Tag: New Jersey Personal Injury Lawyer

Is Your Computer Chair Really Safe?

Each day millions of people sit down on their computer chair to check their email, have conversations with people and even to do business. We also let our children sit at the computer to play computer games, learn or do homework. We all assume that our trusty computer chair in our home is safe; we never consider that to could possibly injury or harm us.  This assumption is wrong.  Each day, millions of products are recalled because they are unsafe and may cause injury. One of these recent product recalls was on the OfficeMax Office Chairs which was found to cause serious injuries to user because it was a fall hazard.

According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission the chairs were recalled on September 1, 2009 because the back and base were defective and could break during routine use causing a serious personal injury.  The OfficeMax Company has received thirty-six reports of these chairs bases or backs breaking while in use, resulting in fifteen reported personal injuries including lacerations, muscle strains, contusions, and concussions.

The specific office chairs being recalled are the OfficeMax Task Chairs with the model number OM182 and OM96614. The chairs are also charcoal in color and have plastic arms and a plastic and metal base.

If you have one of these office chairs, you should stop using it right away and go to an OfficeMax location for a full refund or a gift card.

If you have been injured or hurt by a defective product like this office chairs or know someone that may have been, you should contact a defective products lawyer right away. They can help you fight for your consumer product safety rights and be your advocate to make sure your rights are protected the way they should be.

For additional information regarding Consumer Safety Product Recalls you may go to the U.S. Product Safety Commission  located here: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prerelsep09.html  and for additional information concerning this specific product recall you may visit: www.officemax.com

YAMAHA RHINO AT CENTER OF FEDERAL REGULATION CRITICISM

“The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is probing the design of so-called recreational off- highway vehicles after reports of fatal accidents involving the new, unregulated products.” – Alan Ohnsman

The CPSC review, although covering many brands, focuses primarily on the Yamaha Rhino.The Rhino has caught the attention of the CPSC after over 30 fatalities and many more injuries were reported.

The probe spotlights gaps in oversight of the vehicles, which have been produced for about five years.For the past five years, these vehicles have been categorized as All-Terrain Vehicles, or ATV’s.There are several key differences between vehicles such as the Rhino and conventional ATV’s. The Rhino is larger than conventional all-terrain vehicles, it has two side-by-side seats as opposed to a centered seat, and utilizes a steering wheel and protective roll cage.

Despite mounting evidence, The Yamaha Corporation insists that the Rhino is, “…one of the safest, most-reliable vehicles in the category.”Putting profit before customer safety, the Yamaha Corporation is attempting to protect its interests by defining the vehicle as an ATV as opposed to re-designing a safe product.Yamaha also claimed that unsafe use of the vehicles lies at the center of the problem, and that proper use will result in a drastically safer product.

Don’t be fooled.There are inherent design problems in the Rhino which have resulted in serious injuries.The center of gravity on the Rhino is significantly higher than the average ATV, making it prone to tipping.The lack of doors to keep limbs inside the vehicle also contributes to many crippling injuries and possible fatalities.These two factors highlight the danger of driving one of these vehicles through rough terrain.If the Rhino is truly an ATV, why is it so dangerous to drive it in rough terrain?

If you, your family, or anyone you know owns a vehicle such as the Rhino, please inform them immediately of the CSPC study and the potential hazard of driving it.Other vehicles with similar designs include Polaris’s Razor, Honda Motor Co.’s Big Red, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd.’s Mule and Arctic Cat Inc.’s Prowler.

Contact an ATV accident lawyer in NJ