Defective Smoke Alarms & Smoke Alarm Lawsuits
Mobile, Alabama
BRIEF HISTORY OF SMOKE ALARMS |
|
PHOTOELECTRIC VS. IONIZATIONThere are two primary types of smoke alarm sensing technologies: photoelectric and ionization. A photoelectric smoke alarm is best for detecting slow smoldering fires. Slow smoldering fires typically involve lots of smoke and little or no flames at the initial stage. For example, a couch may smolder and billow plumes of toxic smoke for a long period of time before developing into a flaming fire. Slow smoldering fires typically occur when people are asleep and are generally responsible for more deaths than fast flaming fires. Photoelectric smoke alarms cost approximately $15.00, but represent less than 5% of all smoke alarms sold in America. Many experts recommend a photoelectric smoke alarm or a photoelectric/ionization combination. The manufacturers recommend that you have both an ionization and photoelectric, but a vast majority of people do not even know there are two technologies. [more] |
CONSUMER COMPLAINTSWe know how ionization smoke alarms perform in the UL 217 laboratory smoke box test. They pass with flying colors. But, how do the smoke alarms perform in real‑world fires? When our law firm litigates with a smoke alarm manufacturer, we request complaints from consumers who write or call the manufacturer complaining about the performance of ionization smoke alarms in their homes. The smoke alarm manufacturers do not like producing these consumer complaints, so trial judges typically have to compel the smoke alarm manufacturers to produce them. When we eventually get the consumer complaints, we contact some of the consumers and ask that they give a video deposition. The testimony of these consumers can be truly amazing. |
SMOKE ALARM MANUFACTURERSThere are two major smoke alarm manufacturers in America: BRK Electronics , Inc. (BRK) and Walter Kidde Portable, Inc. (Kidde). BRK at one time controlled the smoke alarm market, but Kidde, a subsidiary of United Technologies (NYSE:UTX) now has the largest market share. Kidde is now the major manufacturer and seller of ionization smoke alarms in America. The manufacturers defend these cases with the same old song and dance: Underwriters Laboratories (UL) tested and certified the smoke alarms. How can they be defective? They also point to the “government studies” they believe supports their conduct. UL’s Standard 217 for smoke alarms was promulgated approximately 30 years ago. The ionization smoke alarms do pass the UL 217 test and all smoke alarms sold in America do have the UL certification emblem on them. The UL 217 Standard is, of course, a minimum performance Standard promulgated by the “industry” itself. [more] |
DO YOU HAVE A SMOKE ALARM CASE?If you have a case involving a fire and there is a death or substantial injury, then you should consider a potential smoke alarm case. The first order of business is to secure the scene and locate all smoke alarms in the structure. The smoke alarms must be preserved. If the smoke alarm is still on the wall or ceiling, then remove a section of the wall or ceiling with the smoke alarm intact. The smoke alarm can be x‑rayed to determine if the battery is still intact and properly positioned. The smoke alarm must be inspected by a smoke alarm expert and a battery expert if there is an issue with the battery. Failure to maintain the integrity of the smoke alarm and the battery during removal may result in spoliation of evidence issues. If the manufacturer can be identified prior to removal, then it is a good idea to contact the manufacturer and place it on notice of your intentions to remove the detector. [more] |
DO YOU HAVE A SMOKE ALARM CASE? |
If you have a case involving a fire and there is a death or substantial injury, then you should consider a potential smoke alarm case. The first order of business is to secure the scene and locate all smoke alarms in the structure. The smoke alarms must be preserved. If the smoke alarm is still on the wall or ceiling, then remove a section of the wall or ceiling with the smoke alarm intact. The smoke alarm can be x‑rayed to determine if the battery is still intact and properly positioned. The smoke alarm must be inspected by a smoke alarm expert and a battery expert if there is an issue with the battery. Failure to maintain the integrity of the smoke alarm and the battery during removal may result in spoliation of evidence issues. If the manufacturer can be identified prior to removal, then it is a good idea to contact the manufacturer and place it on notice of your intentions to remove the detector. People familiar with the house should be questioned about the number and location of the smoke alarms and when and where they were purchased. Determine the make and model and purchase an exemplar. You should determine if the smoke alarm sounded or sounded late during the fire. Immediately interview any survivors, neighbors, and first responders to determine if they heard a smoke alarm sound. If the smoke alarm is powered, but did not sound in the presence of smoke, then you most likely have a defective ionization smoke alarm. If your investigation reveals that the smoke alarm did sound, then determine at what point in the fire it sounded. Remember that ionization smoke alarms have a significant delay in sounding. Oftentimes, the sleeping occupant needs only 30 more seconds to get out of the burning structure and a smoke alarm sounding 15-30 minutes late could certainly be the cause of their inability to escape. [more] |
Smoke Alarm Lawsuits |
The causes of action against a smoke alarm manufacturer are well known to most lawyers. You allege product liability, negligence and wantonness. However, you should also consider breach of warranty and failure to warn. One of the best theories of recovery against a smoke alarm manufacturer is failure to warn. It can be easily proven that the smoke alarm manufacturer knows that the ionization smoke alarm has a history of failure and defect. The manufacturer will admit the delay in sounding and will have to admit its knowledge of the consumer complaints. However, despite this knowledge, the manufacturers do not warn about the hazard. Purchase an ionization smoke alarm at a local retail store and read the package front and back before opening it. Typically, the only information pertaining to the limitation (defect) of the smoke alarm is wording such as: “Kidde recommends for maximum protection that both ionization and photoelectric smoke alarms be installed. Ionization technology is faster at detecting fast flaming fires that give off little smoke. Photoelectric technology is faster at responding to slow smoldering, smoky fires.” There is no warning on the package telling the purchaser how much faster the photoelectric is at detecting a slow smoldering fire. The manufacturer knows the ionization alarm has a 15-30 minute delay in sounding when compared to the photoelectric. However, this is not revealed. In fact, the smoke alarm manufacturers have testified that they do not warn about the substantial delay in sounding or the risk of not sounding. They must admit this because there are no “warnings” concerning this defect in the packaging or on the alarm. [more] |
HOW CAN WE GET IONIZATION SMOKE ALARMS OFF THE MARKET? |
At least three states have “outlawed” ionization-only smoke alarms in new construction. Massachusetts, Vermont and Iowa passed laws that do not allow ionization-only smoke alarms in new construction. A similar bill should soon be enacted in Tennessee. Unfortunately, these laws were initiated before the state legislatures by families who lost loved ones in fires where ionization smoke alarms did not sound or delayed in sounding. We should not wait for more deaths before we bring the issue before the state legislatures. The laws that were passed by Massachusetts, Vermont and Iowa can be found on our website. Our law firm recently reached a confidential settlement in the Spencer v Kidde in Mobile, Alabama against a major smoke alarm manufacturer. In that case, a single mother age 32, and her two minor children ages 11 and 14, died when their ionization smoke alarm did not sound during a slow smoldering fire. The Spencer family and our law firm established a foundation called Smoke Alarm Awareness Foundation, or SAAF (www.SAAF.com). The purpose of the foundation is to make the public aware of the defects in ionization smoke alarms and to introduce a law in the Alabama Legislature similar to the laws in Massachusetts, Vermont and Iowa. It appears that the only way to get ionization smoke detectors off the market is to have legislation passed or for juries to hold the manufacturers accountable. Hopefully, you can help by introducing legislation in your State or by asking a jury to hold the manufacturers accountable. |
