How Trial Lawyers Killed The Red Plastic Gas Can
From the WSJ:
Blitz USA has controlled some 75% of the U.S. market for plastic gas cans, employing 117 people in that business, and had revenues of $60 million in 2011. The Consumer Product Safety Commission has never deemed Blitz's products unsafe.Then the trial attorneys hit on an idea with trial-lawyer logic: They could sue Blitz when someone poured gas on a fire (for instance, to rekindle the flame) and the can exploded, alleging that the explosion is the result of defects in the can's design as opposed to simple misuse of the product. Plaintiffs were burned, and in some cases people died.
Blitz's insurance company would estimate the cost of years of legal battles and more often than not settle the case, sometimes for millions of dollars. But the lawsuits started flooding in last year after a few big payouts. Blitz paid around $30 million to defend itself, a substantial sum for a small company. Of course, Blitz's product liability insurance costs spiked.
In June, Blitz filed for bankruptcy. All 117 employees will lose their jobs and the company--one of the town's biggest employers--will shutter its doors. Small business owners have been peppering the local chamber of commerce with questions about the secondary impact on their livelihoods.
...The Atlantic hurricane season started June 1, and Blitz estimates that demand for plastic gas cans rises 30% about then. If consumers can't find the familiar red plastic can, fuel will have to be carried around in heavy metal containers or ad-hoc in dangerous alternatives, such as coolers.
Video killed the radio star … Trial lawyers killed the plastic gas can.
Patrick at July 23, 2012 1:01 AM
Or you could have read it on Point of Law on July 9. http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/2012/07/blitz-usa-closes-oklahoma-factory.php
Ted at July 23, 2012 6:02 AM
Go ahead, try to carry gas in a styrofoam cooler. Go right ahead, I'll wait.
They use those things in OK to cook meth. Throw it in a ditch in the countryside and come back to collect it later. One of my young relatives is a cop and warned everyone that if we saw a gas can in the ditch to pass it by.
nonegiven at July 23, 2012 6:51 AM
Does anybody else wonder how people are going to get gas for their lawn mowers? I've got a bitty lawn, so I use an old-school mower, but if I ever got a new house with a real lawn, I'd need to get something to carry the gas in. (Perhaps this is part of the movement toward solar powered lawn mowers?)
That reminds me. My husband has one of those red containers in his car (just in case). Never been used. How much do you think we could sell it for on Ebay in a few months?
Shannon M. Howell at July 23, 2012 7:17 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/07/23/how_trial_lawye.html#comment-3274443">comment from Shannon M. HowellMy dad has used one of these red plastic gas cans to fill his lawn mower for 60 years. As have most of his suburban Detroit-dwelling neighbors. He turns off the lawn mower before filling it, just as you're supposed to turn off the car at the gas station. He also doesn't smoke or invite people with lit cigarettes to stand next to him on a windy day as he's filling the tank. It seems to me that it takes just the teeny-weeniest bit of smarts to not endanger oneself. The answer to behaving stupidly shouldn't be using trial lawyers to bleed a company dry.
Amy Alkon at July 23, 2012 7:26 AM
The irony is that in the last few years, the humble gas can had already gotten a massive makeover, courtesy of the regulators at the CPSC. You'll have noticed that late-model gas cans all have some variant of a complicated mechanism built onto them which can be used to start and stop the flow of gas.
When new, that is. These mechanisms are invariably fussy little collections of pastic bits and bobs that worked well enough to satisfy the elf'n'safety goblins of the CPSC, but which are totally inadequate to survive in a rough-and-tumble real-world application.
The regulators and the attaorneys will not be happy until we are all forced to buy and use Eagle safety cans, all steel and brass, with automated venting and flash arrestors, $50 and up.
In the instant case, the plaintiff was hurt after he poured gas from a gas can onto an open fire. No amount of regulation can cure foolishness of that order. As Ron White has declared, 'You can't fix stupid. Ain't a pill you can take. Ain't a class you can go to. Stupid is ForEver.' And apparently, in the eyes of regulators and plaintiff's lawyers, we are all required to pay for it. I can't wait to see what sort of gas can would satify these folks. Probably one which is hermetically sealed, so you can't get the gas out of it at all.
llater,
llamas
llamas at July 23, 2012 8:16 AM
This is bad.
But CARB is the real demon here. They ran all the other producers out of business.
Want a real "Jerry Can?" Not CARB-compliant.
Want to work for CARB and make regulations for environmental and safety reasons? Don't have a degree?
No problem! Just make one up! As long as you outlaw stuff, they won't care!
