Vendor responsibility

[thescot]

I think the vaper should get their own insurance if they want to hold a battery and heated coil to their face and suck on it.
If you want one of my mods you will be buying at your own risk. I do try to make everything as safe as possible but when people start stacking batteries etc then why should the vendor be responsible.
Still safer than lighting say 20 cigs per day with matches or lighter and then having to extinguish them correctly.....
I think there's more to this post than meets the eye.....

[hifistud]

There are insurers who offer liability policies that would cover e-cigs as a general sales product. They would, however, require proper CE marking of product (not the erzats one the Chinese often use, which isn't actually a CE mark) and proper testing of OEM'ed liquids as opposed to branded liquids (ie, e-liquid which is sold under a "house" brand rather than as, for instance, "Decadent Vapours", "Hangsen" or "Dekang", each of which should have its testing done by the manufacturer). Similarly, it's entirely possible to retail mods which have undergone sufficient documentation to satisfy the requirements of such insurers.

From that point of view, all businesses need to carry liability insurance - but they do need to be completely honest with their insurers about what they're doing, too.

Yes, ECCA should be pressuring for this - as soon as possible - and, frankly, it won't matter whether we, as consumers want protecting or not - the Nanny State will take that choice away from us soon enough.

[VE Jason]

The reason why suppliers will be reluctant to pass comment on the subject is the unfortunate claim mentality of some people (not aiming that at anyone here).

Another thing to keep in mind is if you want to buy a mod from one of the many excellent modders we have here, you can expect to pay say £30 for the mod, as is.

If you want it fully compliant and with all necessary insurances etc, no problem, but expect to pay £70-£80 for the exact same mod.

Also, liabilty insurance is quite easy to obtain, but if the product being sold is not compliant, do you think the insurers would pay out?

I think this is more about adults making their own decisions about what to purchase/not purchase and thats the way it should be IMO.

However, I also believe a supplier should test products before putting them on sale, as far as reasonably practical.

[james481538]

The 1st question I post and I have an alternative motive ???
The question came about due to all the recent threads of failing kit and the potential of injury to folks.

I think the question was reasonable enough.
And sorry if it touched a nerve for some that was not the intention.

[VE Jason]

It certainly hasn't touched a nerve with me James and I don't have any problem with your question.

I was just pointing out that there are different ways of looking at it

[james481538]

Exactly.

And this is what I was hoping for a good debate on the subject.
As it never seems to have been approached before.

It's the claim culture why I posed the question.

[Perpetua]

I certainly don't think you've an alternative motive James and I'd ignore the suggestion that you do, it's a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

I'd again say what I said earlier, that users of any device that has the potential to cause harm, must take some responsibility themselves for it's usage . . . although it behoves any Supplier of such a product to ensure the devices that they sell will not cause harm or injury in any way.

But as Hifi says, soon enough the decision will be made for us and I suspect only the most conscientious Suppliers will be left in business . . .

[VE Jason]

Now, the claim culture - that is a touchy subject and one I despise.

I spent 10 years as a Construction Director and saw some of the most spurious claims you could imagine, including one man turning up for work drunk, falling from a scaffold and then being awarded £27,000 in compensation because the site foreman did not spot that he had been drinking.

There are many more and I get annoyed just thinking about them >

But, compensation is a good thing if handled correctly and paid out for genuine issues. I just wouldn't like to see things go the way of other countries.

It's an interesting subject though I agree.

[Perpetua]

It's a culture that seems rife in our society these days Jason and one I also similarly despise, like all systems it gets gets abused - thereby making it harder for those with genuine cause for compensation harder to claim.

[lynwlt]

I believe the subject of Public Liability insurance was discussed a while ago.
Lisa from Cloud9 raised the issue.
She expressed similar concerns to james481538.
I'll see if I can find it.....

Lynda

[thescot]

No nerve touched here mate if your implying your comment to me.
Drive your car too fast and is it the car maker who is liable?.
Look if you use a mod and it works perfect for the rest of your life then your lucky. Eventually a button will stick, a wire fail or spilled juice will do some damage. Like most things you buy an e-cig is not built for life if you know the workings of them due to too many perishable bits. Maybe there should be a e-cig MOT centre where we could get every atty and battery connection checked before we use it....just not possible with the design of e-cigs i'm afraid. James i didn't mean you had an alternative motive but possibly too much one sided on the side of the buyer's protection.
You want to drive - you get insurance
Before you get insurance - MOT
What i'm getting at here is some people abuse their e-cigs and don't take care of them, some stack batteries or use home made atties and many other variables and i don't think all the blame should land in the hands of the vendor. Surely the vaper has some responsibility for the need to feed their crave in which every way thy feel suits them but it mostly means like my last post holding a battery and heated coil to their face and sucking on it to get the nicotine they desire.
We could rub it on our bodies but for me it wouldn't be the same...lol
My work in the oil industry also is very strictly safety oriented and what we get drummed into us every day is that the person who is mostly responsible for your safety is YOURSELF ....
The example they use alot is that the load being lifted from the crane won't fall on your head if you don't walk under it

