Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 67
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,534

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    Quote Quoting Welfarelvr
    View Post
    Premised it is!
    but it is still not applicable to the OP's situation.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    833

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    but it is still not applicable to the OP's situation.
    I know, silly. It is applicable to his *argument*. That is the argument he is making. Phones don't catch on fire so it must be defective. I brought it up to show why that argument is not correct. It is because in his "situation" he had control over the phone.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,534

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    not really sure what your point at all is since negligence has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

    I do not believe the OP ever put forth a negligence argument either.

    we are dealing with a product liability issue or an implied or express warranty and how either of them address consequential damages (since he was given a new phone or one acceptable to the OP as a replacement direct damages are not an issue).

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    833

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    not really sure what your point at all is since negligence has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

    I do not believe the OP ever put forth a negligence argument either.

    we are dealing with a product liability issue or an implied or express warranty and how either of them address consequential damages (since he was given a new phone or one acceptable to the OP as a replacement direct damages are not an issue).
    The victim said his phone caused a fire. He said he had no control over it because the battery is sealed inside. He did not give a reason why other than it was because of a product defect because phones are not supposed to do that.

    That is an example of an argument regarding the facts speak for themselves. That is not a correct argument as we have said. That is the "point" and key to the "issue at hand". "Product liability" is not a cause of action. In California, a lawsuit like this would allege strict liability, breach of warranty, and negligence. The damages are small. The victim is not going to get the experts required to prosecute a case under strict liability. Proving a product is defective rather than proving the actual item is defective is expensive so strict liability is not going to be the cause. A breach of warranty is a problem for more than the phone because of your mention of consequential damages. That leaves negligence. The cause of action the victim would use on his complaint in this "situation" is negligence.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,534

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    Welfarelvr;745221]The victim said his phone caused a fire. He said he had no control over it because the battery is sealed inside. He did not give a reason why other than it was because of a product defect because phones are not supposed to do that.
    and in that, no claim of negligence, correct?

    and I disagree with your removal of other possibilities but I do not intend to argue this with you.

    Negligence is a huge issue to prove and not even remotely suggested either by the OP or the facts of the situation. OP would have a much better chance of prevailing under just about any of the other theories

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    833

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    and in that, no claim of negligence, correct?

    and I disagree with your removal of other possibilities but I do not intend to argue this with you.

    Negligence is a huge issue to prove and not even remotely suggested either by the OP or the facts of the situation. OP would have a much better chance of prevailing under just about any of the other theories
    He would need the phone to prove it. That is why I wrote what I did in my first post. I agree it would be hard and is a huge issue.

    Proving a design defect or manufacturing defect would require an expert and Apple would have too much to lose if such a thing were proven. An expert is too expensive for the damages in the first place and litigation with Apple fighting like crazy would be too expensive in the second. That would assume there *was* such a defect.

    I think it likely the warranty would be the best chance to prevail regarding phone replacement. A warranty is a contract. Consequential damages do not usually flow from a breach of contract. I think Apple's warranty would also specifically deny consequential damages in the text. The victim wants more than a replacement of the phone.

    The forum seems to focus on discussion. Why bring up your disagreement if you do not want to discuss it?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,534

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    I think it likely the warranty would be the best chance to prevail regarding phone replacement.
    the phone was already replaced and not an issue. All we have left is consequential damages. So since you do not believe product liability is a valid claim in California, I guess, especially since California address the issue of negligence, strict liability, express warranty, and implied warrranties under product liability, I guess OP has no claim at all.

    Product liability is the umbrella which each of those four are under, even in California.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    833

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    the phone was already replaced and not an issue. All we have left is consequential damages. So since you do not believe product liability is a valid claim in California, I guess, especially since California address the issue of negligence, strict liability, express warranty, and implied warrranties under product liability, I guess OP has no claim at all.

    Product liability is the umbrella which each of those four are under, even in California.
    I agree negligence, strict liability and breach of warranty are under the umbrella of "product liability".

    I know all we have left is consequential damages. That is why I eliminated the warranty issue from consideration.

    The victim's claim would be in strict liability or negligence. He would not win in strict liability. I do not think he would win in negligence because of proof issues. Proof of breach and proof of damages and proof linking the breach to the damages. He does have a "claim". He probably does not have a successful one.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,534

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    =Welfarelvr;745240]Do *you* believe "product liability" is a valid cause of action in California?
    as a general claim, yes and that is supported by the civil rules of procedure:


    http://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/

    I know all we have left is consequential damages. That is why I eliminated the warranty issue from consideration.
    actually the warranty is the first place to look.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    833

    Default Re: Compensation for Property Damaged by a Product Malfunction

    I changed the product liability part of the prior statement as I understood what you were saying now.

    The warranty is a contract. Do people generally get consequential damages under breach of contract?

    The warranty is Apple's warranty. Have you read one of those? Does it specifically exclude consequential damages?

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Auto Insurance: Compensation for a Car Damaged by a Drunk Driver
    By Kenneth Hunt in forum Insurance Law
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-16-2013, 02:14 PM
  2. Payment: Contractor Damaged Client's Floor, Dispute Over Compensation and Payment
    By leinad3030 in forum Construction, Repair and Renovation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-30-2012, 07:58 AM
  3. Retailers: What to Do if Company Refuses Return of Damaged Product
    By Limongi in forum Consumer Law
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-02-2012, 05:17 AM
  4. Repair and Maintenance: Water Damage to Personal Property Due to Sprinkler Malfunction
    By mimillanes in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-12-2009, 10:02 AM
  5. Warranties: Can I Use The Product Warranty For Goods Damaged When Delivered
    By Pico in forum Consumer Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2006, 02:55 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources