation to the seller Shenzhen Pink Vine Technology Co. Ltd., of China, but the firm has not agreed to recall these fuel bottles or offer a remedy to consumers.”
You can find out more information about the warning here.
Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:
Consumer Product Safety Commission Warning – Stop Using True Brothers Fuel Bottles Due to Risk of Poisoning, Burn, and Flash Fire Hazards; Violation of Federal Safety Regulations for Portable Fuel Containers
In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a warning about the product at issue may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On April 4, 2024, the CPSC issued a warning urging consumers to “immediately stop using True Brothers refillable fuel bottles sold by Shenzhen Yinglong Industrial.” According the CPSC, bottles “pose a risk of poisoning and burns to children due to lack of a child resistant closure” and “pose a flash fire hazard to all users due to lack of a flame mitigation device.” Apparently, “CPSC issued a Notice of Violation to the seller Shenzhen Yinglong Industrial Co., Ltd. of China, doing business as LetSports, but the firm has not agreed to recall these fuel bottles or offer a remedy to consumers.”
You can find out more information about the warning here.
Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:
Consumer Product Safety Commission Warning – Immediately Stop Using Elide Fire Extinguishing Balls Due to Failure to Extinguish Fires and Risk of Serious Injury or Death
In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a warning about the product at issue may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On March 28, 2024, the CPSC issued a warning urging consumers to “immediately stop using Elide Fire Extinguishing Balls due to failure to extinguish fires and risk of serious injury or death.” According the CPSC, “the products can fail to effectively disperse fire retardant chemicals and fail to extinguish a fire.” Apparently, “Elide Fire USA has not agreed to recall these fire extinguishing balls or offer a remedy to consumers.”
You can find out more information about the warning here.
Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:
Subrogation Waiver Unconscionable in Residential Fuel Delivery Contract
In a matter of first impression, the Superior Court of Connecticut (Superior Court), in American Commerce Ins., Co. v. Eastern Fuel Corp., No. CV-206109168-S, 2024 Conn. Super. LEXIS 380, held that a waiver of subrogation provision in a consumer fuel service/delivery contract violated public policy. The Superior Court overruled the motion for summary judgment filed by Eastern Fuel Corporation (Eastern) and determined that the clause was impermissible as the contract was entered into by two parties with unequal bargaining power.
American Commerce Insurance Company (American) provided property insurance to Arlene and James Hillas (the Insureds) for their home in Woodbridge, Connecticut. The Insureds hired Eastern to service their heating system on or around October 25, 2018. The service work at the property included inspecting the oil filters and flushing the fuel lines. On November 1, 2018, when the Insureds turned the heating system on for the first time that season, the two oil tanks on the property were allegedly full. After a series of deliveries, claims that the oil levels were lower than expected, discovering oil staining on the floor and Eastern’s replacement of the oil lines, Eastern delivered another 429 gallons. However, after the delivery, additional leaks were discovered relating to the oil line replacements. Ultimately, the Insureds submitted a claim to American and American paid in excess of $59,000 for the damage incurred.
Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights
The point at which an insurance carrier possesses the equitable right of subrogation is an issue on which the states have differed. Some allow carriers to pursue rights of subrogation immediately upon payment and some have taken stricter approaches. Missouri falls into the latter group. By not allowing the carrier the right to file suit against third-party tortfeasors until the insured provides its carrier with an assignment of all its rights, Missouri’s approach has opened the door for challenges to subrogation rights.
In Megown v. Auto Club Fam. Ins. Co., 2024 Mo. App. LEXIS 82, the plaintiff-insureds Michael and Jane Megown (the Megowns) suffered a house fire on February 8, 2016. Their insurance carrier, Auto Club Family Insurance Company (Auto Club) reimbursed the Megowns for their property damage in the amount of $722,433.56. Subsequently, the Megowns sued Auto Club for breach of contract and later amended their complaint to add claims against Tyberius Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Crag Electric (Craig Electric), the third-party tortfeasor, for direct negligence, alleging both property damage and personal injuries. Auto Club intervened in the Megowns’ claim against Craig Electric to protect its interest as subrogee for its property damage payment to the Megowns. Craig Electric settled prior to trial, paying $1,000,000.00 to both the Megowns and Auto Club, to be allocated at a later date. After a bench trial that apportioned the settlement with $722,433.56 paid to Auto Club and $277,566.44 paid to Megowns – and a jury trial awarding no further damages – the Megowns appealed.
Pursuing Claims Against Minors and Their Parents
Chris Konzelmann, Partner, hosts the newest episode of the Subro Sessions podcast entitled: “Pursuing Claims Against Minors and Their Parents.” In this episode, Chris revisits a case and discusses the problems that may arise when subrogation efforts are targeted towards children and their parents and whether either can be held responsible for tort claims.
Consumer Product Safety Commission Recalls
In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On March 14, 2023, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:
- Best Buy Recalls Insignia® Air Fryers and Air Fryer Ovens Due to Fire, Burn and Laceration Hazards. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he air fryers can overheat, causing the handles to melt or break, posing fire and burn hazards. Additionally, the air fryer ovens can overheat and the glass on the door can shatter, posing fire, burn and laceration hazards.”
- Textron Specialized Vehicles Recalls Tracker Off Road OX EV Light Utility Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard. According to the CPSC’s website, “[w]ater can get into the lithium-ion battery pack of the Tracker OX EV vehicles, posing a fire hazard.”
- Honeywell Recalls System Sensor L-Series Low Frequency Fire Alarm Sounders and Strobes Due to Risk of Failure to Alert Consumers to a Fire. According to the CPSC’s website,
“[t]he sounders and strobes can malfunction and cause the fire alarm system to fail to alert consumers of a fire.”
Consumer Product Safety Commission Warning – Immediately Stop Using Faddare 16.4 Foot Extension Power Cords Due to Shock and Fire Hazards; Sold Exclusively on Amazon.com
In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a warning about the product at issue may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On March 14, 2024, the CPSC issued a warning urging consumers to “immediately stop using the extension cords, and destroy them by unplugging, cutting the cord, and safely disposing in the garbage.” According the CPSC, Faddare 16.4’ extension power Cords “have undersized wiring, posing shock and fire hazards.” Apparently, the “CPSC notified the seller, Great Effort of China, but the firm has not responded to requests for a recall.”
You can find out more information about the warning here.
Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:
