The CPSC began an investigation into injuries caused by fire pots in the spring of 2011. While Bird Brain’s CEO claimed that the company conducted extensive tests, this isn’t true. Rather, the company failed to conduct Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), a standard component of a product’s safety analysis. This process evaluates all possible failure modes and the potential consequences of each. While Bird Brain had reassured consumers that their products were thoroughly tested, they did not know what to expect.
Napa Home & Garden
A recent report by the Consumer Product Safety Commission has found that “Fire Pots” and their gel fuels can cause serious burn injuries. The manufacturer of firepots, Napa Home & Garden Inc., has asked retailers to stop selling these products but has faced numerous lawsuits from people who have suffered severe burns. The company has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection but may face further litigation.
According to court documents, the companies that manufactured Firelites products, namely the pourable fuel gel, packaged them under the label “Napa Home & Garden,” and sold them to major retailers. The companies involved in the lawsuit include Ashland and CKS, two manufacturers of Kleeel gelling agents. As a result, Harts’s lawsuit against these companies may be consolidated.
The CPSC launched an investigation into injuries caused by Bird Brain fire pots in 2011. Despite claiming extensive testing, Bird Brain’s CEO admitted to having conducted none. The company did not even conduct a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), a standard component of product safety analysis. FMEA analyzes all possible failure modes and their consequences. Despite the product’s safety, Bird Brain failed to conduct a comprehensive FMEA for the fire pot. The CEO was unaware of the potential dangers of the product and failed to adequately test its safety.
According to the CPSC website, there have been more than twenty reports of injuries caused by BirdBrain’s product. Two deaths and nearly 60 injuries have been reported. The company has already recalled some of its products. The company’s products are sold as single bottles that can be poured into a stainless steel cup and ignited. To avoid the risk of fire, it’s recommended to buy only models that are sold in stores.
The lawsuit claims that the alleged suppliers of the product were responsible for the deadly fire. The company recalled two million bottles of the fuel gel and voluntarily agreed not to publicly air the video of the explosion. After the video became widely public, many national retailers stopped selling the product. However, lawsuits are not the only remedy for injuries. It may be your best bet for compensation if you’ve been injured by a defective product.
The fuel gel was compared to napalm by victims. It exploded in a flash and stuck to clothing. Even when covered with blankets, the fire raged on. The fuel gel was sold by Napa Home and Garden, Inc. in Duluth, Ga., since December 2009. It is made from ethanol and sold under the brand names Firegel and Napafire.
Many people have been injured by Fire Pots and Fuel Gel. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has opened an investigation into this product. In April of 2010, they received eight reports of serious burns caused by these products. Until now, there are no specific names or companies involved in the production of these products, but they have been sold by major chains and smaller retailers since 2008.
Despite the CPSC’s voluntary recall of two million Fire Pots and Fuel Gel products, the problem persists. In 2011, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recalled two million products made by nine different manufacturers, totaling more than two million units. The Illinois Attorney General also called for a recall of gel fuel firepots. Since the CPSC recall, there have been lawsuits filed by victims of gel fuel burns. These lawsuits allege that the warnings are inadequate or understated. The product poses a danger, but the manufacturer does not adequately warn consumers of its potential hazards.
Pourable fuel gel
A poured fuel gel lawsuit may be the right solution for those who have been burned by a fire pot. Burn injuries are extremely painful and can leave people permanently disfigured. CPSC, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the manufacturers are all responsible for the recall of this dangerous product. Despite the voluntary recall, many victims were still injured by the product, which made filing a lawsuit an appealing option. Attorneys from Chaffin Luhana have been following these lawsuits from the beginning.
The company is facing a flood of lawsuits and plans to lobby lawmakers in Florida to ban the product. It has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and has two more families suing it. Some consumers believe that gel fuel should be banned completely. Another group wants the product banned nationwide, and the company is already investigating the injuries and deaths. Until then, there’s still time to file a pourable fuel gel lawsuit against the manufacturer