WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. Name of Product: Blue Ember Gas Grills Units: About 47,000 Importer: Fiesta Gas Grills, of Dickson, Tenn. Manufacturers: Keesung Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and Unisplendor Corp., of China Hazard: The gas grills can be assembled improperly exposing the gas burner hoses to excessive heat, posing fire and burn hazards to consumers. Incidents/Injuries: Fiesta has received 14 reports of grill fires. No injuries have been reported. Description: The recall involves Blue Ember liquid propane (LP) or natural gas outdoor grills. The recalled model and serial numbers are listed below. The model and serial numbers are printed on a rating plate label on the rear of the grill. The cabinet style grill has two doors and is silver-colored and black or silver-colored and gray. “Blue Ember” is printed on the grill’s hood. | Model Numbers | Serial Numbers |
|---|
| FG50057 or FG50069 | 08K018821-08K018948
08K043658-008K043785
08K018309-08K018692
08K018693-08K018820
08K044554-08K044681
08K054921-08K056968
08K026501-08K033172
08K052233-08K053512
08K057481-08K057864
08K057765-08K060045
08K033317-08K038068
08K040117-08K042708
08K044572-08K047883
08K048790-08K051669
08K000001-08K000640
08K007425-08K007808
08K053641-08K054920
08K000641-08K000768
08U042773-08U046804 | 08K006915-08K007042
08K044042-08K044297
08K048396-08K048523
08K007299-08K007426
08K044298-08K044425
08K018949-08K019332
08K016003-08K016258
08K017797-08K017924
08K044426-08K044553
08K048268-08K048395
08K017925-08K018052
08K042277-08K042634
08K015875-08K016002
08K053385-08K053640
08K007043-08K007298
08K038069-08K038196
08K051926-08K052052
08K060193-08K060320 |
Sold at: Various home centers and retailers nationwide from November 2007 through June 2008 for about $450. Manufactured in: China Remedy: Consumers should immediately stop using the grills, and inspect the burner hoses to make sure they have been properly assembled. If the hose is to the rear of the installed heat shield, the grill has been improperly assembled and consumers should contact Fiesta for replacement hoses, assembly instructions, and if necessary, for assistance in examining the grill. Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Fiesta toll-free at (866) 740-7849 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, visit the firm’s Web site at www.fiestagasgrills.com (note: this is a .doc document), or email the firm at mnorman@fiestagasgrills.com
Will New Product Safety Law Be A Boon To Insurers? BY DANIEL HAYS NU Online News Service, Nov. 13, 3:25 p.m. EST The new Consumer Product Safety Act may prompt some litigation by whistleblowers, but in the long run it should reduce claims against insurers, according to an attorney who represents whistleblower interests. That assessment of the law--which was disputed by a product liability lawyer- -comes from Stephen Kohn, president of the non-profit National Whistleblower Center. Mr. Kohn’s viewpoint was rejected by Frank Citera of Greenberg Traurig in Chicago, who heads firm’s product liability practice group. He said he doubted whistleblower involvement will help insurers. Mr. Kohn’s group next week is sponsoring a seminar to brief attorneys on new protections in the law for employees who are fired for going public with product problems. The Act--passed on Aug. 8 in an effort to improve the safety of children’s toys, and keep toxic playthings from the marketplace- -gives whistleblowers the right to bring an action for a jury trial to obtain reinstatement and compensatory damages for emotional distress and loss of reputation, as well as attorneys fees. Mr. Kohn said the Act--which covers 15,000 products, from bicycle helmets to blasting caps--may result in individual whistleblower suits. But he argues that if the worker’s disclosure keeps a defective product off the market before consumers are harmed, it could avert hundreds of millions of dollars in injury claims, and class actions. “This is in the long-term best interests of the insurance companies,” he said, adding that insurers should be supportive of whistleblowers because, “it’s a money saver.” It would be counterproductive for insurers, according to Mr. Kohn, “if they don’t support and educate employees as to their rights.” Insurers, he suggested, “should require companies to have a mechanism to obtain internal [employee] complaints as a requirement to be insured.” For publicly-traded companies, he noted, there is already a requirement that they have an employee concerns program, “but that only covers fraud against shareholders.” Insurance companies, according to Mr. Kohn, are in the best position to make sure companies have mechanisms to learn about defects before there is a big lawsuit. The attorney said he is currently handling the case of an employee who was fired in 2001 for raising an alarm about defective bullet-proof vests, which had material that was degrading. Two years after his firing, a policeman was shot through the vest and another suffered permanent injury from a bullet that penetrated. Two years later, the Department of Justice withdrew the vest from the market. Mr. Kohn said insurers most likely covered the two failures, but his client’s actions “probably prevented hundreds of injuries.” Mr. Citera said Mr. Kohn’s notion was “a perverse viewpoint.” The whistleblower component of the law, he said, has been one of great concern to companies. “I think the Act will be a bit of a boon for the plaintiffs’ bar that ultimately would impact the insurance industry,” he predicted. In a perfect world, he said, a worker on the assembly line who sees a defect would prevent the product from hitting the market sooner, “but historically employees reluctant to blow the whistle.” Mr. Citera added that it would be unlikely the average employee would be aware of protections afforded by the Act. And, in the course of his experience doing product recall cases, Mr. Citera said he could not recall many employee warnings. Ultimately, he said he thought whistleblower involvement will have little impact on cutting down products that don’t comply with the Act.
