Shopping Discussion

Safety recall: asked to destroy a product before getting a replacement ?

  • Last Updated:
  • Apr 4th, 2016 12:26 am
Tags:
None
Member
Apr 3, 2010
311 posts
62 upvotes
Montreal

Safety recall: asked to destroy a product before getting a replacement ?

There is a safety recall for a plastic kayak I purchased last year from a retailer.

The manufacturer is offering to give a free replacement kayak.
I registered for this product recall and they sent me instructions to destroy my current boat. I have to saw the hull and send them a photo showing the serial number to prove that the boat was properly destroyed
before I can be "eligible to get a replacement".

Although I see why they request such a thing, I dont really like the idea of destroying my boat BEFORE having a new one in hand.
I also dont understand why it should be my job/responsability to saw the boat (what if I cut my finger while doing it ? Who will clean the mess in my Garage ?) and dispose of 12' long of unusable plastic.

Do you think I should complain to the manufacturer or the retailer?
21 replies
Deal Guru
May 29, 2006
10930 posts
3663 upvotes
im sure theres an option B, like a refund or they can pick it up.
Deal Fanatic
Jan 5, 2003
5068 posts
5010 upvotes
Toronto
Is it this kayak?

http://www.eliesport.com/resources/secu ... kayak.html

If you read the retailer FAQ, it says:

"1.12 A customer who bought a kayak in your store but refuses to destroy the product will be asked
to return the kayak to your store. We ask that you submit the serial number for destruction
authorization to our customer service and we will send you the destroy authorization and a
replacement kayak as stated above."

So there's that option (return to store and let them handle it), even though they would prefer that customers destroy it themselves.
Deal Addict
Aug 10, 2013
2403 posts
671 upvotes
Toronto
Seems like something that would be fairly difficult to destroy, if you are able to do it then as long as you have it in writing that it will be replaced you shouldn't have an issue. I had a warranty claim like this for a pool pump and they wanted me to send a picture showing I cut the cord of the non working pump, but destroying a canoe does seem extreme I mean what if you were a little old lady, odd request
Sr. Member
Apr 14, 2015
580 posts
175 upvotes
Tsuu T'Ina, AB
Would you prefer to mail it back to them??

But hopefully you can just return it to where you bought it, as mentioned.
Deal Fanatic
Aug 13, 2007
5058 posts
1279 upvotes
GTA
Couldn't you just take it to a derelict field and go to town on it with a sledgehammer? If you bring a buddy you could probably get through it in 30 mins.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 3, 2014
3252 posts
3029 upvotes
Vancouver(ish)
butor20077 wrote: There is a safety recall for a plastic kayak I purchased last year from a retailer.

The manufacturer is offering to give a free replacement kayak.
I registered for this product recall and they sent me instructions to destroy my current boat. I have to saw the hull and send them a photo showing the serial number to prove that the boat was properly destroyed
before I can be "eligible to get a replacement".

Although I see why they request such a thing, I dont really like the idea of destroying my boat BEFORE having a new one in hand.
I also dont understand why it should be my job/responsability to saw the boat (what if I cut my finger while doing it ? Who will clean the mess in my Garage ?) and dispose of 12' long of unusable plastic.

Do you think I should complain to the manufacturer or the retailer?
I don't think it's that onerous to simply cut a boat and take a photo. If you're so concerned about cutting your finger, perhaps you should get your mother to come down to the basement and do the sawing for you. I'm sure she'd be happy to pull out the vacuum and clean up the mess for you too, since you apparently don't think that's within your abilities either. :-)

Apparently the other option is possibly to lug the old kayak to the retailer.

Their request and terms of replacement are entirely reasonable considering the size of the item.
Proud RFD member since January 31, 2007. Feel free to add 3,034 to my post count.
Sr. Member
User avatar
Apr 13, 2010
659 posts
424 upvotes
Napanee, ON
Heavenleigh85 wrote: what if you were a little old lady
A little old lady who enjoys kayaking?
Gabe of Gabe's Hacks
Sr. Member
User avatar
Dec 21, 2015
725 posts
350 upvotes
Canada
nothing wrong with being old & enjoying kayaking.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 28, 2007
3204 posts
1094 upvotes
Whitehorse, YT
We should understand that when someone else causes us harm we should not expect to be restored 100%.

