United Technologies Corporation’s (UTC - Kidde/Chubb/Quell) Failures to Disclose - Emails

World Fire Safety Foundation/UTC Emails June 2008 ~ May 2009

D N U

C R E

S N O

C U TR

N O TI

© The World Fire Safety Foundation

First Published: June, 2013

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

1 of 9

This document will be completed by 15 June, 2013.

Summary
‘United Technologies Corporation’s (UTC)  Failures to Disclose - Emails’ is one of a series of Special Reports (see link below) exposing the root cause of the problem with the ionization type of smoke alarms in hundreds of millions of homes around the world - flawed Smoke Alarm Standards. Despite repeated requests, UTC, the world’s largest ionization smoke alarm manufacturer, continues to fail to disclose the level of visible smoke their ionization smoke alarms activate under Australian Government (CSIRO) Standards testing. This document contains correspondence between the World Fire Safety Foundation and UTC. This document is designed to be read together with: ‘UTC Failures to Disclose’ document: www.SmokeAlarmWarning.org/utc Thank you. Sincerely,
Special Report

United Technologies Corporation (UTC - Kidde/Chubb/Quell) Failures to Disclose

The World Fire Safety Foundation Adrian Butler
Chairman, Co-Founder, Former Fire Fighter

NSW, AUSTRALIA
SAFormalAcknowledgementOfFlawedAS3786May13.pdf | Updated: 13May-05:26am - Check for Updates: www.Scribd.com/doc/140862221 1 of 3

Read together with: ‘UTC’s Failures to Disclose’

The World Fire Safety Foundation (WFSF) is a self-funded, Non-Profit Organization founded in March 2000. We do not sell anything, solicit or accept donations.

SPECIAL REPORTS www.Scribd.com/collections/4257876/Can-Smoke-Alarm-Standards-be-Trusted

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

2 of 9

On 16 December 2008 10:51, Adrian Butler <email address removed> wrote: Attn: Supercheap Auto Glen McGregor, Area Manager David Ajala, CEO Alison Hancock, Manager (Alison, please forward to Mr McGregor and Mr Ajala) c.c. Steve Berman, Managing Partner, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP Damian Scattini, Practice Group Leader, Slater & Gordon Neil Roberts, Queensland Minister for Emergency Services Lee Johnson, Commissioner, Queensland Fire & Rescue Service Graham Thom, Superintendent, Queensland Fire & Rescue Service Geoff Garrett, CEO, CSIRO Adam Liberman, Senior Legal Counsel, CSIRO David Isaac, Standards Australia Committee FP2 (for distribution to FP2 Committee Members) et al RE: Ionization Smoke Alarm Class Action - Summary Document Attached Good Morning Alison Thank you for your time yesterday afternoon. Further to our discussion a document summarising the current US Ionization Smoke Alarm Class Action Law Suit is attached. This document will help Supercheap Auto understand why the World Fire Safety Foundation believes the SCA9 and Chubb (i.e. Quell branded) ionization smoke alarms you are currently selling are not fit for purpose. Compelling CSIRO evidence indicates, that in the case of smouldering fires, the type of fire that commonly kills, ionization smoke alarms do not activate until a "dangerously high and totally unacceptable" level of smoke. www.YouTube.com/watch?v=2OGO1updHJA Last night I spoke to Mr David Laundry, National Consumer Manager, Consumer Fire Safety Products, from Chubb's Sydney offices at length. We discussed issues relating to my Quell branded ionization smoke alarms purchased from your Supercheap Auto Burleigh store yesterday morning. I asked Mr laundry: "Will your SA502 or SA602 ionization smoke alarms SAFELY detect a smouldering fire - the type of fire that commonly kills?" Alison if you contacted your car manufacturer because you had a problem with your brakes and asked: "Will my car SAFELY stop when the brakes are applied?" Would you be concerned if your question was avoided, not answered? A more damming question about my new ionization smoke alarms I will require an answer to is: "What is the level of smoke that my ionization smoke alarms activated at under the CSIRO's, smoke alarm sensitivity testing in accordance with clause 7 (e) and (f) of Australian Standard 2362.17 (AS2362.17, the smoke sensitivity testing standard is called up by the Australian Smoke Alarm Standard, AS3786) Your CEO, Mr Ajala, may wish to ask Mr Laundry and or the CSIRO these same questions - Mr Laundry is available on (Phone number removed). Mr Adam Liberman from the CSIRO is available on (Phone number removed). The CSIRO listed Supercheap's own branded SCA9 ionization smoke alarm after they conducted scientific testing on the device last year. I have several other very interesting questions Mr Ajala may wish to ask the CSIRO. The World Fire Safety Foundation is currently investigating if Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro's Class Action Law Suit may be extended into Australia. Supercheap Auto has a window of opportunity to do the right thing by it's customers and make a name for itself by doing what no one in the fire industry appears as yet, to have the foresight or integrity to do... To immediately stop selling and recall ionization smoke alarms from all residential applications. Why? Because empirical evidence indicates that since 1993, the CSIRO's (and SSL before them) own scientific testing proves they have NOT safely activated in the most common type of fire that kills. Once Supercheap investigates you will discover why Mr Steve Berman, the Managing Partner of Hagens Berman Sobol and Shapiro stated in the attached document:

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

3 of 9

"We had a client contact us with a story that was truly stunning." What is so "truly stunning" is the statistical probability that most of the recipients of this message will have ionization smoke alarms supposedly protecting their familys. This begs the last and most important question: "Why hasn't the public been adequately warned about ionization smoke alarms and the safe, available and affordable alternatives so they may exercise their right to chose between savings and safety and thereby properly protect their families from fire? Given the above, I respectfully request that you bypass Supercheap's bureaucracy so this matter is brought to the immediate attention of your CEO, Mr David Ajala as soon as possible. Thank you. Sincerely Adrian Butler Chairman World Fire Safety Foundation Gold Coast, Qld, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 409 782 166 - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- "It is truly alarming. It is so stunning and so horrifying and it's so hard to believe that it's something that people just don't know..." - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

4 of 9

Smoke Detector Class Action - Is Your Family Safe?
“The majority of smoke detectors sold today do not detect the type of fire that is most likely to kill you; a smouldering fire.” Tom Clarke, Investigative Journalist, from the film ‘Silent Alarms’, CTV, Jan 2000. (See below)

Find out how you may have been misled/deceived, why your family’s lives may be at risk, and if you live in the USA, how you may seek compensation. Please forward this document to everyone you know - especially your local fire fighters.
Adrian Butler, Former Fire Fighter. Chairman, World Fire Safety Foundation, Qld, Australia, 15 Dec 2008

Where there’s smoke there is fire
Posted by Steve Berman - June 18 2008

We had a client contact us with a story that was truly stunning. In short, our suit calls into question whether ionization-only technology – what makes most smoke detectors work -- does a very poor job of detecting slow, smoldering fires. Another technology using photo-electric devices does a much better job, according to our suit...

Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP

Steve Berman, Managing Partner

“This could be a major case that could make millions of Americans safer.”

From the Filed Complaint

(filed June 18 2008):

Introduction This proposed national class action is brought on behalf of American homeowners and renters who have purchased stand-alone “ionization-only” smoke detectors. Early warning is key to surviving smoldering fires – the deadliest kind of home fire. “Ionization-only” smoke detectors – those detectors that use only ionization technology to sense the presence of smoke – are slow to warn, if they warn at all, of smoldering fires, which typically occur while the occupants are sleeping. Defendants, three of the largest manufacturers of ionization smoke detectors sold in the United States, fail to adequately warn consumers of this dangerous limitation of “ionization-only” devices even though almost 90% of all stand-alone smoke detectors sold in the United States use this detection technology. When consumers purchase standalone smoke detectors, Defendants fail to adequately advise consumers that alternative “photoelectric” devices provide earlier warning – typically by hours – against the most dangerous fires, that the devices are priced similarly to ionization-only” devices, and that “ionization-only” devices should not be used alone in any home. By reason of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, millions of American homeowners have purchased fire-alarm systems, not knowing that their purchase inadequately protects their home and families against deadly fire.” (page 1, emphasis added) ... Defendants’ conduct described herein constitutes prohibited practices, unfair, deceptive and unconscionable conduct under the Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Acts of of 26 states and the District of Columbia... (clause 80, page 31 emphasis added)