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 30, 2008
Release #08-413 | Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 925-6278
CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772
CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908 |
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. Name of Product: General Electric Toasters Units: About 210,000 Importer: Wal-Mart Stores Inc., of Bentonville, Ark. Hazard: An electrical short circuit can occur between the heating element and the bread cage, posing a fire and electrical shock hazard to consumers. Incidents/Injuries: Wal-Mart has received 140 reports of fires or sparks coming from the toasters or the toasters tripping the circuit breaker in consumers’ homes. No injuries have been reported. Description: The recalled toasters have a chrome steel body, a black plastic base and controls with either two or four openings in the top. The GE logo is located on the front of the toasters just above the controls. Model numbers 169115 and 169116 are included in this recall. The model number is printed on the bottom of the toasters. 4-Slice | 2-Slice | 169115 | 169116 |
Sold at: Wal-Mart Stores nationwide from September 2007 through July 2008 for between $17 and $28. Manufactured in: China Remedy: Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled toasters and return them to any Wal-Mart for a full refund or replacement toaster. Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Wal-Mart at (800) 925-6278 between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Monday through Friday, or visit the firm’s Web site at www.walmartstores.com Office of Information and Public Affairs | Washington, DC 20207 |
Locally, the big health care story unfolding is Provena is appealing a ruling by the 4th District Appellate Court denying its tax exempt status as a not for profit hospital. By way of background, several years ago, Provena engaged in a practice of "dunning" the indigent who received care at one of their facilities and then eventually requesting a bench warrant for the patient's arrest for not appearing in court. As bad as this sounds, the real discussion lies in what qualifies as charitable care such that the hospital's not for profit status can remain in good standing with the Illinois Department of Revenue and the Internal Revenue Service? There are many angles to consider but one I think bears the most scrutiny is can a metro area the size of Champaign-Urbana economically support two hospitals? Without passing judgment, is Provena willing to open its books and demonstrate where every single nickel is allocated? Where do its patients come from? What percentage have insurance or inadequate insurance? The list goes on and on. Stay tuned because the hospital industry is watching this very closley.
Every now and then even a cynic like me can simply stare in disbelief at the dysfunction in the health care marketplace. I recently read that Medicare is no longer going to reimburse providers for sevices that result in either malpractice or were by mistake. What other business on the planet can operate in this capacity and why, after 40 years of being LBJ's lynchpin program of his "Great Society" is this now just being addressed? "I am sorry, sir but I amputated the wrong leg. Now, your insurance coverage will only cover 50% of our billed charges but we can certainly work out an installment arrangement that fits your budget." Amtrack, the US Postal Service and Medicare are government run programs that suck off the American taxpayer like a malnourished infant. When everybody wakes up and realizes we all have been duped at our own expense and you are booking your cardiologist's 6 week European vacation, my heartfelt condolences are with you. Now, having spent many years working inside a health plan, I am acutley aware of the aristocracy which exists between physicians and the rest of "them." I can assure folks that unless and until both sides of the health care equation (payors and providers) are willing to sit down and openly discuss pricing mechanisms and the true cost of medical services, anybody who must access the health care system will be grist for the mill.
Although I’m not much of an “Olympics guy”, I couldn’t help but watch the swimming events, especially the accomplishments of Michael Phelps and Dara Torres. I was in awe of their commitment to accomplishing their goals even though both are on opposite ends of their careers (although I wouldn’t count Torres out too soon). Both knew that in order to reach their goal, they would need to not only have a plan, but be committed to implementing it and staying with it for the long-run. It obviously wasn’t easy, but they stuck with it and became the best they could be. If you think they accomplished this by themselves, think again. They had coaches, nutritionists, and a number of other individuals to keep them limber and motivate them towards their goal. It is the classic example of personal accountability with a team effort. I know each of their team members were also striving to be the best they could be and to reach their goals. Keep in mind, if it wasn’t for one of Phelps’ team-mates swimming a phenomenal leg, Phelps would have had 7 golds and 1 silver! Still not bad, but due to this team-mate’s efforts, Phelps now holds a record 8 gold medals. Same applies for Torres (who was swimming in her first Olympics the year before Phelps was born). She has 12 medals over her career beginning with the 1984 Olympics! There are a number of lessons we can take from Phelps and Torres: 1. The drive to excel comes from within: - We will not accomplish our goals unless we are passionate about reaching the end result. 2. Planning is essential : - We need to know how we will get from Point A to Point B. 3. Hard work is part of the process: - We can’t rely on someone else to accomplish our own goals. 4. Personal accountability is essential: - Excuses don’t cut it. 5. Teamwork is imperative: - Our team is there to encourage us and lift us up when we struggle. They are there to keep us pushing towards the goal. 6. Celebrate the Successes: - Enjoy the fruits of your labor. Celebrate when you reach the mark and then go set the next mark higher! We each have a choice when we put our feet on the floor in morning as to how our day is going to go. This doesn’t mean we will enjoy each issue we face, but it does mean we have a choice as to how we deal with them. Live your day passionately and celebrate YOUR “Olympic successes”!