It costs the kayak owner little to cooperate with the manufacturer who has paid a steep price for its error. Let's be reasonable. What if we had made some costly error? Wouldn't it be decent if our victims helped out a bit?
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 5, 2001
11979 posts
3170 upvotes
Edmonton
Take a picture of it and cut it up in a photo editor.

Why waste your time, dull your saw and knife blades and make mess you have to clean up just to appease the warranty gestapo for a company that couldn't be bothered to make a safe and reliable product in the first place.


Save the kayak and reuse it for a non aquatic purpose. Cabin wall art, stage prop, flower planter, etc.




Oh and post the brand / manufacturer of the kayak. I'm in the market this spring and don't want to buy someone's used unsafe model.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 7, 2014
2270 posts
1724 upvotes
Explain it to customer relations, if they have one. Or someone higher up
Banned
May 12, 2004
9756 posts
4136 upvotes
Ottawa
Kayak + Wood chipper + video camera = a couple thousand likes on FB.
Deal Addict
Sep 20, 2008
1605 posts
691 upvotes
Calgary
Marzipan wrote: We should understand that when someone else causes us harm we should not expect to be restored 100%.

It costs the kayak owner little to cooperate with the manufacturer who has paid a steep price for its error. Let's be reasonable. What if we had made some costly error? Wouldn't it be decent if our victims helped out a bit?
No, when another party causes me harm and fault is 100% there's, j should be made whole again. A victim shouldn't be left out of pocket in a manner that is disproportionate to their contributing actions.

That being said, I don't consider returning a product to a store to be outside of what is reasonable. Asking someone to destroy a product may be. Not everyone has the tools needed to do such a job.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 28, 2007
3204 posts
1094 upvotes
Whitehorse, YT
Dark Phoenix wrote: No, when another party causes me harm and fault is 100% there's, j should be made whole again. A victim shouldn't be left out of pocket in a manner that is disproportionate to their contributing actions.
That is an understandable expectation. However, I believe the law incorporates the fact that in life we must expect bumps and bruises. It is normal.

Take the example of a brand new car that gets keyed. Is it reasonable for the insurer to provide a replacement brand new car or is a patch job a more reasonable remedy?
Dark Phoenix wrote: That being said, I don't consider returning a product to a store to be outside of what is reasonable. Asking someone to destroy a product may be. Not everyone has the tools needed to do such a job.
You could argue that the buyer bears a degree of responsibility for not conducting adequate due diligence respecting that vendor and that product. That degree of responsibility might be anything ... 50%, 10% or .1%.
Deal Addict
Sep 20, 2008
1605 posts
691 upvotes
Calgary
Marzipan wrote: That is an understandable expectation. However, I believe the law incorporates the fact that in life we must expect bumps and bruises. It is normal.

Take the example of a brand new car that gets keyed. Is it reasonable for the insurer to provide a replacement brand new car or is a patch job a more reasonable remedy?



You could argue that the buyer bears a degree of responsibility for not conducting adequate due diligence respecting that vendor and that product. That degree of responsibility might be anything ... 50%, 10% or .1%.
For your example, a repainted door would be considered made whole. Also, there is a difference between insurance and tort law.
Deal Fanatic
Dec 19, 2009
6197 posts
4451 upvotes
The manufacturer is just trying to make sure that when you receive your new kayak that you won't sell the old one on kijiji which you may well do.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 5, 2001
11979 posts
3170 upvotes
Edmonton
Marzipan wrote: That is an understandable expectation. However, I believe the law incorporates the fact that in life we must expect bumps and bruises. It is normal.

Take the example of a brand new car that gets keyed. Is it reasonable for the insurer to provide a replacement brand new car or is a patch job a more reasonable remedy?



You could argue that the buyer bears a degree of responsibility for not conducting adequate due diligence respecting that vendor and that product. That degree of responsibility might be anything ... 50%, 10% or .1%.

Kind of an apple and keyed car door comparison you are making.

In this case the manufacturer is responsible for the recall resulting from unsafe product. They are 100% liable and responsible. Offloading some of that onus onto already victimized consumers is just terrible.


If the car manufacturer had assembled the door or applied the paint or caused the scratch due to defect or some other fault (such as a service center) they would be just as liable to take care of the owner, via repaint, new door, new car or whatever other adaquate solution.

Top