Week 2

BUS670: Legal Environment

In a society full of human’s supply and demand for most commodities can be very demanding and overwhelming to the produces. With the demand being so high, companies are forced to produce products at a higher rate of speed. Typically, when products are made at a faster speed, minor things are more likely to go wrong with the product. With this being said, there is a large number of recalls on items produces on a daily basis. It is important for consumers to be aware of what is being recalled. It is also important for the manufacturing company to have a system in place to contact the consumers who purchased a product that has been recalled, as well as a way to correct the problem they may be faced with.

Our job was to locate a product that has recently been recalled I chose to research the Keurig MINI Brewing System, it was recalled on December 23, 2014, and the Recall number: 15-05. See below for an example of the product code bar and what the consumers who purchased the product were looking for to see of their product was affected by the recall. This picture below was provided by the compnay. * |

| 1. 2 of 3 photos 2. Identification number is located on a white sticker on the bottom of the brewers 3.
Below is a brief summary of the product and why it was recalled, also known as the Recall Summary? Keurig® MINI Plus Brewing Systems, the hazard occurred when the coffee was being brewed, apparently the water would overheat and spray out the sides and the consumed became burned. Keurig did provide duty of care to the consumers (See below). They seem to have covered their legal obligation to the consumers by offering an extensive list of how to correct the malfunction in order to avoid any more harm done to the consumers. Their reply to the consumers was as follows: giving out their company information, as well as the times to call, with an alternative to go on line and trouble shoot the issue themselves with step by step instructions provided by Keurig. Costumer contact: “Keurig Green Mountain, toll-free at (844) 255-7886
Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET, and from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. ET on Saturday or Sunday or online at www.keurig.com and click on “Product Recall” for more information. Consumers were given specific instructions to contact Keurig for a free repair. While waiting for a free repair, consumers can contact Keurig about steps to avoid a burn injury“(http://www.aboutlawsuits.com/keurig-coffee-maker-recall-75956/). It appear as though Keurig is aware of the problem, they lifted all Keurigs off the shevles at all stores and have provided an extensive list that includes many ways for the consumers to correct the problem n the companies dime.
Keurig also seemed to have met the standard of care by doing its due Diligence on the product as well as the harm it could cause (Seaquist, G. 2012). They provided a complete list of where the product was sold, as well as the time fame of when it was sold. (see below) The standard care is very important because it determines if there were any negligence on the companies end when the product was created, if they find negligence on the companies part then there is a reason to cause some sort of action. According to Keurig the list of stores the product was sold at were, Kmart, Kohl’s, Target, Walmart as well as some other retailers nationwide, they have also included a link to where the item could have been purchased on line as well, www.keurig.com, www.greenmountaincoffee.com and www.keurig.ca, the dates the product was sold were from December 2009 through December 2014 for about $100.
I personally do not feel as though Keurig breached of duty. According to my research “A breach of duty occurs when one person or company has a duty of care toward another person or company, but fails to live up to that standard”( Seaquist, G. 2012.). In Keurig’s case they released a product that had a defect, they were contacted by the consumers with the problem and within a reasonable amount of time came across with a plan for consumers to do to help fix the defect, the information on the product and its defect was released immediately, with extensive amount of information on the product its self. Below is some of the information about the product that was released to the public.
Importer(s)
Keurig Green Mountain Inc. of Waterbury, Vt.
Manufactured in
China, Malaysia
About 6.6 million in the U.S. and 564,000 Canada “This recall involves Keurig® MINI Plus Brewing System with model number K10 (previously identified as model number B31). Recalled brewers have an identification number starting with “31” followed by a range of numbers printed on a white sticker on the bottom of the brewer. They are single-serve, hot beverage brewers and were sold in 13 different colors with silver trim. Colors include black, red, white, cobalt blue, aqua blue, purple, platinum, emerald, yellow, orchid, bayberry, mauve and Poinciana. The recalled brewers measure about 11 inches tall, have a “Brew” button, three cup size brewing options (6 oz., 8 oz. and 10 oz.), and a removable drip tray. The water tank is located on top of the unit towards the back. K10 is marked on the packaging. Recalled units were produced between December 2009 and July 2014 and can be identified by the serial number printed on a white sticker on the bottom of the brewer: it has been said the Keurig received a little over 200 reports of the hot liquid that came from the machine, the reports included 90 that were burn related injuries.
The leading cause to all the burns had to do with the water overheating and spraying out at the users”.( http://www.aboutlawsuits.com/keurig-coffee-maker-recall-75956/)This is a very extensive amount of information given to the consumers about the product. The actual cause refers to the factor in which the water would not have sprayed out onto the user of the device. The question to ask is if the consumer placed too hot of water to start out with, or did they use cold water as instructed by the directions provided with the machine. After research was done it appears to be a machine defect, as they can overheat, especially when two cups are brewed right after one another. It comes down to the machine not being properly tested prior to sending out for sale to consumers, it appears as though the overheating of this particular product has been over looked. The incidents occurred with no cause by the consumer at all. This means that there is a proximate cause simply stating that a mishap occurred without fault by the consumer, by nature that was dangerous. In this case it was a defective product and does fall into the proximate cause category. Over 200 machines had the same issue which means there was indeed a defect in the product that was very harmful to the consumers (Seaquist, G.2012).
The consumer act was put into place by the legislation. Is was put into place to protect the rights of consumers. This particular act has laws in place for the consumers. In regards to the consumers, they are identified as the individuals who upon their own will, they participate within the commercial marketplace by engaging in a purchase as well as a financial transaction This act protects the right of the consumers. The main aspect in regards to the product and the recall I researched is to seek monetary redress and other relief for conduct injurious to consumers. If this product had not been recalled, then yes Keurig would have most likely been involved with the consumer act protecting consumers. Burns on consumers due to the product being produced with negligence will defiantly make the company responsible for any harm a consumer may come into.
Although the company did come out right away with a solution to the problem, they were aware of consumers who indeed did get harmed by the negligence in producing the product, they are liable for those consumers. Keurig did a great job making it clear what any other consumers should do prior to using the product again, that solution consisted of either returning the product and or contacting the company directly. Over all it appears as though they followed most if not all laws provided to help with situations like this, it doesn’t appear as though the company is out of step with how they handed the situation.
Consumer Production Safety, is the agency that has stepped in to create protection. There are so many guidelines involved when creating statues involved with the product. For the Keurig, it is important to keep in mind that it is a kitchen accessory that requires to be plugged in and could possibly start a fire if wiring if produced incorrectly. In this case, it wasn’t the wiring it was the product overheating. Consumers need to be protected in the event anything goes wrong with the product. As I stated earlier in my paper, questions to ask with the default of this particular product are, was the water too hot prior to the machine brewing the water, was the water placed in the machine correctly, or was it truly a defect with the machine. If it truly was a defect with the machine, as it seems to be, one way we know this is because it occurred with more than one machine, then it is necessary to have steps into place to protect the consumer.
.

References

http://www.aboutlawsuits.com/keurig-coffee-maker-recall-75956/).
Seaquist, G. (2012). Business law for managers. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.