Hypothetical question

[Carljh]

Beyonwiz are replacing all the power units supplied with their T2 PVR and that made me think, with some reported problems with the units supplied with Skippas and the heat problem, what would happen if for instance a fire was started by a problem with one of these units?  If it was discovered to be a design fault, who,if anybody, would be responsible to notify Skippa owners?  IceTV mark 1 are obviously out of the equation and although Altech have closed their Australian operation but are still operating off shore, would they have any liability as the manufacturer and presumably got paid for the units that were supplied?  Or is it simply a case of use the Skippa at your own risk?  Just wondered if there are any legal whizzes out there that might have opinions on this matter?

[IanL-S]

Not sure who has a list of those who got a SKIPPA. IceTV Mark 1 would have that information, but may no longer exist when the problem arises. The units were sent from the UEC/Altech warehouse so they may also have the list. But, they have stopped operations (not clear if the company is being liquidated or merely mothballed).

Not sure that that gets us anywhere. The overseas company that made the units may have some obligation, but I have no knowledge about this point.

I suspect we are largely left out on a limb if anything goes wrong.

Ian

[prl]

If you have home & contents insurance, then if your Skippa causes a fire it presumably falls on the insurance company to find someone to sue.

[nis200sx]

Thankfully we don't live in the USA. I would have though insurance companies here cannot sue anyone if there were no criminal charges filed by the authorities.

[IanL-S]

Not wishing to become too technical; if the insurance company pays out on your policy, it can then exercise your right to sue those responsible for your loss. It is call the right of subrogation. It does not of course mean they will be successful in pursuing the claim. Insurance Law 101 strikes again.

Ian

[prl]

Thankfully we don't live in the USA. I would have though insurance companies here cannot sue anyone if there were no criminal charges filed by the authorities.

Suits for compensation for negligence (or similar) are normally civil law, not criminal law, both here and in the US, and no crime need have been committed for the suit to succeed. The level of proof is also lower that in criminal law: "balance of probabilities" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt".

An insurance company would simply weigh up whether to sue or not depending on their estimation of the cost of litigation, the ability of the sued party to pay, and their estimation of their chances of success.

IANAL

[simoncasey]

Thankfully we don't live in the USA. I would have though insurance companies here cannot sue anyone if there were no criminal charges filed by the authorities.

But it is a good point, we want to avoid the scenario that happened earlier in the year when a woman sued her niece for hugging her. She was universally condemned but it was at the insistence of her medical insurance who wouldn't pay for her treatment unless she sued her own family, even though it was clear even to the insurers that the case had no merit.

[prl]

Thankfully we don't live in the USA. I would have though insurance companies here cannot sue anyone if there were no criminal charges filed by the authorities.

But it is a good point, we want to avoid the scenario that happened earlier in the year when a woman sued her niece for hugging her. She was universally condemned but it was at the insistence of her medical insurance who wouldn't pay for her treatment unless she sued her own family, even though it was clear even to the insurers that the case had no merit.

The issue under discussion was nothing like what you've described. It was:

what would happen if for instance a fire was started by a problem with one of these units?

[simoncasey]

Thankfully we don't live in the USA. I would have though insurance companies here cannot sue anyone if there were no criminal charges filed by the authorities.

But it is a good point, we want to avoid the scenario that happened earlier in the year when a woman sued her niece for hugging her. She was universally condemned but it was at the insistence of her medical insurance who wouldn't pay for her treatment unless she sued her own family, even though it was clear even to the insurers that the case had no merit.

The issue under discussion was nothing like what you've described. It was:

what would happen if for instance a fire was started by a problem with one of these units?

I know, I was just chatting off topic about the approach of insurance companies in the US forcing people to take civil actions. Just don't hug your skippa too tightly.