Customer threatening lawsuit over supposed damages caused by item.

[pandas]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

I work for a ecommerce business that sells car chargers. A customer/lawyer in ny claimed that our product caused a fire and damaged his phone which he had to replace. He requested that we pay for insurance deductible, and so I requested that he provide us with any information regarding the incident or any evidence that this happened, but he did not provide us with the information. He told us that the item was returned to the vendor and that he was refunded. When I said that we could not accept responsibility as there was no evidence and that we needed the item back, he stated that we have 30 days to provide compensation for the damage to his phone. Your retailer has the device. You are free to contact them for it. Your refusal to do so is willful.

Do we actually need to respond to this threat? If so, how can we respond without this causing any headahes. Can we be held liable for this?
It seems ridiculous, but I get a sense that this guy really intends to move forward, and lawyers are scary to me.

 

[Just Blue]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

I work for a ecommerce business that sells car chargers. A customer/lawyer in ny claimed that our product caused a fire and damaged his phone which he had to replace. He requested that we pay for insurance deductible, and so I requested that he provide us with any information regarding the incident or any evidence that this happened, but he did not provide us with the information. He told us that the item was returned to the vendor and that he was refunded. When I said that we could not accept responsibility as there was no evidence and that we needed the item back, he stated that we have 30 days to provide compensation for the damage to his phone. Your retailer has the device. You are free to contact them for it. Your refusal to do so is willful.

Do we actually need to respond to this threat? If so, how can we respond without this causing any headahes. Can we be held liable for this?
It seems ridiculous, but I get a sense that this guy really intends to move forward, and lawyers are scary to me.

This is not your legal business. Pass the customer complaint to the customer service department MGR who will then discuss the issue with the legal department. .

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Advise him when he has evidence to present supporting his case, your business will consider it in light of the contract you had and get back to him. Then discontinue communication until he provides some proof.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

I work for a ecommerce business that sells car chargers. A customer/lawyer in ny claimed that our product caused a fire and damaged his phone which he had to replace. He requested that we pay for insurance deductible, and so I requested that he provide us with any information regarding the incident or any evidence that this happened, but he did not provide us with the information. He told us that the item was returned to the vendor and that he was refunded. When I said that we could not accept responsibility as there was no evidence and that we needed the item back, he stated that we have 30 days to provide compensation for the damage to his phone. Your retailer has the device. You are free to contact them for it. Your refusal to do so is willful.

Do we actually need to respond to this threat? If so, how can we respond without this causing any headahes. Can we be held liable for this?
It seems ridiculous, but I get a sense that this guy really intends to move forward, and lawyers are scary to me.

You do not have to respond to a letter from a customer/attorney who asserts a product you sold caused damage. You do not have to compensate the customer/attorney simply upon a demand from the customer/attorney that you do so.

That said, you can potentially be held liable for any damages caused by any product you sell that can be shown to have harmed a consumer. The consumer can name in a lawsuit not only the manufacturer of a defective product but the company/seller/reseller of the product, as well.

The chances of you being sued might be slim, based on the facts as you present them here, but the chances are not zero. If you are sued, you/your ebusiness will want to contact an attorney in your area for a review of all facts. And, regardless of whether this one incident leads to a lawsuit or not, it might be smart for your business to investigate the customer/attorney's assertion that your product caused a fire. If your product did, or could, cause a fire, the damage from such a fire may not be limited to a ruined phone next time.

Good luck.

 

[eerelations]

You do not have to respond to a letter from a customer/attorney who asserts a product you sold caused damage. You do not have to compensate the customer/attorney simply upon a demand from the customer/attorney that you do so.

That said, you can potentially be held liable for any damages caused by any product you sell that can be shown to have harmed a consumer. The consumer can name in a lawsuit not only the manufacturer of a defective product but the company/seller/reseller of the product, as well.

The chances of you being sued might be slim, based on the facts as you present them here, but the chances are not zero. If you are sued, you/your ebusiness will want to contact an attorney in your area for a review of all facts. And, regardless of whether this one incident leads to a lawsuit or not, it might be smart for your business to investigate the customer/attorney's assertion that your product caused a fire. If your product did, or could, cause a fire, the damage from such a fire may not be limited to a ruined phone next time.