‘Silent Alarms’ - “You might be thinking that you’re ok? . . . well think again!”
By now you might be thinking that you’re ok because when you burn toast in your kitchen, what happens? The smoke detector goes off and that must mean that every thing’s fine and that you're safe ... well think again! 1. Most detectors work on a principal called ionization. A current of ions flows between two metal plates. 2. When smoke particles enter the chamber the flow is interrupted and the alarm is triggered. 3. Toast and kitchen smoke generally produce lots of small particles, just the right combination to block the flow of ions. 5. ... are large and few in number and they often don’t interrupt the flow and so the alarm does not sound.

4. But smoke particles from say the fire on your average couch ...

Note: Transcript and images from ‘Silent Alarms’. This award-winning documentary aired on Canadian national TV (CTV) in January 2000

Seek Compensation - Join the Law Suit or find out more at: www.hbsslaw.com/smokedetectors
Note: All information in this document is within the public domain ClassActionSummary.pdf Last Updated: 16Dec08 WFSFCAS08

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

5 of 9

On 22 December 2008 22:31, Adrian Butler <email address removed> wrote:
Attention: Mrs Martha Berker, Senior Legal Council, Chubb Fire Safety Ltd c.c. Mr David Ajala, CEO, Supercheap Auto Mr David Isaac, Standards Australia, FP2 Committee Member Mr David Laundry, National Product Manager, Chubb Fire Safety Ltd RE: CSIRO AS1670.1 Test Data Disclosure - Chubb Smoke Alarms Dear Mrs Berek On Friday of last week I had a long discussion with your National Product Manager, Mr David Laundry about safety concerns with Chubb's ionisation smoke alarms. Subsequent to my discussion I called your office and left a message so we could discuss this matter. Last week I purchased two ionisaton smoke alarms from a Supercheap Auto store in Burleigh Queensland. They are both Chubb alarms carrying the Quell Fire & Safety brand mark, i.e. Quell SA502 and SA602 models. I seek confirmation that my SA502 and SA602 ionisation smoke alarms are fit for purpose. Both alarms carry a logo on the front and back of the packaging stating "Know you're safe - Trust Quell". Please advise, in writing, within 14 days: 1. Will my SA502 and SA602 smoke alarm/s safely activate in a slow smouldering fire, the type of fire that commonly kills? Australian Standard 1670.1 is the testing standard called up by the Australian Smoke Alarm Standard, AS3786. AS1670.1 sensitivity testing is currently performed by the CSIRO. It is a requirement of AS1670.1 that the CSIRO discloses to the Manufacturer/Supplier the level of smoke at which my SA502 and SA602 alarms activated in their sensitivity testing. Please advise, in writing, within 14 days: 2. At what level of smoke (i.e. light obscuration per metre) did my SA502 and SA602 smoke alarm/s activate in accordance with clauses 7 (e) and (f) of Australian Standard 1670.1? Thank You. Sincerely Adrian Butler Chairman World Fire Safety Foundation Gold Coast, Qld, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 409 782 166

