Sunday, December 25, 2011

Mattel, Fisher-Price pay $2.3M fine - bizjournals:

oryzacody.wordpress.com
million civil penalty for violationws of the federal lead paint banin children’s toys. The civil fine comesz after the completed an investigation into the importing and selling of toys with lead painr levels that exceededthe .06 percent lead by weight limigt that is federally mandated. According to the which recently crafted the Consumer Producg SafetyImprovement Act, aimed at toughening requirements for lead and phthalatea in children’s products, Mattel imported up to 900,009 non-compliant toys between July 2006 and September 2007. Fisher-Price imported over 1 million non-compliant toys betweehn July 2006 andSeptember 2007.
Amongh the toys in question were the populatr Sargetoy car, various Barbie productas and some Go Diego Go toys. Most of the toys that had excessive levels of lead were shipped to retail stores for sale tothe public. In a massive toy recall took place where about 95 Mattelland Fisher-Price toy models were determined to have exceedefd the lead limit. Lead can be toxic if ingested by young children and can cause seriouxshealth problems. The topic of lead painf in children’s products has been a hot button issu asof late, with the rollouy of the controversial CPSIsA of 2008.
Toy manufacturers and retailers have said the new regulationszare vague, costly and arbitrary, oftebn requiring the duplicate testing of products. Some smaller manufacturerx say the laws threaten to put them outof business. On the political Rep. Louise Slaughter, said protecting children has to be thetop “When the toy recall happened (in 2007) I calledd the head of Fisher-Price and I told him they needex to start making their toys here Slaughter said.
“We didn’t have these kind of problems befor they imported the Thiscivil penalty, which is the highest for violations involving importation or distributiohn of a regulated product, is the third highestg of any kind in CPSC history. “Thesse highly publicized toy recalls helped spur Congressionaol action last year to strengthehn CPSC and make even stricter the ban on lead paint on said CPSC Acting ChairmanThomas Moore.
“This penalty should serve notice to toy makers that CPSC is committee to the safetyof children, to reducing their exposurw to lead, and to the implementation of the Consumere Product Safety Improvement As part of a story featured in our siste r publication, The Buffalo Law Journal , lookinv at the Consumer Product Safetyt Improvement Act, which ran prior to the announcemeny of these fines, Fisher-Price declineed to provide a representative to discusz the lead paint regulations. Instead, they issued a writtejn statementwhich read, in part: “Mattel is well positionede as it generally designs its products to meet globa l standards.
Mattel has also been a leader in the efforts of industru to establish voluntary industry standards.” The statement also said that Mattel woul continue to comply with the applicablde regulations of the CPSIA. Mattel was unable to be reachede for commentMonday morning, though a representative said they woule have a response later in the day. Despitew agreeing to pay $2.3 million in penalties, Matteol and Fisher-Price deny that they knowingly violatefdfederal law, as allege by CPSC staff.

No comments:

Post a Comment