My rant over

[thescot]

Jun 28, 2011 6:46:37 GMT Perpetua said:

I certainly don't think you've an alternative motive James and I'd ignore the suggestion that you do, it's a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

Sorry Perp and i don't know what i've done to get on your bad side of late.
I'm sure james can ignore what he wants without being told to do so.
It is a perfectly reasonable question to ask and what i meant was nothing to do with any suggested alternative motive i was meaning that james seems to be one sided on the buyers half. I have responded to james in this great topic from the other side and hope to continue without being ganged up on by people telling the OP how or what he should read or ignore.
If my english is not up to your standard and my wording gets taken out of context then i'm sorry. ???

[rawveg]

thescot has made very valid points here, in particular is the reference to home made attys and the like. The PC industry went through, and is still going, through similar changes. PLI is fine, but in a market where the core product is actually only a part of what is being used, it rapidly becomes impossible to test every single permutation of atomiser, cartomiser, clearomiser, tank etc to ensure that a product has been completely tested.

In this kind of scenario, the manufacturer would be left with only a couple of solutions:-

1. To specifically state what the ecig was tested with, and therefore only recommend use of that combination. This is already happening with batteries for many mods, but I believe that's most an aesthetic decision.

2. This is the route that some PC Manufacturers have gone, and that is to sell the enture combination as a single unit, and seal the unit. It's still possible to take the unit apart, but if you break the seal you void your warranty and subsequently void any cover that PLI may give.

The CE mark would of course be a requirement, but frankly, I see this mark on 100s of goods on an almost daily basis, and I'm not talking the erzats here, and I know for a fact that the brand is a fake.

This was all actually brought to mind last night while sat watching a documentary on the Beeb about the manufacture of surgical instruments. Items being manufactured in Pakistan and marked as 'Made in Germany' simply because the steel came from Germany... the law states that the Country named in the 'Made in' declaration, simply needs to have provided a vital element to the manufacture... in this case the steel provision was all it takes, and sadly similar 'loopholes' exist elsewhere which basically means that you can't trust any mark of safety, not fully, as there's always someone who will exploit it.

I guess ultimately, my point is, that as a society these days we appear to have become devoid of any form of common sense. We know that there are consequences to every action, but the blame culture that we live in is quick to point the finger at other people. Sometimes of course the finger pointing is exactly right, but you have to accept a degree of responsibility yourself.

With the cited example of a mod exploding in your hand. If it was being used and operated within normal parameters, then fine. Sadly there are those who will try to sue you even if they were trying to cut through it with a blowtorch at the time....

[collie2011]

I have to completely agree with you rawveg and all the talk of CE marks made me think of the programme last night too. There would be nothing to stop some unscrupulous dealer going to a factory in China and asking them to stamp Made in England and a CE mark on them for a few extra quid.

The compensation culture is on the whole a bad thing, but thanks to it I am getting compensation for a car accident that was entirely not our fault as we were actually stationary in a queue of traffic at the time so I see both sides. The compensation industry is too open to abuse and seems to be in favour of the "victim" the whole way through, there seems to be not even the slightest belief or question that the "victim" might be lying! The medical experts they send you to that do the court reports don't examine you they ask you questions and base the report on your answer. What's to stop you lying about how bad it is?? The whole process needs an overhaul that's for certain.

Would a liability waiver cover the modders a**es? Something like this mod is only intended to be used as sold or with the following items, any alteration to this unit voids it's warranty and waives my liabilty. I am no legal person maybe someone can word it a bit better but you get the point.

[rawveg]

Oh I've had compensation too for an accident that wasn't my fault... when the system works, and works justly, it's fine... there are just not enough checks and measures in place. You're right you're not examined you're asked... and that's wrong. The same goes with surgical implements last night... there is only one hospital in the country that employs someone to check surgical implements.... and this is the problem. We need checks and measures, but the system won't provide he resource...

A liability waiver would cover most things, but despite what you waive, if you were to lose a finger, or be blinded, or some other major mishap, a waiver can be legally challenged... There are cases to prove that already, where a couple of bungee jumper's died but their family challenged the waiver, as they didn't reasonably expect there to be a risk of death, depsite what it said on the piece of paper.