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/02/ca-legislators-threaten-hearings-if-ucla-fires-carb-whistleblower/
Unix-Jedi at July 23, 2012 8:34 AM
"And apparently, in the eyes of regulators and plaintiff's lawyers, we are all required to pay for it. I can't wait to see what sort of gas can would satify these folks. Probably one which is hermetically sealed, so you can't get the gas out of it at all."
Don't give them any ideas. It'll be like the incident some years ago when the CPSC, in response to the national "epidemic" of children drowning in mop buckets, demanded that bucket makers design buckets that would be incapable of holding water.
Cousin Dave at July 23, 2012 9:30 AM
I am not blaming Blitz at all, but it sounds like this strategy from their insurance company and lawyers contributed to their doom:
Blitz's insurance company would estimate the cost of years of legal battles and more often than not settle the case, sometimes for millions of dollars. But the lawsuits started flooding in last year after a few big payouts. Blitz paid around $30 million to defend itself, a substantial sum for a small company. Of course, Blitz's product liability insurance costs spiked.
If you're producing millions of these things that due to their nature are going to be involved in fires (whether they cause them or not) each year and become known for settling you're painting an enormous target on your back.
I don't have any solution to that.
IIRC, In the 80s and 90s Cessna stopped producing small aircraft mainly because the price of each aircraft was skyrocketing -- much of the cost of a new aircraft went straight to insurance for Cessna on that aircraft. It took some sort of tort reform or legislation for the aircraft industry to bring production of small aircraft back.
jerry at July 23, 2012 10:16 AM
Jerry:
The problem in the early 80s was the lawsuits over planes that were 30+ years old at the time, usually not kept maintained per FAA requirements.
The FAA and the manufacturers put out fixes, culminating in a "AD" - Airworthiness Directive. That'll give what has to be done, and how, and a final date, if it's not done, the plane isn't considered airworthy. But that doesn't mean it won't _fly_ just fine. An AD might say "Install a Placard", or "At the next [maintenance event]..."
And many people fly planes that aren't in compliance. Some crashed. Lawsuits came about - some as a direct result of not implementing a AD, over awfully old planes.
But the absolute last straw was when Piper lost a lawsuit due to a "design defect" when a pilot was brain damaged in a 1983 crash in a (1947?) Super Cub.
He never installed shoulder harnesses. The Jury found that Piper, not installing shoulder harnesses, before they were in any sort of wide acceptance, was a intolerable design failure. Nevermind the AD instructing the owner to install them. Or the rest of his stupidity - taking off of a closed runway - not checking the runway - including a VAN WITH HEADLIGHTS ON IT PARKED IN THE MIDDLE TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLOSED, and that he couldn't see that, cause he'd built a jury-rigged setup for a cameraman to take pictures, so the cameraman was facing backward (with no shoulder harness!) and....
Oh, it's painful.
That was when the insurance companies said "We can't insure you, even for old planes."
And for 20 years, there were essentially no General Aviation aircraft made in the US.
http://www.airportjournals.com/Display.cfm?varID=0603014
Unix-Jedi at July 23, 2012 11:32 AM
Thanks Unix-Jedi.
jerry at July 23, 2012 1:03 PM
Unix-Jedi, I think the law you're talking about is the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994. It eliminates manufacturer liability for aircraft that are more than 17 years old. I recall that the sponsors were also trying to add a provision that would relieve manufacturers of liability for general aviation aircraft not in compliance with Part 23, but I don't think that made it into the final bill.
Senator Nancy Kassebaum, who was generally regarded as a RINO in most matters, was the author and driving force behind the bill. She had been trying to get some kind of aviation liability limiting bill passed since 1987, but until the 10th Circuit denied Piper's appeal in 1993, she couldn't get any co-sponsors. Then the election of 1994 happened; she got Republican support in Congress, and Clinton's willingness to sign it. She did have a motivation; she represented Kansas and Cessna is a major employer in Kansas.
(Trivia: Nancy Kassebaum is the daughter of Alf Landon, who was the Republican nominee for President in 1936.)
Cousin Dave at July 23, 2012 7:25 PM
When blatant stupidity on the part of a consumer results in injury or death, that stupidity must in law override bad product design. Only individuals who "follow the instructions" and are injured severely anyway should be allowed to sue. Only a bad mechanic blames their tools. Make something that even a fool can use and only fool will use it.
A P at July 25, 2012 9:06 AM
I know that this has been an issue for the past 10 years. Thats why I have dedicated myself to creating The Ultimate Fuel Can. I am a regular man, like you, and am involved 100% in bringing this design to market at a reasonable price. Check out my website ( hashtagonecan.com ), like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and follow us on Instagram. Thank you for your support.
Shawn Cross at May 24, 2016 5:10 PM
Leave a comment