|
|
|
|
Banjodowork
Aug 13, 2010, 9:24 PM
Post #1 of 89
(14970 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2010
Posts: 2
|
Hey all, this is my first post here. I'm not actually a rock climber at all, I'm an arborist, I climb trees 8 hours a day 5-7 days a week. I spend a lot of time trusting my life to climbing products. When I use a piece of gear in the way it is intended I expect it to perform as it is supposed to. If it didn't, I would expect the manufacturers to step up to the plate and make a bad situation right. Kong, however, is unwilling to to pay the medical bills of a colleague who was injured due to a Kong product failure.
I'm posting a link to a discussion about this in an arborist forum. I think this is an important topic for all who use life supporting climbing gear.
Thanks for reading.
http://www.treebuzz.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=239337&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1
OOPs I don't now how to post a link here. Just copy and paste.
(This post was edited by Banjodowork on Aug 13, 2010, 9:29 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 13, 2010, 9:50 PM
Post #2 of 89
(14933 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
Banjodowork wrote: Hey all, this is my first post here. I'm not actually a rock climber at all, I'm an arborist, I climb trees 8 hours a day 5-7 days a week. I spend a lot of time trusting my life to climbing products. When I use a piece of gear in the way it is intended I expect it to perform as it is supposed to. If it didn't, I would expect the manufacturers to step up to the plate and make a bad situation right. Kong, however, is unwilling to to pay the medical bills of a colleague who was injured due to a Kong product failure. I'm posting a link to a discussion about this in an arborist forum. I think this is an important topic for all who use life supporting climbing gear. Thanks for reading. http://www.treebuzz.com/...amp;fpart=1&vc=1 OOPs I don't now how to post a link here. Just copy and paste.
Fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Aug 13, 2010, 9:53 PM
Post #3 of 89
(14932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
So what actually happened? No one in the thread you posted talks about the failure. Did an aluminum right pull apart under body weight? Was there a short fall on slings? What piece failed?
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Aug 13, 2010, 10:49 PM
Post #4 of 89
(14875 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
Hi, I'm sorry to hear about the injury.
I read the first 3 pages of your link and all I got out of it is that you are rallying the troops behind you in an effort to pressure Kong into paying medical bills. This seems to be dragging their name through the mud and was stated that he didn't support such actions and yet you bring it here for more rallying. I don't know who's in the right here but Kong has come out and replied to you there with this statement; "KONG Bonaiti of Italy has confirmed the issuance of polished aluminum rings that were sourced elsewhere and
distributed without individual testing." They may be dragging their feet but if they're liable remains to be seen. If this distributing is true than IMO they are no more at fault than Sherrilltree is in that they also distributed the rings in question, yet you are not disgruntled with them?
At any rate, I hope their condition has come back to 100% and they get the issue resolved one way or another, but your link hardly shows me any issues with Kong products which your post alludes to.
Good Luck
(This post was edited by moose_droppings on Aug 13, 2010, 11:01 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Aug 13, 2010, 11:17 PM
Post #5 of 89
(14839 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
Hope he recovers OK. Sorry to hear of his troubles.
2 questions)
1st) He doesn't detail how the ring failed. Could it have been somehow misused?
2nd and the big question. Why didn't the arborist carry workmans comp insurance. Isn't it mandatory for you? I understand wanting to put that money in the pocket, but when this kind of thing occurs, your medical bills would be covered.
|
|
|
|
|
mr_rogers
Aug 13, 2010, 11:46 PM
Post #6 of 89
(14815 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2006
Posts: 57
|
moose_droppings wrote: but Kong has come out and replied to you there with this statement; "KONG Bonaiti of Italy has confirmed the issuance of polished aluminum rings that were sourced elsewhere and distributed without individual testing."
Actually, that does not appear to be the case.
Sherrill, the folks who sold the hurt dude the ring, have claimed in their recall notice that Kong distributed the rings. I can't find any acknowledgment of this by Kong.
The posts by some sort of Sherrill agent/rep in the arborist forums indicate that they found a box from Kong in their shop that had unmarked rings in it. It is unclear if they mean that they opened a new box from Kong and it had unmarked rings in it, or if they were reusing a box from Kong to store unmarked rings.
Kong states on their facebook page that the broken ring was not a Kong ring. They emphasize the absence of Kong markings.
So who made the ring in question? Who knows. I dug through the links on the arborist forum for a bit, but aside from what I've relayed above I never found anything conclusive as to who made the rings. All the tree jockeys seem pretty sure it was Kong, but I can't figure out why.
Also, note, that I think a lot of the antagonism from the tree-jockeys to Kong has a lot to do with Kong not having anyone that can speak the english real pretty. Their communications, both on their facebook page and in the note from their lawyers, is rather disjointed.
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Aug 14, 2010, 12:14 AM
Post #7 of 89
(14795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
mr_rogers wrote: moose_droppings wrote: but Kong has come out and replied to you there with this statement; "KONG Bonaiti of Italy has confirmed the issuance of polished aluminum rings that were sourced elsewhere and
distributed without individual testing."Actually, that does not appear to be the case. Sherrill, the folks who sold the hurt dude the ring, have claimed in their recall notice that Kong distributed the rings. I can't find any acknowledgment of this by Kong.
Kong admits to distributing the rings, read the bolded in your quote of me. They are in fact denying that the rings are their product. Don't know if this is true or not though. Sherilltree has indeed also distributed the rings by reselling them to individuals.
In reply to: Also, note, that I think a lot of the antagonism from the tree-jockeys to Kong has a lot to do with Kong not having anyone that can speak the english real pretty. Their communications, both on their facebook page and in the note from their lawyers, is rather disjointed.
I agree with that and also their admissions are in the least, not fully disclosed IMO.
All in all I still we still have no evidence in his link that Kong products are at the heart of the matter, even if that lack of evidence is in the form of lack of evidence yet to be exposed. With no malice toward Kong or the injured party, it would be more relevant to this thread to know more about the actual facts leading to the failure of the ring.
No matter where this leads to, I wish nothing but the best and speedy of outcomes to the injured party.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 14, 2010, 12:14 AM
Post #8 of 89
(14793 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
If I was Kong, I was going to ask you this question:
was this item intended for climbing or commercial, arborist work(meaning , it need to meet OSHA, ANSI,).
if your answer is yes then you got a case, if not, then you are on your own.
|
|
|
|
|
Banjodowork
Aug 14, 2010, 12:21 AM
Post #9 of 89
(14785 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2010
Posts: 2
|
It wasn't my injury. It was a colleague. It was an aluminum ring that failed under the load of a climber. There was no shock loading. The climber swung off a branch(increasing the load but not shock loading, 400 lbs max) and was rappelling to the ground when the failure happened. He fell twenty or so feet after the piece broke.
|
|
|
|
|
rschap
Aug 14, 2010, 12:34 AM
Post #10 of 89
(14775 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 592
|
I’m sorry to hear about your friend but shit happens. If it was negligence on the part of the manufacturer I would care but sometimes things break and people get hurt that’s why we have a backup. The space shuttle is the most certified craft man has ever made and it still blew up twice.
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Aug 14, 2010, 1:46 AM
Post #11 of 89
(14734 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
Banjodowork wrote: It wasn't my injury. It was a colleague. It was an aluminum ring that failed under the load of a climber. There was no shock loading. The climber swung off a branch(increasing the load but not shock loading, 400 lbs max) and was rappelling to the ground when the failure happened. He fell twenty or so feet after the piece broke.
I understand that it wasn't you.
That does sound like a defective ring from what you say and in line with the recall. I'll take your word on the facts but be advised the manufacturer will probably want to see the actual ring and examine it for their own conclusions.
It would now be nice if the actual manufacturer of the ring in question would place their best foot forward. I don't know if just distributing them makes a company or a retailer liable at all.
|
|
|
|
|
mr_rogers
Aug 14, 2010, 1:52 AM
Post #12 of 89
(14731 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2006
Posts: 57
|
moose_droppings wrote: Kong admits to distributing the rings, read the bolded in your quote of me. They are in fact denying that the rings are their product. Don't know if this is true or not though. Sherilltree has indeed also distributed the rings by reselling them to individuals.
Sorry, let me explain what I meant.
