Re: Product endorsement
Originally Posted by
The Artful Todger
->
Fit for purpose within the expressed limitations of the spec or application notes. If the buyer uses the product outside of the spec then that's down to them.
If in this case the product was used within the specs valid
at the time then "state of the art" defence applies. In the case of buildings that are now potential fire hazards because of what has been learned then the onus to do something about it is on the leaseholder or possibly the building management business.
Surely that requires that the purveyor of the faulty goods can prove
that he UNKNOWINGLY sold a dangerous product?
In the case of Grenfell it is obvious from evidence presented
at the inquiry that the purveyor was all too aware of the shortcomings
of their product! The inquiry has the E mails to prove it !!
The case of the poor sods living in high rise accomodation clad
with what is now accepted to be a life threatening product is more
complicated and needs government intervention via new laws to
control the sale and leasing of multi tenancy accomodation and who
is liable for what etc!
At the moment it seems landlords have the whip hand and the
relationship needs rebalancing imo??
Donkeyman! 👎👎