PEOPLE who say they have been injured due to defective airbags have asked a law firm to investigate the potential for a class action over what has become Australia’s largest product recall.
Shine Lawyers has been contacted by five people who report airbags exploding with “excessive force†in a crash, leaving them with facial scars and bruising. Some spent weeks in hospital and others have been unable to return to work.
Along with these claims, serious concerns have emerged about the effectiveness of Australia’s recall process. Toyota has only managed to examine and where needed, fix, just 29 per cent of 1700 Corollas and Avensis Versos red-flagged in April 2013, when the total number of cars considered at risk was 12,000 and there was no parts shortage.
The number of suspect cars rose to 168,000 last year, then 400,000 last month and now 850,000.
Got a legal drama? Get free, live advice here — NOW
Is your car among those recalled? Find out here
Around the world, 54 million vehicles are affected and the airbag maker, Takata, can no longer produce replacements quickly enough. By Christmas, Toyota hopes to have one-third of the stock needed for recently recalled Yaris models.
And the Takata airbag recall is not alone in failing to gain traction with consumers. Samsung triggered an official alert on 145,000 potentially deadly washing machines in 2013 but is yet to see more than 80,000 of these.
A Toyota spokeswoman effectively blamed customers for the response to the 2013 recall. It and other manufacturers have sent letters to addresses believed to correlate with at-risk vehicles.
“We are relying on customers to book in their cars†for checks, she said.
Carmakers needed to do more to get customers into safer vehicles, either by forcing Takata to work faster or by providing loan cars, said Shine partner Rebecca Jancauskas and Senator Nick Xenophon, who has a record of campaigning for greater product safety and owns a recalled 2006 Toyota Yaris.
“The manufacturers should be treating this as a consumer safety emergency and pulling out all the stops,†Senator Xenophon said. “Would those car company executives want their family members to be driving in cars when there is a real chance of injury or death?â€
Shine’s Ms Jancauskas said questions need to be asked about the testing of products before they hit the Australian market.
Relying on information from carmakers, the Department of Infrastructure, which includes transport, said there has been no report of injury due to defective airbags.
A class action would likely target Takata and carmakers.
Meanwhile, Choice yesterday said Samsung washing machine owners should not rely on repairs and instead should insist on a refund.
‘My airbag wasn’t there to protect me’
NO injuries due to defective airbags? Gaik Teh begs to differ.
On November 27 last year Mr Teh was driving through Sydney’s Dee Why at about 35km/h when another car ploughed into the left-hand side of his 2006 Honda Civic VTI.
He says the airbag exploded, emitting a grey-black smoke and “small, white particlesâ€.
“It didn’t inflate. It was not there to protect me, Mr Teh recalled this week.
His head hit the steering wheel, causing bruising and dislodging a stent inserted in his tear duct two weeks earlier. It had to be removed early as a result, Mr Teh said. He has also suffered whiplash and numbness.
Mr Teh said had the airbag inflated properly “I don’t think I would have got as bad injuriesâ€.
A Honda spokeswoman said that after a phone conversation a “customer relations team specialist†concluded “the airbag deployed correctlyâ€. She added: “Our records indicate the vehicle in question is not subject to any airbag recall.â€
Only Honda Civics made in 2004 and 2005 are currently affected. But Honda did not rule out expanding the recall to include the 2006 model. It has had to do so six times in the past 18 months.
Shine Lawyers said the pace at which the recall is growing — and the fact Mr Teh’s airbag failed in a similar way to red-flagged models — gave reason to query whether the 2006 model should also be subject to further investigation.
Originally published as The safety device that could maim you