I tracked that quote to Sherril's recall letter, found here:
http://www.isa-arbor.com/...minumRing_recall.pdf
So we don't have a direct statement from Kong, only a claim from Sherril. I've no reason to suspect Sherril would make something like this up, but I also haven't seen anything from Kong aside from the general denials on their facebook page and a lawyer letter (poorly) translated into english.
I believe Kong is offering about $7-9K to the injured party, which I think is about 1/2 of his medical bills. I don't know if that's a settlement type of thing, or just stepping up.
In reply to: No matter where this leads to, I wish nothing but the best and speedy of outcomes to the injured party.
Absolutely.
|
|
|
|
|
ClimbClimb
Aug 14, 2010, 3:36 AM
Post #13 of 89
(14678 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 389
|
rschap wrote: I’m sorry to hear about your friend but shit happens. If it was negligence on the part of the manufacturer I would care but sometimes things break and people get hurt that’s why we have a backup. The space shuttle is the most certified craft man has ever made and it still blew up twice.
A ring indended for climbing breaking under body weight when rapping is decidedly not "sometimes things break". That's just not supposed to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
nickfromwi
Aug 14, 2010, 3:40 AM
Post #14 of 89
(14677 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2005
Posts: 8
|
I'm glad that the rock climbing community is at least perking their eye-brows at this issue. Something is wrong here, and the tree climbers aren't 100% exactly sure what the problem is. What is known is that the ring broke and there is no way in hell that it should have.
Who's fault is it? All the options are
1. The climber (Jay)
2. The retailer (SherrillTree)
3. The distibutor (Kong)
4. The manufacturer (company name unknown to me)
In my opinion, it's not Jay. He was using a ring that was supposedly rated at 5,000 pounds and using it in a manner that surely put less that 5% of a load on that ring.
Not Sherrill, either. They were sold a ring from Kong with the intention of selling it to tree climbers. I always thought Kong was a manufacturer and distributor. I wasn't aware that they deal in equipment they didn't even make. So I put the blame on them. I think they may've contracted out an outside agency to make the rings, then Kong served as the intermediary to get those rings to Sherrill.
I wonder if Sherrill had 2 purchasing options, "Kong rings made by Kong" and "Kong rings made in China by someone else" and intentionally bought the cheaper one. If that was the case, and if they knew there was a potential for increased risk, then I'd put some blame towards Sherrill.
That leaves Kong or whoever made the rings for Kong. Either way, it doesn't matter to me. But someone messed up. This gear is NOT allowed to break when used properly.
Regardless, the fact of the matter is that if you buy something made by Kong, there is a chance that it will not meet strength requirements climbers should expect in their gear. A previous poster made a comment that "shit happens" and you gotta have backups. I disagree with this 100% You don't back up your climbing rope, you don't back up your harness. If you were using a carabiner to clip in, you don't back up that carabiner. You don't, and you shouldn't have to.
The most important factor in climbing gear is not ease of use, weight, strength, or anything like that. It is trust. You have to TRUST that when you buy something from Petzl, Mad Rock, Omega, Black Diamond, Mammut, etc that it will do what it is supposed to. Kong has lost my trust. I can no longer support them.
If you are interested in reading the original thread where the ring break was announced, you can see it here: http://www.treebuzz.com/...amp;fpart=1&vc=1
love
nick
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Aug 14, 2010, 3:45 AM
Post #15 of 89
(14669 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
nickfromwi wrote: I'm glad that the rock climbing community is at least perking their eye-brows at this issue. Something is wrong here, and the tree climbers aren't 100% exactly sure what the problem is. What is known is that the ring broke and there is no way in hell that it should have.
Yes, your description of the accident, had it been in many rock climbing locations, would have been a fatality for sure.
Edit add:
I don't understand the in you face attitude of some posters below. Also - Dingus, below, says he never swings out on a single ring. Pftt, we all do it all the time. We show up at a rap station and there's a single unmarked alum ring there. Some other person had left it some time ago. We don't know the brand, and we'd all like to see 2, but we don't always, and no one I know leaves biners at these single ring rap stations. We thread our rope and trust our life to it. That 2 ? have failed should be very disturbing to all of us. That we have been spare doesn't mean that this is not a climber issue.
