broken ring and funny world

Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

Yes, there were two. The second involved an adjustable friction saver sold by Sherrill. The aluminum ring on the prussic failed
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

kong deleted the link to the isa web site that pertained to the ring failures
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

Wesspur recalled the ring that where bought from them. I have paper work that was sent to me recalling these rings. I had two sets of large and small. If you need me to scan them I will. I'm sure wesspur will reproduce them if you ask nicely.
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

ctm do you think you could post those on the kong facebook page with your conclusion?
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

well i posted the links on kongs facebook page that classic provided
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

Jay, I would go over to the treehouse, arborsite, treeworld and all the other arbor forums houses to make your story known. this is a serious issue. How did faulty rings end up being distributed? This cant be allowed to slip under the table and be dismissed. We have to have to have to have to have to have to be able to have confidence in our gear.
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

thanks for the other sites, and sherrills insurance company was who did the origial negotiations with kong before i had my lawyer try.so i'm pretty sure kong is reponsible for the ring wether they made it or not i will find out and post.
 
Re: Here\'s what I wrote to Kong

Here's a link to a law firm that specializes in product liability: http://www.michaels-smolak.com/lawyer-attorney-1501239.html

And here is a link to the definition of product liability.

Looks like both Sherrill and Kong are legally exposed. Business is business, Jay. You may have to sue to get Sherrill and/or Kong to ante up. Don't worry, Sherrill and Kong likely carry insurance for this very thing.

Good luck. And by the way Jay, offering compensation to you may be unwise from their perspective, as it admits some liability, which may not protect them from additional future liability.

Refusing to admit guilt is a good tactic sometimes, as it has at least one zero payout outcome. See it from their perspective and it may encourage you to sue.
 
Kong- I am a rope splicer and arborist. I make climbing gear for tree climbers around the entire world. Sometimes those items include aluminum rings. I recently heard about the plight of Jay Butcher, the arborist here in the United States who has been seriously hurt by your faulty product (alloy ring) that was recalled. I understand that you did not make the ring, but you did sell it as your own.

I knew of the ring-breaking situation immediately after it happened and have followed closely how Sherrill dealt with the recall. I am surprised to hear that this much time has gone by and Jay Butcher is still wondering how to manage his medical bills.

It is a shame to hear that you would allow such unsatisfactory products to leave through your doors. You owe it to Jay and his family, and to the entire climbing community- arborists, rock climbers, industrial workers, and more- to take full responsibility for his medical bills and compensate him for time off work due to any injuries sustained by the breaking of one of your rings (regardless of who made it, you MADE this ring yours when you sold it to Sherrill).

The relationship between a climber and a gear manufacturer is built on one thing: TRUST. I do not pretend to understand what is involved in the creation of great aluminum climbing gear. But what I do know is that if I use it properly, I should not have to worry. I cannot support a company who willingly allows non-satisfactory gear to pass through its hands. I must, at all costs, avoid putting dangerous gear into the hands of my clients worldwide.

Please do two things.

1- Do not sell gear that you don't make or oversee. Put your name on all the gear you sell, and make sure that all of it, regardless of where it is made, meets your stringent quality standards. When I buy gear from you, I am buying the KONG name. If I didn't care where it came from, I'd open up a "made in china" catalog and purchase the cheapest thing I could find. I want solid gear from a reputable manufacturer.

2- Take full responsibility for Jay Butcher's situation.

I am very thankful for the climbers that brought attention to this matter and to Sherrill for quickly responding in a way that lets the climbing community know that we can continue to trust the equipment that passes through Sherrill's doors.

Jay was VERY lucky, but this is not a matter of liability, lost work days, or reduced sales. This is a matter of life and death.

I thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.

love
nick

Nick Araya
Owner, Splices by Nick
www.splicesbynick.com
ISA Certified Arborist
TCI Trained Facilicator
 
I sent my letter on their website. I'll post on their facebook as well.

Gerry, you put it perfectly. This is a no-duh case. Granted, we are all armchair lawyers here, but this is EXACTLY what liability is all about. We are all professionals enough in the arborist/tree management world to understand that.

Jay- I am getting the vibe from you that you feel like you can't put up that big of a fight. You mentioned you do have a lawyer, but that your lawyer seems like there isn't much that can be done because this is international. I'm gonna come right out and say it: That's BS. Your lawyer needs to get some balls!

Your lawyer is indirectly implying that we could make crappy gear here in the US, sell it overseas, and they can sell their crappy stuff here, and there's nothing that anyone can do about it.

This thread has grown 8 pages long in 2 days not because we're all concerned about you getting that extra $7,500. We all use this stuff every day. We NEED to know that it is safe. To think that Kong, Petzl, or any other company could just start half-assing it because they are protected in a shroud of international legal confusion scares every single one of us.

I don't mean to talk bad about your lawyer. I admit that I don't know much in regards to legal matters such as this. But I refuse to admit that it can be "that easy" for Kong.

Some have offered funds to help you pay for your bills. You have stoically said that you won't take that. I commend you for that and I totally get it.

Can we try this a different way? I don't know how much your lawyer's time costs, but I would like to pledge $100 towards his/her services. Your lawyer is fighting for all of us: for everyone on this thread, every tree guy on alllllll the message boards, all the pickup-truck and chainsaw guys out there that barely understand what a carabiner is, every rock climber, window washer, high rise construction worker, kids at summer camps, sailors...the list goes on and on.

If you won't let us pay your medical bills, please let us pay to fight OUR fight.

love
nick

ps- In 2006 I bought 3 kong steel locking carabiners. It was my first Kong purchase ever. Within 2 weeks the spring in one of the carabiners just popped out and the gate no longer worked. I immediately pulled all three from service, disgusted that something so simple, yet important was not reliable. I've never purchased Kong gear since then.
 
If you actually want a lawsuit tro go somewhere you need a real tort lawyer with a reputation for litigating. Truthfully though, what does that get? A lonnnggg fight, lot's of hassle and stress... it's such a huge waste. It will take a lot more out of you than $7500.

Even if you succeeded Kong wouldn't change how they do business. They've been completely silent regarding these rings, they figure it will blow over and in few years nobody will even remember and Kong can go on making and selling cheap, inferior equipment that has no place in life support.

This is a company that contracted with an off-shore manufacturer to make it's products. Other than smacking of yet another company run by stockholders rather than employees and customers, that's OK. Scummy, but OK.

What they did was to neglect basic quality assurance. IF they checked those rings at all they sampled them, probably picked 2-4 rings per 1000 and broke'em. That's SQA, it's good practice if you're making screwdrivers or wing nuts... but life support gear? It wouldn't surprise me if they depended on King Snap to do the QA anyway... which is REAL bullshite.

100% of links for life support should be inspected and proof loaded. If the manufacturer can't swing that then sell the crap as accessory biners or something. I really don't want to hear manufacturers bitching about 100% inspection or proof loading. Why do they get top dollar if they aren't doing something to earn it? If want unrated biners and stuff we'll go the Wal-mart for'em.

This stuff ain't cheap, it's really pricey if you consider only materials and manufacturing. What we're SUPPOSED to be paying extra for is security and reliability. We're trusting this stuff ISN'T made by some contract manufacturer with no interest in the product once the invoice is paid. We're paying a premium for excellence and no mistakes. Climbing, rigging and rescue disciplines require it. We can't do our job if we don't trust our safety systems.

Kong violated that trust and in my book, it can't be fixed by settling a lawsuit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom