IGNITION Air System Recall Notice

[slade]

in hindsight the reg manufacturer should have made more thorough checks on the safety of the tank they were sold, but i really cant blame them about it, the tanks were DOT certified and no one (besides GCI) could have seen this coming. so i wouldnt put the blame on them. GCI fled the country, so they cant recieve the funds they need to pay for the new tanks from them. the blame certainly isnt on the customer either, so the money shouldnt come from either the customer or the manufacturer. in my opinion, this should probably be paid for by some sort of insurance, or government funding. but considering that isnt happening, i think what the company is doing is right. they are recalling the tanks and replacing them for below-cost, so they are not making a profit here, im pretty sure theyre taking a loss, especially with the carbon fiber shortage. the manufacturer has probably already made calculations, and most likely recalling all their tanks for free replacement would make them bankrupt or at least push them out of buisness. they dont have much of a choice, and $40 isnt too much to pay for a replacement tank. if you were to buy your own it would be MUCH more. also, take into consideration the hydro date... with the new tank, you are getting an extra year or so added to it. even more if your old tank was a 3-year tank.

[Lohman446]

I think they will change it - I think the DOT will discuss it with them and they will have no choice if they wish to continue to stay in business. If you sell a certified product you are responsible for its certification, even if you were not the one doing the certifying. Your only course of action is against whoever sold it to you / manufactured it for you.

Edit: hmm.. which means the retailer (store / etc) holds responsibility to the end user

[Hexis]

$40 is super reasonable, if the customer had anything to do with the problem. But they didn't, they bought and paid for a product that was falsly advertised (not that Archon knew any better, nor should have).

They had a supplier problem, and may not be able to recover the costs associated with that problem from the supplier. That's still not the consumer's fault. If Archon does not have insturance to cover this type of situation, it may well put them out of business. And frankly that's they fault for planning their business poorly.

[TheTramp]

[warbeak2099]

Exactly. There is no reason they can't simply have CGI pay for the replacements.

[Lohman446]

Exactly. There is no reason they can't simply have CGI pay for the replacements.

As has been stated repeatedly CGI seems to have ceased to exist, and is probably bankrupt

[warbeak2099]

Darn, so Archon can't file any claims against them. Have they formally anounced bankruptcy though?

[Lohman446]

Darn, so Archon can't file any claims against them. Have they formally anounced bankruptcy though?

I don't know - from what some have said it sounds like they fled the country. The fact of the matter is, if they have declared it or not, if the company has no assetts then what can you collect? Its one thing to be entitled to money, quite another to collect it.

[SpecialBlend2786]

a few quotes from that MacDev link that was put up earlier.

In light of this information, MacDev are issuing a recall of all GCI manufactured bottles . Systems using these bottles must not be used under any circumstances, as using a GCI bottle is potentially hazardous. MacDev takes no responsibility for any accident, harm, injury or damage arising from continued use of GCI bottles. All fault and wrongdoing lies with GCI as the manufacturer of these bottles.

and

Customers who have purchased MacDev LegionAir or Conquest tanks with GCI bottles will not be abandoned by MacDev . GCI bottles can be replaced with brand new Luxfer 5 year retest bottles for a small cost. Customers with GCI bottles manufactured in 2005 may have their bottle replaced for $US40, whilst those customers with GCI bottles manufactured in 2004 may have their bottle replaced for $US60. MacDev regrets that there must be a cost to those customers affected, however please recognise that the cost to MacDev is greater, and those bottles replaced will have an extended life over those already possessed by the customer.

Archon isnt the only one charging. Personally I dont have a problem with them charging the $40. It is extending the life of my product while at the same time making it safer for me and those around me. Plus, I dont have to go out and buy a brand new tank. At least these two companies arn't leaving their customers high and dry like GCI did to them.

[TheTramp]

Its one thing to be entitled to money, quite another to collect it.

I wish wasn't true so often.

[TheTramp]

Archon isnt the only one charging. Personally I dont have a problem with them charging the $40. It is extending the life of my product while at the same time making it safer for me and those around me. Plus, I dont have to go out and buy a brand new tank. At least these two companies did not leave their customers high and dry like GCI did to them.

As far as them charging goes, if people pay up and don't complain then there won't be a problem.

As far as this "MacDev takes no responsibility for any accident, harm, injury or damage arising from continued use of GCI bottles. All fault and wrongdoing lies with GCI as the manufacturer of these bottles" goes....it means NOTHING!

Just because they say that they "take no responsibility" in NO way means that they don't have responsibility (liability). They've re-sold the defective products as part of their air system which means that they could third-party sue CGI if you sue them but as CGI appears to be gone it's really just the companies left with liability trying to get legal language out there that they hope might provide some limited saftey.

Of course as lomg as no one is injured but one of CGI's tanks all of this will never be important.

[Hexis]

Of course as lomg as no one is injured but one of CGI's tanks all of this will never be important.

And we all hope that that remains the situation.

I find it equally shortsided for Mac Dev to charge for the recall. It's a safety thing, and if that causes even one person to nor exchange their faulty HPA setup, the consiquences could be quite bad. Oh well, guess that's two companies I can't buy from the the future. That's too bad, MacDev looked like somone I would have for my next HPA tank.

[Lohman446]

Here it is - if I had one I would not have a problem splitting cost with the company and $40 is not that bad. That being said they likely do not have the legal right to do so - they do have a legal responsibility for the certification of anything certified they sell - and as The Tramp has elaborated this charge may put them in poor legal standings.

[warbeak2099]

They'd better watch out. As you said, GCI is out of money i guess. And these suits are all about who has the "deep pockets". If anyone's gonna get sued, it's Archon or MacDev. I hope the $40 per tank is going to cover the lawsuit they are going to get. Then again, maybe they took that into consideration and decided it would be cheaper to charge $40 per tank and take the lawsuit.

[slade]

They'd better watch out. As you said, GCI is out of money i guess. And these suits are all about who has the "deep pockets". If anyone's gonna get sued, it's Archon or MacDev. I hope the $40 per tank is going to cover the lawsuit they are going to get. Then again, maybe they took that into consideration and decided it would be cheaper to charge $40 per tank and take the lawsuit.

if you read the book fight club, the main character works for a car company where his whole job is recalls. there is a formula involving the estimated cost of a recall versus the estimated failure rate and the cost of their liability. even if the product released is life threatening, they wont do a recall if they can pay off the victims of product failures for less money than the recall would cost.

yeah, yeah i know, its just a book. but it does seem like a really logical thing for a large corporation to do.

my guess is, these manufacturers did something similar. and they found out that the cost of the recall would be VERY large, and would most likely put them out of buisness, considering a large part of their income is the tanks, which turned out to be defective. they also realized that if they did nothing, someone would find out and then theyd be sued out of buisness. and they probably calculated out that they could recall the tanks if they charged $40, while staying in buisness and still have enough money to run the company and continue producing the new tanks. this way they could stay in buisness while still being honest and helping their customers. whats the point of doing a recall at your cost so your customers are happy, if youre put out of buisness?

oh, and also im sure that the issue with the tanks is mainly a regulation thing, where they didnt meet spec. i havent heard anything about a single tank exploding yet, and im sure none have. thats two companies where their whole line used these tanks, with no failures as of yet. im sure if the tanks were exploding left and right, they would do an immediate recall for free. but it appears that the tanks are fairly safe, albeit the fact that they do not meet regulations.