Thank you again for sharing it over here. Who knows, maybe a life or 2 gets saved due to your words. We are indebted to you for the post.
(This post was edited by billcoe_ on Sep 22, 2010, 2:03 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Aug 14, 2010, 12:27 PM
Post #16 of 89
(14524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
nickfromwi wrote: I always thought Kong was a manufacturer and distributor. I wasn't aware that they deal in equipment they didn't even make. So I put the blame on them. I think they may've contracted out an outside agency to make the rings, then Kong served as the intermediary to get those rings to Sherrill.
Just a point of info: most companies outsource some, if not all, of the manufacturing for most of the gear we use.
Just off the top of my head, I believe Petzl sources most/all of their biners from Rock Exotica. There was a great post a few months ago by Mal (Trango) explaining how it all works.
From a thread on Ball nuts:
In reply to: The Camp Lowe Balls and the Trango Ball Nutz are manufacturered at the same factory and are identical in all respects other than the markings. I'd like to think that our version has better Karma, however. Malcolm
And another:
In reply to: Thanks for the love, George. In the late '80s, when I was working for Lowe, I developed the Balls under license from Steve Byrne, the inventor. I busted my ass trying to get them made in Boulder and eventually did. About six months later, I was at a trade show in Germany and a short Asian guy came up to me with a Ball in his have an said, "We can make this vely good quality, vely cheap." So I gave him a sample and said go for it. Two weeks later I was looking at the best Ball I had ever seen and I've been a convert of world production ever since. Out Korean manufacturer makes our Classic carabiners, the Pyramid, the FlexCams and our technical ice tools. Our harnesses are (currently) made in Czech, some of the carabiners and the Jaws are made in Italy and the rest is manufacturered here in the US. I'm proud of the way we have been able to source, worldwide, the best manufacturers for particular products. It's always a challenge to balance our production and cost needs against developing a reliable supplier and being true to them. I'm also proud that since our inception in 1992, we've only had one product recall (In 1993 for an Italian locking carabiner for a design flaw that was also present in two US made carabiners.) This manufacturing flexibility has allowed us to be pretty innovative: rather than designing a piece of gear to fit our manufacturing specific capability, we design the gear the way it ought to be designed, then find the best place to manufacture it.
(This post was edited by acorneau on Aug 14, 2010, 12:36 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 14, 2010, 12:45 PM
Post #17 of 89
(14513 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
rschap wrote: I’m sorry to hear about your friend but shit happens. If it was negligence on the part of the manufacturer I would care but sometimes things break and people get hurt that’s why we have a backup. The space shuttle is the most certified craft man has ever made and it still blew up twice.
You're an idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
Blinky
Aug 14, 2010, 1:38 PM
Post #18 of 89
(14501 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2010
Posts: 6
|
The guy has a point, stuff breaks... but this is a simple aluminum ring designed for a harness interconnection, not a spacecraft. NASA never considered the space shuttle 'Fully Operational' anyway, that was Reagan that said that and the NASA guys freaked out when he did it. The Shuttle is experimental.
The whole point of bringing this thread to rock climbers is to make MORE people aware that if a KONG product fails because of THEIR negligence and you are injured, you're screwed. They won't pay your medical expenses... cuz they don't have to. Kong cares more about it's stockholders than it's customers. So, good stock, bad company.
It's difficult for anyone who didn't follow this when it happened (there were TWO ring failures, one didn't cause an injury) to understand how it played out. You don't have to take our word for it but you would do well if you did. None of us has anything to gain through this effort other than to make Kong change their behavior and put other manufacturers on notice that selling unsafe gear will result in a strong reaction from the climbing community.
We're all climbers, I've been climbing rock seriously since 1978, did towers for almost five years and now I climb trees cuz it's a great job for an old burned out climber. There's lots for us to argue about like bolting and chopping, gym climbers vs. trad climbers, blablabla../. but on the matter of safe gear, I'm thinking we would do well to speak to manufacturers with one voice.
The rings most likely failed because they were not heat treated after manufacture... that's negligence. And negligence in the manufacture of equipment designed to protect life should be unforgivable by anyone who hangs their life on such gear.
If it was reported that a Kong figure eight just broke... just broke right open, during a rappel, would you be inclined to buy more Kong gear? That's basically what happened.