Good luck.

OP is an employee of the company that sold the charger. So I don't think (but please correct me if I'm wrong) the OP will be the one to be sued, rather it will be his employer who will be sued. If I'm correct, then I don't think OP should be going to the trouble and expense of retaining an attorney, because he won't actually need one. (And again, I could be wrong, I am basing this on knowledge gained in my HR career - when a terminated employee wanted to sue for wrongful termination or whatever, he/she would communicate this to me. But it was the company he/she would sue.)

 

[quincy]

OP is an employee of the company that sold the charger. So I don't think (but please correct me if I'm wrong) the OP will be the one to be sued, rather it will be his employer who will be sued. If I'm correct, then I don't think OP should be going to the trouble and expense of retaining an attorney, because he won't actually need one. (And again, I could be wrong, I am basing this on knowledge gained in my HR career - when a terminated employee wanted to sue for wrongful termination or whatever, he/she would communicate this to me. But it was the company he/she would sue.)

The use of pandas' "we" and "us" when referring to the ecommerce business makes me question his role in the business but, even if he were an employee of the company, he can be named in any lawsuit that might arise over a defect in the product that is sold.

This is no different, really, than selling a defective product online that a seller has purchased at a garage sale. The manufacturer of the product can be sued but so can the seller of the product. An attorney for the seller could potentially get the seller removed from such an action, however, depending on the facts.

Obviously the one with the most money and therefore potentially the best target for the suit generally will be the manufacturer of a defective product but that does not preclude a plaintiff from naming as co-defendants any and all who were involved in the sale of this product.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

I work for a ecommerce business that sells car chargers. A customer/lawyer in ny claimed that our product caused a fire and damaged his phone which he had to replace. He requested that we pay for insurance deductible, and so I requested that he provide us with any information regarding the incident or any evidence that this happened, but he did not provide us with the information. He told us that the item was returned to the vendor and that he was refunded. When I said that we could not accept responsibility as there was no evidence and that we needed the item back, he stated that we have 30 days to provide compensation for the damage to his phone. Your retailer has the device. You are free to contact them for it. Your refusal to do so is willful.

Do we actually need to respond to this threat? If so, how can we respond without this causing any headahes. Can we be held liable for this?
It seems ridiculous, but I get a sense that this guy really intends to move forward, and lawyers are scary to me.

Did you contact the retailer to get information on the situation?

 

[not2cleverRed]

Many products state on their packaging, "Return defective items to [manufacturer]. Do not return to the retailer."

Question to the OP: did the directions for the product indicate that defective products were to be returned to you, as part of the warrantly?

Question to the senior posters: would such directions have helped OP at all?

Finally, hypothetically, were the customer to take OP's employer to court, the customer would have to present some sort of proof of what happened. I'm not sure if it is reasonable to expect that the vendor kept track of the item - the vendor might just have the policy of refunding anything returned in 30 days, tossing it in a landfill, and writing it off as a loss.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

It is not up to OP to chase down information on an unsubstantiated claim from a third party. It is up to the party claiming compensation to provide proof of their claim.

 

[quincy]

Here is a link to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission on one of at least two USB car chargers recalled in 2014 over fire and electric shock hazards, both manufactured in China: http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2014/Lifeguard-Press-Recalls-Charging-Kits/

Anyone who sells a product that has been announced publicly as a recalled product violates federal laws.

This is not to say that the car charger sold by pandas is one of the recalled items. It is possible that the car charger his ecommerce business is selling might be subject to recall in the future, however, if there are reported incidents of fires or other safety problems with the product.

Disclaimers and instructions to return defective products to the manufacturer does not make the distributer/seller/reseller immune from liability. Damages could potentially be mitigated.

Here is an informative guide from the CPSC on selling products: http://www.cpsc.gov/Global/Business-and-Manufacturing/Business-Education/ResellersGuide.pdf