Monday, December 1, 2008
Carters, isn't ONE baby's injury enough to start this recall? We have received numerous emails from parents nationwide as well as other countries sharing their own horrible experience with their babies wearing these Carters tagless clothes. Enough is enough! Recall this merchandise and save other families and their babies from enduring this preventable injury.
Friday, November 14, 2008
We made the effort of writing the Executive staff of Carters and only received responses to placate our frustration, not a response of action. The CEO interview in ZRecs just further exasperates us for these reasons: They are sticking to boilerplate responses, falling back on statistical quality thresholds based on fallable data, and they continue to ignore the fact that babies are suffering from their products.
We will continue our quest to compel Carters to do the right thing.
ZRecs interviewed Carters CEO, Michael Casey:
Being on the record, Casey surprisingly provides more information and color into what went into the creation of these tagless labels and their corporate stance on the whole situation.
We do take issue and differ with the terminology Casey tries to clarify with ZRecs. We stand by our position and our pediatrician's diagnosis that Ava did in fact suffer a CHEMICAL BURN, not contact dermatitis. Our pediatrician, a well-known Doctor and child safety expert, as well as his experienced colleagues all diagnosed Ava had in fact suffered a chemical burn from these tagless clothes. Additionally, Zrecs asks Casey why Carters won't recall the clothes and Casey's response, "[t]he level of inquiries on this... even now, has not been significant in terms of its relation to the total number of our garments. It is some fraction of 1% of the garments from the Fall 07 line." So I guess 1% of inquires or the injured babies is not enough to warrant a recall...wow, enlightening to know that this "trusted" company of children's clothing does not think it's serious enough to begin a formal recall. Truly disappointing, but not surprising to hear their corporate position on this matter and very sad for any baby and family that has been affected by Carters tagless clothes. We'll be waiting for more updates on the nationwide class action....
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Class Action Lawsuit (click on Ava's picture on the left to see the video):
Viewers' Responses to the NBC Investigative Stories on Carters tagless clothes (click on the picture with "restitution" highlighted):
We are so relieved this story and all of our experiences are finally getting the coverage it requires. Carters, we hope you are watching; these were once your consumers whose trust you had, but whose babies you have injured. We look forward to the days and months to come as Lindsey Webb, the CA class action plaintiff, the other parent-plaintiffs nationwide and their legal team push their class action ahead...how will Carters respond? Can they really continue to keep their heads in the sand and stand by their corporate position that a recall is not necessary?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
I will get a copy of the complaint uploaded soon, but some of the highlights are below. If you would like a copy emailed to you, please email me at: email@example.com
The Complaint cites some factual background with published reports from research groups on the unique qualites of babies which we found surprising and extremely informative:
"Children are more susceptible to chemical toxicity than adults" and "infants have a relatively greater surface area of skin than adults, thereby increasing their potential dermal absorption of certain compounds." "This higher rate of intake means that children will receive higher doses of whatever contaminants are present..."
"The thin skin of a newborn may well be more permeable to specific chemicals than the skin of an adult. Compounding this fact, the surface area of a child's skin relative to body weight is greater than adults, such that the potential dose of a chemical following dermal exposure is likely to be about 3 times greater than infants than adults."
The complaint's alleges these legal theories (details of each in the complaint):
- Strict products liability - Defect in design or manufacture
- Strict products liability - Failure to Warn
- Misleading & Deceptive Advertising
- Untrue Advertising
- Unlawful Business Acts & Practices
- Unfair Business Acts & Practices
- Fraudulent Business Acts & Practices
- Breach of Express & Implied Warranties
- Intentional Misrepresentation / Fraud
- Negligent Misrepresentation
- Unjust Enrichment
- Negligence & Negligence Per Se
- Violation of Magnuson-Moss Act
- Injunctive & Declaratory Relief
Thank you to this plaintiff and her team for taking this legal stance and demanding Carters finally do the "right thing" for everyone involved.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
We appreciate everyone's support and collectively, we hope all of us can bring more media attention and public awareness to the hazards of these tagless clothes. Where the media stories and our demand for a formal recall remain ignored, some parents are seeking redress through legal resources. Perhaps that is what is necessary for Carters to own up and stand behind their corporate promise to "make trusted" clothes for our kids. At this point, our trust is irrevocably shattered.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Just today, a victim told us she asked a Carters store manager if she knew about the tagless safety issue and yesterday's advisory and statements from CPSC and Carters. The manager of Carters retail store had no idea! Carters: you have a duty to effectively communicate to your distributors and especially your own stores. You can not stop with this advisory. Communicate effectively and comprehensively, be compassionate and fair with your victims, and recall your products.