Rescuers and rock climbers should know about it. I know a lot of you guys are into sport and gym climbing and I see how this doesn't really get your attention, that's cool... but if you're like me, that rack of aluminum gear is what makes you able to do dangerous things safely. An untreated part that could fail without warning is unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Aug 14, 2010, 1:40 PM
Post #19 of 89
(14501 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
I havent yet rad the complete thread, but i see one big problem in how this whole thing got/gets handled:
It seems like there is
a) no proof that the ring is indeed a kong one, and
b) no one that actually investigates what went wrong
did the broken ring get collected and sent to the manufacturer or such stuff?
I dont know about the USA (and tree climbing), but here the DAV (german alpine club) has a safety commission, where people send their mistery accident pieces to, to find out what happened.
Also kong seems to be pretty proud about their laser etching (they even etch their cheapest stuff with all kinds of logos, markings and what norms they fullfill, and that it has been individually tested and whatnot).
Also the only ring i found on the kong page is clearly marked:
So i would be rather careful to blame kong.
furthermore the cultural difference seems to be a problem. Of course the language, but also more: I would assume that they simply do not understand the issue.
A climber fell due to a product failure, got injured, to hospital and had to skip work for a month and now is fine again (as far as i read it).
also they are not convinced that it is their product, so i can understand why it does not seem to be an issue for them.
I am not sure about the situation in italy, but stuff like health insurance is quite common in europe, so i would even go so far that they simply do not understand why money would be involved in that whole thing. From an european perspective it might just be an ordinary working accident, and now someone tries to press money out of that.
qwert
|
|
|
|
|
Blinky
Aug 14, 2010, 2:12 PM
Post #20 of 89
(14483 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2010
Posts: 6
|
Manbearpig can't be stopped... because he's half man, half bear, half pig and half Dick Cheney.
Kong knows it's their ring, they just call that into question as a legal maneuver. They started with the laser etching on rings AFTER this incident occurred.
You're right about the investigation... we have no administrative body to deal with issues like this. Even though it was a regular work harness it happened during a competition so OSHA doesn't get involved. That's why Kong gets a pass, no independent enforcement of safety standards.
That's why it's up to us to make a big deal out of it so people know about stuff like this. The internet is pretty much our only tool at this point. Thing is, we have a case if you look at it practically rather than legally.
No, we can't prove that Kong sold that ring... clever how they didn't mark it, don't you think? But Sherrill Tree, one of the better retailers of tree gear stated they were from a box of Kong supplied rings. I for one trust Sherrill and take their word for it... but nobody can prove it.
I don't know who has the broken rings now but Sherrill took in a lot of rings when they unilaterally decided to exchange ANY unmarked ring of that type with a new, rated ring at no charge REGARDLESS of where the ring was originally purchased. The goal was to get unsafe rings out of circulation and protect climbers. So Sherrill has a bunch of unmarked rings, at least two were mine. I don't know if they tested them all or not.
Resist this if you want, no skin off my nose, buy all the Kong gear you can afford, we're just trying to get the word out, you'll make your own decisions based on your own judgment, this is just information... but it's good information, not exaggerated, doesn't carry a hidden agenda.
Even though we're often competition for each other, arborists are a tight community, we support each other. That's what this is about. Climbers looking out for other climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Aug 14, 2010, 2:20 PM
Post #21 of 89
(14481 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
After having read all of the stuff i have to say that i am on Kongs side in this!
While their tone might not be really matching the issue, i can totally understand their position.
An aluminum ring that was not produced by them broke.
There has already been a recall on said rings by the distributor.
So what are they supposed to do? they are already offering more than they are supposed to do! (7000$ vs. 0$)
Of course it always bad when something breaks/ goes wrong, especially with life/death equipment, and such occurrences should always be fully investigated, and kong should play a role in that investigation, if only to find out that the distributors cleaning woman put some unmarked rings in a kong box or something like this.
so the only thing i can criticize on kong at the moment is their communication/ lack thereof.
qwert
|
|
|
|
|
Blinky
Aug 14, 2010, 2:31 PM
Post #22 of 89
(14470 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2010
Posts: 6
|
So if a Kong figure eight broke and your climbing partner was injured in the fall, you think Kong bears no responsibility?