I can't help but look back over the last two months and wonder "where has this year gone already?". If any of you are like me, I'm tired of winter and am looking forward to some warm weather. However, as much as I'm planning on enjoying the warmth, I know there isn't a lot (ie absolutely nothing) I can control as it relates to controlling the weather. However, that is different in planning for a new year. We set our subro recovery goals (both internally and for our clients) at the beginning of the year giving us our destination. Granted, there will be roadblocks, potholes, and the unexpected as we travel this road, but it's all about setting the course and preparing for those "bumps in the road". It's so important for all of us to be able to see the goal and then be able to plan the route to accomplish them. For me, it is a daily evaluation of what has been accomplished and what I need to do today to keep moving forward. Subrogation is not only recovery focused, but as equally important focused on delivering on the promise to take care of our/your clients in the event of a loss. I believe too many times we are focused only on the bottom dollar (very important!) and forget about the person waiting for the deductible. My challenge to all of you is to plan your day so you take the steps necessary to deliver on "the promise" and to maximize recoveries. Might be as simple as staying up on your "diaries", returning calls, or getting those arbs written. Whatever it is, keep moving forward and don't forget those we serve.... Subrogation: Live it! Breathe it! Share it!
Question: "If you insured several tenants in a apartment complex and one of your insured's caused the fire and your other tenants had damaged and we paid a claim for damages. Can you subrogate against your own company for the tenant that caused the fire ? Another factor in all of this is that the loss is greater then the policy limit. We have tenants that are insured with us and other tenants that are insured with other carriers and also damage to the apartment itself. Would the other carriers frown upon pro-rating the loss with us being added as a claimant ? or would it be best to just refund the insured's back there deductible based on the loss ratio ?" Answer: I have dealt with a situation such as this before, and it does cause several issues. Ultimately, you have to look at the best representation of the insured in either situation. So for you as the subrogation adjuster, I would look to pursue to the fullest extent possible especially if you consider what affect that loss may have on your insured's underwriting even if you absorb the deductible. Yes you will probably get some push back from the other carriers involved with regard to your pro rata participation, but it's an argument I have won on a few occasions. An issue to consider is what is the financial impact of the case, and from an overall handling standpoint, is it cost effective to proceed. In a case such as this you will have to have your own counsel to proceed in the pro rata and protect your lien. One pitfall to avoid is representing your insured out of pocket damages without a signed handling agreement outside of your policy. One such situation led to the carrier being barred from dropping the litigation even though it was not cost effective, as early in the file they agreed to rep the insured's OOP interest without a litigation agreement.
Is this the year the American public demands universal health care? Do the special interests control one sixth of our gross domestic product? If there was ever a topic that provided heated debates- both health care and subrogation fit this bill. I read with interest a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court case that reversed a lower court ruling and allowed a worker's comp carrier to assert a subrogation claim against wrongful death proceeds. Let's be honest: the situation in the instant case is tragic. Who does not want the surviving kids to receive as much money as possible when their parent was not at fault. I guess in the end, as a society, we have gotten way off track with personal responsibility and accepting what reality is and then trying to justify a way to get around it. Frankly, the folks involved in this case should be pleased there was insurance in place. I understand that perhaps the amount of insurance was insufficient but by the same token, don't we agree that people who do not carry adequate insurance run other, more devastating risks? I am open for comments.
