Morts Musings

OK, so on the face of it this piece might seem a little hypocritical after my last, but actually I think it’s a good example of the sort of thing which consumers should be protected from. In this case, bizarrely, it was sofas which proved to be a source of hidden danger.

This piece from the BBC looks at a long running legal case over the use of the fungicide dimethyl fumarate on leather sofas made by a number of firms in China, & sold by UK retailers, including big names like, Land of Leather, Walmsleys and Argos. The sofas were apparently treated with the chemical to stop them developing mould while in transport & storage, however many people who bought the affected sofas developed painful skin rashes, as well as chest and eye problems in some cases. The chemical has now been banned by the EU, and the big name retailers who sold the sofas were all quite prompt when it came to issuing recalls & offering refunds.

Anyway, it seems that it’s pretty much old news now, and that those affected have received reparation, but after a couple of comments on my last piece* I wanted to make it clear that I’m not a completely heartless git. I do firmly believe that private companies can’t be allowed to operate under a completely lassiez faire system; The prime motive of business is to make profit, & history has shown countless times that, when unregulated, some businesses will put the bottom line before the quality, or safety, of their goods. Having said that, as an utter cynic, I think any consumer who doesn’t exercise the caveat emptor spirit is probably a little foolish.

In anycase this is the sort of hidden danger which a consumer can’t reasonably be expected to anticipate by exercising common sense, and which they should be protected from. Ok, so this is a pretty clear cut case, people looking to buy quality sofas have a reasonable right to expect that they shouldn’t be laced with unpleasant toxins. Whereas warnings about not letting heavy furniture fall on children should be pretty redundant, since, to my mind it’s rather obvious advice. Obviously there are grey areas inbetween these two examples, & I suppose those are where the slippery slope towards an over-protective nanny state starts.

Hopefully, this sets the record straight on the view I’m expressing, i.e. that people should be expected (& given the freedom) to exercise personal responsibility where possible, not, that we should live in an unregulated world where unethical manufacturers can endanger the lives of consumers if it means cutting production costs.

*No, I didn’t publish them, I’m fine with people criticising my views, but I’m not going to publish streams of profanity, or waste my time editing such comments to make them work place friendly.

Tags: Home & style, Rants, Weird stuff

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 10th, 2009 at 6:55 pm and is filed under Home and style, Rants, Weird stuff. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.