at homologous safety risk – Business Insider Italia


A distracted and bungling government. And a Parliament unable to intervene. They are the two protagonists who have given birth to a sacrosanct law – the one that forces parents to have car seats with anti-abandon devices – in the worst way. A short circuit that does not really care about the health of children, but that exposes their parents to the risk of fines and penalties for not being equipped with a device that does not yet exist. In the general confusion the executive did not notice at least two problems. The first: in manufacturers' warehouses there are not enough pieces to put on the market. The second: car seat manufacturers recognize only their accessories as homologated. Translated: buying an anti-abandon sensor of the A brand and mounting it on a B-brand seat can lead to failure to recognize the seat's approval. With all the consequences this could have from an insurance point of view.

For example Peg Perego explains that "the abandonment devices could interfere with the safety of the car seat in the event of an accident". And for this reason the company "cannot assume any responsibility regarding the behavior of its own anti-abandon device with a car seat of another brand ”. Translated the company's Memo Pad must be installed only on the products of the parent company. Inglesina moves on the same wavelength. Not only because it has called its own anti-abandon device like its competitors (Ally Pad), but because it recognizes publicly – on its website – that it is theonly certified product for Inglesina ”. As if to say that the others would compromise the holding of the seat. However, even this company denies the possibility of using it with other brands: "The pillow – explains the company – can be used on all restraint systems (car seats and cradles) Inglesina". Obviously Ally Pad is untraceable in any store as the Peg Perego Memo Pad and the homologous product of Infant Comfort cannot be found.

The annex to the circular clearly states that "in the interaction with the vehicle or with a special restraint system, the device must not in any way alter the homologation characteristics". The problem is that none of the manufacturers takes responsibility for the use of another product. And installing any of the universal devices on the market is likely to cause the safety seat to be lost. Consequently, in the event of an accident, the seat manufacturer would not respond because the object would have been modified with respect to the original form. Which is why Tippy, Bebe Reminder and Remmy risk being cut off from the market because they are not recognized by the manufacturers of child seats. Chicco declares its easy tech that attaches to safety belts as universal, but the interpretation by the producers is still to be seen.

Then there is the extreme case of seats Cybex: the German company will not put on the market additional accessories, but will integrate the anti-abandonment system on new products. For the moment, however, he has not made it known whether he intends to approve competitive products. At the Ministry of Transport the mistake is clear to everyone, but to remedy it is not simple: an amendment is needed to a text relating to the highway code, but there is nothing on the table.

Source link



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

thirteen − 10 =