Most folks do not think of Wal-Mart as providing coverage and assuming the risk for payment of medical claims for its hundred's of thousands of employees. Well, they do and in my view, received some adverse publicity last week when the parent organization sought reimbursement from one of its insured's in an amount of approximately $400,000. The reality is nobody wants to have an open and honest conversation about what occurred and who the winners and losers were in this most tragic of accidents. As in most tabloid journalism, the Wall Street Journal reported that Wal-Mart despite its massive profits and reputation for short changing its labor force, extracted approximately $400,000 from a personal injury settlement that should have rightfully gone to its injured employee. David v. Goliath? Corporate greed? Let's at least consider some additional ideas: 1) did the WSJ report that the plaintiff's fee in this instance was 40% and that maybe, just maybe, plaintiff's counsel should have cautioned his client BEFORE taking this case? Did anybody bother to look at the settlement sheet to see the breakdown of fees? My bet is plaintiff's counsel took home a pirate's ransom while the naive, unsophisticated former Wal-Mart employee sucked the exhaust from counsel's new BMW. Was this really even a contingent case worth 40% of the total recovery? I could on and on. Let's switch gears and take on the medical establishment. Having spent the past ten years in provider sponsored HMO's, not once did I hear how happy physicians were to accept the low rates health plans want to pay for their over inflated services. It is no secret that when a patient walks (rather is carried into) the ER with significant injuries stemming from an auto accident, the feeding frenzy commences at the provider's billed rates. Did anybody bother to consider that $400,000 is a tremendous amount of medical services? I am not discounting the severity of the Wal- Mart employees injuries. Rather, I would be interested in knowing the medical necessity of the services provided. I am reminded of the Capitol One commercial and instead of a barbarian inquiring " what is in your wallet?" it is a surgeon who is ready to perform surgery. Gordon Gecko in Wall Street famously quipped, "greed is good." That is what really drives cases like the one discussed above.
All too often, small fire losses, especially appliance fires are swept under the rug as far as subrogation investigation is concerned. This is most commonly a result of the impression that all of them have no value due to the expense for using cause and origin and engineering experts to prove the case. These are some methods to work with your subrogation teams and field staff on that may assist you. - Put a plan in place with your field staff, that when you have a small appliance fire, to overly photograph the entire area of the origin of the fire. This is not difficult, as in these cases the smoke and fire damage point directly to the origin as opposed to larger fires with massive damage.
- As long as it is apparent that the appliance in question is the only possible ignition source of the fire, have them secure the evidence, as in all probability, claims will have insured proceed with repairs to avoid ale, and the manufacturer will not visit the fire scene due to the low potential expense exposure. In securing the evidence, the claims staff should have an evidence receipt form in which they document the securing and possession of the evidence as it changes hands, i.e. insured to adjuster to subrogation adjuster etc.
- As soon as an appliance or other piece of evidence is secured, have notice of the evidence sent to the subrogation team so that they can assist in coordination of any further investigation as needed. Make it part of the process to have the adjuster secure all manufacturer, model, serial number, place and date of purchase information on the evidence form, and obtain and or copy any manuals receipts etc.
- The manufacturers will request the item be shipped to them for testing. Get a written agreement up front which lays out the shipping of the evidence, including the tracking of the shipment, and the responsibility of the manufacturer of the evidence once it is in their possession. A full payment of submitted claim in the event of loss or spoliation of evidence usually does the trick, but make sure it is signed and secured before shipping the evidence.
- If the evidence is questionable, or you have concerns about confirming cause before sending to manufacturer, contact an expert local to where the evidence will be stored, and have them do a short once over of the evidence and the file materials. Other alternatives include locating a appliance repair facility that may be able to give you some opinions or guidance, or local a mail in evidence program that meets your company’s guidelines.
These are not the end all be all of small fire loss handling guidelines, they are simply some tricks of the trade that work.
All -- It is always a great time to reconnect with old friends and associates at the NASP conference. As a board member, I enjoy meeting with the first time attendees and seeing how excited they are to have the opportunity to network with other subro professionals along with attending the educational sessions. In our role as a partner to the insurance industry, our team enjoyed the opportunity to share how both the Acclaim and Recclaim services can impact their operations. It's always a good opportunity for the insurance communtiy to see the different types of services available to enhance their operations. It's also good to see the breadth of services available dedicated to the subro field. Who would have thought 9 years ago when there were only 440 attending the first show that we would be where we are today? Can't wait to see everyone again in Hollywood next year.
Well the team is headed to New Orleans this week for the National Association of Subrogation Professionals National Conference. Should be a great time to meet our peers and our clients. If you are there stop by our booth and say hi. Just look for the Harley! By the way, have a safe and happy Halloween.
I want to know how many plaintiff’s attorneys, when settling a worker’s comp claim, attempt to pass the risk back to the health plan if at all possible? I would also like to hear any comments from attorneys and how they deal with liens when an employer who is both self funded on the health and work comp side and nobody wants the hot potato.
Let’s also open the floor to resolving medical malpractice claims in provider sponsored HMO’s when a shareholder/owner commits malpractice and the malpractice carrier is a self insured entity owned by the same physicians that own the health plan. Cocktail conversation it is not.
|
Federal safety regulators have opened an official investigation on faulty tire valves that may have been installed as original equipment on more than one million 2007 Ford cars and trucks.