Kong sold the ring, that's a fact whether it can be proven in court or not, they don't even deny it, only say it can't be proved.
Suit yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Aug 14, 2010, 2:48 PM
Post #23 of 89
(14463 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
Blinky wrote: Kong knows it's their ring, they just call that into question as a legal maneuver. They started with the laser etching on rings AFTER this incident occurred.
From reading the various threads i can only see that (starting in 2006) unmarked rings broke, and where recalled by the manufactuerer/ distributor of the splices they came with, and where replaced with marked kong rings.
sherril the manufacturer/ distributor of the splices found some unmarked rings in a kong box, yes, but there is no info wether this was a box that came directly from kong, or just a kong box that was standing around in their office, in which someone put those rings.
Also they do not say if they really only purchased from kong (which would support the "theory" that those rings where indeed made/ distributed by kong) or if they also buy from other manufacturers (which would support the "mixup theory").
dont get me wrong, i am not siding for kong, whatever their position in this thing might be, but i cant really believe that they would sell unmarked rings. Unfortunately i seem to have thrown away the catalogue, but in 2002 or 03 or somewhere around that, they where "bragging" about their laser etching, and a (very cheap) carabiner i have from that time is completely marked, and thus i would be very surprised if they dont marked their rings in 2006
However i noted one thing on the kong homepage:
http://www.kong.it/pr_qklk.htm
(the rings are at the bottom)
Edit: I am not so sure about the part below. I have just checked my fig8s (see my post below) and they are also not CE marked/certified, so there might as well be a loophole in this thing! Maybe rappel devices are ok because they should never see high loads anyways? very strange. If someone knows about the certification thing, please explain, since it is obviously not that easy as i thought.
The rings are not EN/ CE certified!
So (at least in europe) they are not allowed to be sold as safety equipment!
Of course one could argue why one should rate something to 25 kn if one has nothing to back up said claim , but as far as i see it, those rings where never to be sold/ used for any situation where a life depends on those rings!
qwert
(This post was edited by qwert on Aug 14, 2010, 3:09 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
Blinky
Aug 14, 2010, 3:01 PM
Post #24 of 89
(14451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2010
Posts: 6
|
Academically that's all well and good, life isn't very academic though. I'm not even willing to discuss whether Kong sold the rings, they did, they know they did because they offered a settlement and Bonaitti doesn't deny it. He only says he will challenge it in court since the ring isn't marked.
I've NEVER seen a laser etched Kong ring, CTI and DMM were already marking their's way back.
Just because you can't PROVE it in court doesn't mean anything accept the defendant covered their ass and has good legal help.
Like I said, suit yourself, it's your life. About that hypothetical broken figure eight? No answer?
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Aug 14, 2010, 3:06 PM
Post #25 of 89
(14448 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
Blinky wrote: So if a Kong figure eight broke and your climbing partner was injured in the fall, you think Kong bears no responsibility?
But in this case i would absolutely know that it is indeed a kong product (assuming my dealer did not sell me a counterfeit product) since it bears a kong label.
In reply to: Kong sold the ring, that's a fact whether it can be proven in court or not, they don't even deny it, only say it can't be proved.
qwert wrote: However i noted one thing on the kong homepage: http://www.kong.it/pr_qklk.htm (the rings are at the bottom) The rings are not EN/ CE certified! So (at least in europe) they are not allowed to be sold as safety equipment! Of course one could argue why one should rate something to 25 kn if one has nothing to back up said claim , but as far as i see it, those rings where never to be sold/ used for any situation where a life depends on those rings!
So take the quoted part above with a grain of salt!
anyone knows more about the whole certification thing?
And blinky, dont get me wrong, i am not trying to fight against you/ the injured arborist/ arborists in general. I am just not happy with what i am seeing at the moment, which looks a lot like a witch hunt from my position.
The internet is a powerful tool for such things, but there have been many cases where an "internet mob" caused a lot of damage, and then it turned out that they where wrong to start with. I know, safety equipment not being safe is a big thing, and there are a lot of emotions involved, but thats the problem! You need facts, not emotions!
qwert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