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

6 of 9

On 24 December 2008 11:19, Adrian Butler <email address removed> wrote to "Nair, Sawan UTCFS" Hi Sawan Thanks for your message below. Supercheap Auto do market Quell branded Chubb product. However Supercheap's SCA9 ionisation smoke alarm appears to have nothing to do with Chubb (see attached CSIRO Product Listing Data Sheet). The product brochure that the Supercheap SCA9 comes with states, on page 6: "Another quality product by: PSA Products Pty Ltd" The CSIRO's Product Listing Data Sheet (attached) lists Kidde as the manufacturer. Please advise if Kidde sell the same smoke alarm identical to the SCA9 alarm sold by Supercheap (i.e. branded differently) and if so what is the model name and number. I am wanting to find out if Supercheap did a joint listing with either PSA or Kidde or if Supercheap paid for the CSIRO to subject their SCA9, Kidde manufactured, ionisation smoke alarm through the CSIRO's complete smoke alarm testing. Thanks for your help on Christmas Eve! Cheers Adrian Butler Chairman, World Fire Safety Foundation Gold Coast, Qld, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 409 782 166 ________________________________________________________________ On 12/24/08, Nair, Sawan UTCFS <Email Address removed> wrote: Hi Adrian, The office you need to contact is CHUBB in NSW. I tried contacting the person in charge but he was on leave. So unfortunately I would not be able to help you out with your query until the new year. I apologize for any inconvenience caused. I have given you the contact number below and I hope this is helpful. CHUBB Silverwater - (02) 8748 7222 Regards, Kidde Australia Sawan Nair, Applications Engineer - Detection Kidde Australia A UTC Fire & Security Company 314 Boundary Rd, Dingley Village, VIC, 3172 Tel: <Phone number removed> Fax: <Fax number removed> Mobile: <Mobile number removed> <Email Address removed> www.kidde.com <http://www.kidde.com.au

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

7 of 9

On 9 February 2009 13:47, Adrian Butler <Email Address removed> wrote: Chubb Fire Safety Ltd Attention: Mr Rodney Molla CEO, c.c. Ainsley Wroe PA to Mr Molla, Martha Berek, Senior Legal Counsel, Josephine Pontillo, PA to Mrs Berek, Jackie Lawson, Legal Department, David Ajala, CEO, Supercheap Auto Pty Ltd David Isaac, Standards Australia, FP2 Committee Dear Mr Molla Will Chubb's Ionization Smoke Alarms Safely Detect Smouldering Fires? I purchased two Quell branded Chubb Fire Safety Ltd smoke alarms from Supercheap Auto's Burleigh, Gold Coast store in December 2008. As I have not had any response from your legal department on this issue (note emails copied below) I am sending this message to you as I would sincerely appreciate an urgent response. Please advise: 1. Will my SA502 and SA602 ionization smoke alarm/s safely activate in a slow smouldering fire?, and 2. In the testing of these alarms by the CSIRO, at what level of smoke (i.e. light obscuration per metre) did my SA502 and SA602 smoke alarm/s activate in accordance with clauses 7 (e) and (f) of Australian Standard 2362.17? If Chubb's intention is to not answer my questions, please extend the common courtesy of advising accordingly. Please note the updated information in relation to this matter on the World Fire Safety Foundation's website. www.SmokeAlarmDisclosure.org Thank You. Sincerely Adrian Butler Chairman World Fire Safety Foundation Gold Coast, Qld, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 409 782 166 - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- "It is truly alarming. It is so stunning and so horrifying and it's so hard to believe that it's something that people just don't know..." www.SmokeAlarmDisclosure.org - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Adrian Butler <Email Address removed> Date: Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 9:35 AM Subject: Correction to Follow Up - CSIRO AS2362.17 Test Data Disclosure - Chubb Smoke Alarms To: "martha.berek" <Email Address removed> Dear Ms Berek My apologies, I just noticed an error in my email sent three days ago (corrected and copied below): The email stated Australian Standard 1670.1 in error. It should have stated AS2362.17 which is the sensitivity testing standard called up by AS3786. I have corrected this mistake and resent the email below.

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

8 of 9

Sincerely Adrian Butler Chairman World Fire Safety Foundation and Supercheap Auto Customer Gold Coast, Qld, AUSTRALIA Phone: <Phone number removed> - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- "It is truly alarming. It is so stunning and so horrifying and it's so hard to believe that it's something that people just don't know..." www.SmokeAlarmDisclosure.org - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -

UTCsFailuresToDisclose-Emails.pdf | Updated: 24 May, 2013-8:52am - Check for Latest Update: www.Scribd.com/doc/143289291 This Document is Under Construction

9 of 9

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful