A wants to buy car seat cover from B company, A told salesman from B company that he is allergic to woollen products. Salesman from B company recommend A a brand of car seat cover and assure to A that it is free from woollen materials. For assurance, A call C (manufacturer of the car seat cover) and is once assure that the product is free from woollen materials. A decided to buy the car seat cover and he meets with an accident while driving due to allergic from the car seat covers. Once inspection, it was discover that the car seat covers contain woollen material. My question is who should A sue? B company or C manufacturer? Thank you
2007-03-31 21:32:28 · 3 answers · asked by chiwee_tan 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Another does that above amount to a breach in condition or a breach in warranty? Thank you
2007-03-31 23:35:04 · update #1
I, admittedly, am no law expert but have taken a few classes at the high school and college level. I believe in a case like this, you could name both parties in the suit, as both provided you with false information pertaining to the product which caused the allergic reaction and eventual car accident. It is the product manufacturer's job to be knowledgeable and forthcoming with answers about their product, and the vendor's job to be knowledgeable about the product which they are selling.
2007-03-31 21:42:44 · answer #1 · answered by Bill M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the case in question, A should first make sure that he/she has written proof of what B and C had told them about the seat cover being free of woollen materials. Then, having bought the product from B, maybe a distributor of C, A should sue B but must mention in the affidavit the product as that manufactured by C. Once the case comes before a court of law for trial, B and C will together be answerable and liable to prosecution and punishment!
2007-04-01 04:42:49 · answer #2 · answered by Sami V 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that company B has no liability, since one must prove willful or negligent misrepresentation to sucessfuly sue a company, but company B actually believed and had good reason to believe that the product was free from wool, while company C should have known full well (even if it didn't) that the product had wool in it.
2007-04-01 04:55:01 · answer #3 · answered by James 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