April 9, 2009
Check it out Rath, Austrailain company sued over defective pool table. And you always say how you invented everything.
Lawsuit: $73,000 Glass Pool Table Not Up to Scratch
By ALAN FARNHAM | Good Morning America – Tue, Sep 25, 2012 10:11 AM EDTEmailShare0PrintRELATED CONTENTView PhotoLawsuit: $73,000 Glass Pool Table Not Up to Scratch (ABC News)
The buyer of a futuristic, $73,000 glass pool table claims he's been snookered. In a complaint filed in Orange Country, Calif., superior court, the buyer alleges that the maker, Nottage Design of Australia, neglected to disclose one important fact about the table:
Play on it with anything but specially-coated, custom-made balls, and you scratch the glass.
Brant Martin, a Dallas attorney representing the buyer (identified in the suit only as Desert Beach, an LLC) says his client learned this fact the hard way: He bought a $73,000 custom G-1 glass-top table for home use, played on it with "a standard set of pool balls, the kind that might be found in any pool hall," and discovered to his horror that this left the table "scuffed, scratched, damaged—essentially destroyed."
The suit says shipping materials that accompanied the table included a sealed envelope with an inconspicuous notation saying that the balls shipped by Nottage were specially made for use with the table—but that this amounted to the "hiding" of so material a warning.
The buyer feels an injustice has been done, says Martin. The complaint seeks $219,000 in damages. Nottage, asked for comment by ABC News, did not respond.
Nottage's website describes the table's glass surface as protected by Vitrik, a proprietary coating "which allows the balls to roll silently at a near identical rate to a standard cloth table… It's highly durable, completely non-toxic and is transparent." The site says the custom balls it sells are coated with a special finish "compatible" with Vitrik. "Please only use these balls," it advises.
Martin says this warning was added only after his client ruined his table and complained to the company. Prior to that, his client alleges, Nottage's website left buyers with the impression they could play with standard pool balls.
The suit claims that at the time the buyer researched and negotiated his purchase, Nottage never once mentioned that its tables could only be used with its own specially-coated balls.
Jesse Rothberg, store manager at Blatt Billiards in Greenwich Village in Manhattan, says he is familiar with the G-1 glass table, which he first saw at a trade show in Las Vegas. He's also seen a copy of the lawsuit.
The table, he says, "didn't look very viable" to him. "I shot a couple of balls on it, because it was there for the exhibit. We all had the same reaction: nothing spectacular. I wasn't thrilled with the action or the balls."
Blatt, in business since 1923, sells traditional slate-topped, fabric-covered models. In the pantheon of pricey pool tables, what could $73,000 buy you?
"Something pretty spectacular," says Rothberg—a nice antique. Then again, you could get what's in the store's front window: A one-of-a-kind gothic job in teak. Price: $250,000.
Expensive, true; but you play on it with regular old balls.
Also [email protected] on Twitter, become a fan on Facebook Top Stories »Waseem Daker Trial: Ex-Husband and Victim Fought Day of MurderFlorida Alligator Pool Parties the Latest for Kids' BirthdaysOregon Family Thanks Teen for Rescuing Boy From House FireEconomic Trend Lines, for Now, Favoring ObamaRomney, Obama Descend on Battleground OhioNews For YouHeartbroken Tom Cruise Misses Daughter Suri, Friend SaysTom Hanks Uses Emmy as Hood OrnamentEmmy Awards 2012: Who is Lauren Parsekian?Sarah Michelle Gellar, Freddie Prinze, Jr. Welcome Second ChildPamela Anderson Voted Off 'Dancing With the Stars: All-Stars' in Week 1
April 9, 2009
There you go.
Um, yhe not sure how this will turn out but will be interesting to see.
Im Sure that if the product was sold in the USA it will be subject to u.s laws on product disclosure.
( regardless of how silly the u.s laws are )
By that i mean .... we all remember the story of the couple who bought a camper van, & then put it into cruse control, only to have the car drive of the road & down a cliff, ........ the couple then sued the car maker for no telling them in the manual that you still need to drive the car when the car is in cruse control, as the car will not drive itself.
( i can't recall how many millions they got in the court payout. )
the other difference between the usa & Australia ............ the usa has a no faults system ...... Australia does not.
In the usa, anybody can sue anybody, & with a no win no fee lawyer, if you sue a company or person and lose your case. .......... You can go home and pretend nothing has happened, if you win you get a payout and celebrate.
In Australian, you can sue who ever you want, but you must have a real case, if you lose .... because your case fails, or is misleading or fraudulent ....... or you just lose.
You are required to pay ALL the court costs, your legal fees, the other persons/company's legal fees, & the courts costs. which can add up to many thousands, to millions of dollars.
So, it will all come down to what laws were broken .... & the laws of what country.
So if the case is tried in the usa or in Australia will make a real difference to the facts involved.
Australia's disclosure laws are different to those of the usa's.
We don't pander & cater to/for stupidity.
If you do something stupid .... that's your problem.
Anybody who thinks that heavy, solid, ceramic billiard balls, knocked around on a glass table, wont chip, or scratch the glass is clearly, a fool.
& im not sure i like his chances.
But im sure if the case is tried in the usa .... his chances of winning will be much grater.
the pool table looks crap.
So see even Australian's can make crap,
But only an American would buy it. 😀
April 9, 2009
Most Users Ever Online: 288
Currently Browsing this Page:
Guest Posters: 2
Newest Members:Toby, ungoliant, Jay Pesek, ketty, Keroro, promoocodes, kelvin nebs, Joanna, Melanie, chetney sessoms
Administrators: John Greenewald: 570, blackvault: 1776