3 ms·
The general solution, at least as done by some other countries, is to hold the seller/importer also wholly responsible for upholding all the regulations and war
by PeterisP 3y ago
The general solution, at least as done by some other countries, is to hold the seller/importer also wholly responsible for upholding all the regulations and warranties - so if the manufacturer is bankrupt, or not responding, or overseas, then that's the problem of whoever sold you the lemon and took your money (i.e. Amazon, Temu, Walmart, etc); if they allow shady sellers on their marketplace, that's their loss.
- red-iron-pine 3y agothe main point is that someone has to do the due diligence on the product, and it shouldn't be the consumer, especially when there are few to no remedies.
- PeterisP 3y agoMy point is that liability for consequences determines who (and if) does due diligence. If there are no remedies then customers are on their own, and either they do due diligence themselves or there is no due diligence at all; but as soon as the seller has to bear financial consequences for selling noncompliant product, suddenly they will become very capable of effective due diligence. It's all about the incentives and motivation; companies which are permitted to offload risks to consumers will do so and ignore even trivial measures they can take to reduce these risks.