December 2016

$50 Million IKEA Furniture Tip-Over Settlement

IKEA agreed to pay $50 Million to settle lawsuits involving furniture tip-overs of the MALM dresser that killed toddlers in Pennsylvania, Washington and Minnesota.

Apart from providing compensation to the families, the settlement called for substantial donations to three children’s hospitals and funding to Shane’s Foundation, a non-profit providing education on child safety with a focus on furniture tip-over education and prevention.

IKEA also agreed to change its policies to only sell dressers that meet or exceed safety standards and to increase awareness of the danger of furniture tip-overs. Because of the lawsuit the following warning now appears on IKEA’s website:

IKEA dresser tip-over

The terms of the IKEA settlement prove that, despite the stigma of Personal Injury Lawsuits and Personal Injury Lawyers, good things can result from Personal Injury Litigation.

The IKEA settlement will bring attention to the hidden danger of furniture tip-overs and the terms of the settlement required IKEA to change its policies to enhance the safety of its products. In addition, the huge amount of the settlement should incentivize all other furniture manufacturers to focus on tip-over prevention or else be at risk for future legal claims.

Furniture Tip-Over Danger

I have two children in college who were toddlers long ago, but I still remember them using furniture to pull themselves up and trying to climb on almost anything in the house. What I don’t remember, though, is having any awareness of the danger of furniture (like dressers or book cases) or heavy TV’s tipping over which could seriously injure or kill a toddler.

What I have learned now from research into the IKEA Settlement is that furniture tip-over injuries and deaths are all too common, but, luckily are also easily preventable.

Furniture Tip-Over Statistics

Every 15 Minutes someone in the US is injured by a furniture tip-over

Every 2 weeks a child dies when furniture or a TV tips over

The estimated number of ER visits per year for tip-over incidents is 33,000

91% of furniture tip-over fatalities occur in the home

2/3 of the furniture tip-over fatalities involve toddlers

Furniture Tip-Over Injuries and Deaths are 100% Preventable

The good news is that furniture and TV tip-over injuries and deaths are 100% preventable. Proper anchoring devices should be provided by the furniture or TV manufacturers and, if not, can be purchased on line or at a local store.

If you follow the anchoring instructions carefully and properly anchor your furniture and TV’s, the tip-over hazard can be eliminated.

For more information on the furniture tip-over danger and how to make your home safe from it visit Anchorit.gov.

Tim Rayne - Personal Injury Lawyer — Tim Rayne – Personal Injury Lawyer

Tim Rayne is a Personal Injury Lawyer with the Law Firm of MacElree Harvey. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping to educate the public on safety issues and insurance choices. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester, Pennsylvania and can be reached at 6108400124 or trayne@macelree.com.

In the Philadelphia case of Bialec v. AIG, a Pennsylvania court found in favor of an injured driver of his employer’s vehicle by ruling that his employer’s cancellation of Underinsured Motorist Coverage (UIM) was invalid because the employer had not given the employee prior notice of the change. This was a significant vicory for injured drivers of company vehicles which will help to ensure that employees and their families receive fair compensation after a Pennsylvania car accident.

Underinsured Motorist Coverage

The purpose of Pennsylvania Underinsured Motorist Coverage (UIM) is to protect someone injured in a car accident caused by someone else who does not have sufficient car insurance to cover all of the harms and losses. UIM coverage is purchased for the vehicle a driver is driving or riding in and kicks in on top of the Liability Coverage of the person who caused the accident in order to help ensure that the injured person is fully compensated.

UIM Coverage can be crucial because many Pennsylvania drivers only carry the minimum amount of Liability Coverage required by law, which is $15,000. If an injured person is not covered by UIM, he or she often is not fully compensated for all damages that arise from a Pennsylvania car accident such as medical bills, lost wages, disability, pain and suffering.

Facts of the Bialec v. AIG Case

In the Bialec case, John Bialec worked for Verizon and was driving a Verizon vehicle when he was seriously injured in a car accident caused by another driver. The other driver had only a minimal Liability Policy of $15,000 and Bialec suffered serious injuries so, without applicable UIM Coverage, Bialec would not be fully compensated for his injuries and damages.

Verizon had cancelled its UIM Coverage before the car accident but had not provided notice to Bialec. Therefore, when Bialec filed a UIM claim, the insurance company denied coverage stating that Verizon had cancelled the UIM Coverage.

The Court Ruling Regarding Underinsurance Coverage

Bialec’s attorneys challenged the validity of the UIM Coverage cancellation and one of the arguments was that it was against Public Policy in Pennsylvania for an employer to be able to cancel UIM Coverage without having notified its employees who would be impacted by the decision.

In considering the Public Policy argument, the Judge indicated that there were two competing Public Policies in play. The first was that the Pennsylvania insurance laws were supposed to accomplish the goal of containing car insurance costs. The second Public Policy was that the car insurance laws were to provide maximum feasible restoration to accident victims for their injuries and damages.

In order to accomplish those two competing goals, insurance companies had an obligation to offer UIM Coverage on every Pennsylvania car insurance policy, but policy holders had the right to choose whether to purchase or waive the UIM Coverage. The law required very precise rules to be followed in order for a waiver to be valid, the purpose of which was to make sure the policy holder was “knowingly and voluntarily” waiving the coverage.

In the Bialec case, the Judge had a huge problem with the fact that Verizon’s drivers had not been informed of the company’s decision to waive UIM Coverage. The Judge found that Verizon’s decision not to tell the drivers resulted in them not knowing that they were not covered by UIM, them not having the opportunity to insist on being covered and them not having the opportunity to purchase alternative coverage. In short, without notice to the individual drivers, there was not knowing or voluntary waiver on the part of the drivers who were relying on the UIM coverage to protect them in the event of a car accident.

In the end, the Judge ruled that Verizon’s waiver of UIM Coverage for its commercial fleet without notice to its employees was void.

This was a huge victory for John Bialec and other drivers of commercial vehicles. Although just a trial court ruling that might be appealed, the Judge’s reasoning is sound. It makes perfect sense that drivers who risk their lives on behalf of their employers on the roads of Pennsylvania should have proper notice of any plans to cancel the insuance coverage that protects them so that they can make appropriate arrangements if their employer is making a business decision to reduce coverage and put them and their families at risk.

Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyer with the Law Firm of MacElree Harvey, Ltd. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of Pennsylvania car accidents receive fair compensation from insurance companies. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester and offers free consultations. Tim handles all cases on a Contingent Fee Basis meaning that there are no fees unless he wins compensation for you and your family. Contact Tim Rayne at trayne@macelree.com or 6108400124.

Tim Rayne

Pennsylvania Car Accident & Personal Injury Lawyer