Before a consumer buys a specific product, he or she studies a long list of the features on that same item. Any one of those features could serve as a clue to the existence of a particular type of defect.
One feature could function as a clue to the existence of a design defect.
If some aspect of a product features a defective design, it functions properly, but the designer has failed to create an item that works to ensure the user’s safety. For instance, a knife might have a sharp edge, which allows for cutting, but it might also lack a feature that serves to cover that same sharp edge.
Some products have a manufacturing defect.
That defect gets introduced during the production phase. It could be a substandard material. Alternately, it could be an error that was made at the time of the product’s crafting or assembly.
Most manufacturing plants have a division of quality control. The men and working in that division are supposed to study the items coming off the plant’s assembly line. Their inspection of the completed products is meant to serve as a means for catching any manufacturing defect.
A third group of products has been deemed defective, due to the nature of their warning label.
The warning on that label does not provide the consumer with a sufficient level of information. It might lack a guide to the method suggested for safe operation of the purchased item. Alternately, that label could lack the needed information, which should alert a consumer to the risks associated with the labelled product.
A toy or a tool might need to have a guide. That guide would explain how each part was supposed to be used. A hazardous product ought to have a label that alerts consumers to the presence of that specific hazard. Some medications use the warning in a TV ad to send an alert, regarding possible side effects from a certain ingredient. By the same token, a packaged food might carry a warning about an allergen.
The nature of a defective product claim:
That claim must include proof of the fact that the person using the product was harmed, due to the existence of the dangerous defect. In the absence of such a proof, even the most surprised and shaken consumer cannot file a product liability claim.
Personal injury lawyers in Placentia discover the public’s weak reasoning, when studying the letter that outlines the consumer’s complaint. Too often consumers think that a one-time discovery of a potential hazard can be used as grounds for a product claim.
That represents a false assumption. All valid claims include proof of the extent to which the claimant was injured.