Salomon recalls Quest Tech inserts

[Vt-Freeheel]

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/n...eply&p=2842557

About time

Official

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salomon has been informed of a potential incompatibility when using Salomon Quest Pro Boots and low tech touring bindings (ex: Dynafit, G3 Onyx model, Plume, ATK Race). The same applies to the touring pads which were designed to allow other Quest boots to be compatible with low tech touring bindings.

Salomon Quest Pro Boots are compatible with the other touring bindings compliant with ISO9523 standard. Salomon started an investigation concerning the compatibility of its Quest Pro Boots with low tech touring bindings, immediately after being alerted to this potential problem and these investigations are still ongoing.

As a precautionary safety measure, Salomon announces that Salomon Quest Boots having a metal tech-fit for low tech touring bindings (Quest Pro boots) should not be used until further notice, and should be immediately returned to Salomon. For returns, contact Salomon at (801) 624-7581. The same return request applies to the touring pads which were designed to allow other Quest boots to be compatible with low tech touring bindings.

There are very limited quantities of these boots and pads in the market. While most of these products were distributed without charge for trial purposes, a very small number may have been sold. In either case, the Quest Pro boots and touring pads should be returned to Salomon by retailers and skiers. Appropriate replacements or credits will be arranged.

Any further questions should be directed to Salomon customer service at the number above, or Mike Aicher, Senior Product Category Manager at 801-624-7568



Salomon USA
2030 Lincoln Ave
Ogden, UT 84401

[ectreeskier11]

bout time.

[dynodonkeyaltabird]

finally. i hope this is good news for tc...

[samthaman]

low tech ?

they work a lot better than any other touring binding.

[XXX-er]

http://www.wildsnow.com/794/first-pr...ding-low-tech/


that WAS the original name ...not a description of performance

[leroy jenkins]

So what's the problem? Prerelease? Don't release?

[mtnbiker/boarder]

well at least they finally reconize that there is a problem but in the end it doesn't fix TC's knee back to normal......its a damn shame that someone had to get seriuosly injuried for them to get it.......VIBES again TC......thanks VTFree.......

[samthaman]

http://www.wildsnow.com/794/first-pr...ding-low-tech/


that WAS the original name ...not a description of performance

no shit, i guess you learn something every day

[thin cover]

So what's the problem? Prerelease? Don't release?

[ame="http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191256"]Saloman Quest Tech inserts failure thread - Teton Gravity Research Forums[/ame]

[eug]

So what's the problem? Prerelease? Don't release?

http://www.wildsnow.com/2888/salomon...tings-failure/

[Professor]

finally. i hope this is good news for tc...

Wont change anything for him. You cant use evidence of a recall as proof of negligence in most states. Otherwise, companies couldnt do a recall without admitting negligence. What it may do is keep others from getting hurt, which is the whole point of a recall.

I wish TC the best of luck with the legal battle he will have ahead of him.

[LightRanger]

Wont change anything for him. You cant use evidence of a recall as proof of negligence in most states. Otherwise, companies couldnt do a recall without admitting negligence. What it may do is keep others from getting hurt, which is the whole point of a recall.

I wish TC the best of luck with the legal battle he will have ahead of him.

Of course, and you may already know this, the standard for a defective product is strict liability. A (this being a hypothetical) negligence claim would be thrown in as well, but strict liability has a much lower threshold in terms of required proof. This is very helpful to TC in any kind of legal negotiations/proceedings. See here for a good explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product...rict_liability

[tyfalk]

saw this on Lou Dawson's website sketchy...

[Professor]

^^^ You are right about the strict liability, however we all know that "strict liability" is not as simple as it sounds. Depending on the state (like Utah) you may also have to deal with the issue of alternatives as well as many other tough subjects. My only point was that TC likely still has a rough road ahead of him if this gets litigated. These kinds of claims are never just "open and shut" unfortunately.

[XXX-er]

a child can see the Teck fitting Salomon used was flaky and not up to the task

do either of you lawyers have any opinion as to what salomons liability is ?

If you read all the posting on the incident salomon was aware these toe blocks have problems,possibly for other reasons than the tech fittings pulling out (the need to ski them in touring mode) ,how are Salomon liable or how would someone go about claiming damages if possible ... the answer or anything you could contribute would interest me far more than reading another "fuck salomon post"

[Professor]

Every case, every state varies. But unless you were actually injured by these there are no real damages. If you bought them and they are recalled, you may get a new pair or a refund. Again, every situation is different.

As for Salomon's liability to TC, not touching that with a ten foot pole. I am not his attorney and only know what I have read on the internet, which is far cry from what will be proven in court.

[XXX-er]

you are the second lawyer to give that opinion ...I had to try

[Professor]

^^^ Good luck getting anyone to give you a real answer. One other variable to note is whether this is even a U.S. case. I notice you are in BC, but I have not payed any attention to where TC is located, or to where most of these were sold and how the recall will play out. It will be interesting to see what occurs. Personally I am just glad I dont do any personal injury work anymore.

[XXX-er]

Yeah you don't really win till you get the$$$ in the bank, I am thinking TC is colorado or SFT but 99% sure in the US

would the action be brought about in the state where he bought the boots (which could be different from where he lived due to mailorder/interent ?) or where the boots blew up on him

It sounds like there are <3 doz boots out there and 2 or 3 have failed

[Professor]

Again, every state is different regarding jurisdiction. He likely has multiple venue options. I am sure he/his attorney will research all their options and go from there. As for the others that have failed, unless the folks using them were hurt, the only damages would be minimal (cost of ticket, gas, etc.)

[byates1]

tc/east coast/ mt. wash. NH is where the accident occurred