From the Safety Files: Was a manufacturer at fault for a mower without advanced safety features?
Appears in Print As: Manufacturer negligence or caveat emptor in mower injury?
A man was pushing a mower across a slope when he slipped and caught his foot under the machine, sustaining serious injuries. The injury was just one of the thousands caused by personal lawn mowers each year.
Last month’s Safety Files (“Mower design flaws spark deadly fire,” Machine Design, Sept. 9, 2010, machinedesign.com/article/mower-design-flaws-spark-deadly-fire-0909) looked at a fatality related to a riding mower. This month, the machine in question is a self-propelled push mower.
At the time of the accident, the operator was crossing a short, 25° slope in the front yard of his rental property. When he slipped, he let go of the mower, and it stopped its self-propelled forward motion. However, the blade continued to spin.
The man got his foot wedged under the rear of the mower. A hard plastic guard hinged to the mower deck prevented his foot from going all the way under the mower, but his toes entered the blade circle and were seriously injured.
The plastic guard was meant to prevent objects from being thrown toward the operator, to keep feet out, and to comply with industry safety requirements. However, when the man’s foot pushed the guard’s bottom edge inward toward the blade, a 1.5-in. gap opened between it and the ground.
Investigators concluded the accident could have been prevented by a better guard design that truly excluded feet and objects from the blade circle.
Operator-presence controls (OPCs) would have also prevented the accident. OPCs are fail-safes that stop the motion of the mower blade within 3 sec when the operator loses contact with the mower. Current mower designs commonly require the operator to squeeze a bar to the mower frame to keep the engine from shutting off and the blade from stopping.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has mandated OPCs on riding and walk-behind power lawn mowers sold since 1982. The mower in this case was a 1981 model. It had a clutch release that disengaged the self-propelling drive when the operator lost contact. The release didn’t kill the engine or disengage the blade drive.
CPSC had announced the upcoming OPC requirement at least three years before it went into effect, and other mower manufacturers were offering OPCs as early as 1980. OPC technology for lawn mowers had been available in some form since 1947.
Was the mower manufacturer negligent in failing to apply state-of-the-art safety measures to the mower or justified in waiting for the mandate? Weigh in by e-mailing jessica.shapiro@penton.com or in the comments section of this article on machinedesign.com.
© 2012 Penton Media Inc.

Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Comments
mower safety
This is a great example of "you can make it fool proof but not damn fool proof". If this "consumer" read the OWNERS MANUAL that comes with the mower,he would see to "taverse a hill or incline" do not mow up and down.
I am not opposed to holding a manufacturer responsible for his product but, in this case, I feel, the customer has to take responsibility for his negligence.
Rotary mower safety
There is only so much one can do to make a knife or axe safe. And a rotary mover is only half a step better. To reduce gap between the body and the ground to 1.5" is pretty good.
If people wanted safer mowers they would buy the reel type instead of rotary mowers anyway.
Mower Safety vs Useability
While I appreciate the never ending quest for complete safety, particularly from the trial lawyers and other blood suckers, face it, if a safety feature makes any device less usable it WILL be disabled. The foot safety drape on the back of push and self propelled mowers makes it nearly impossible to pull one backwards. Safe yes, usable no so guess what comes off in the first usage.
OPC's are a great idea but have you ever bought a used mower that it wasn't disabled on? Check out the used push mowers and most of them will have a tie rap on the bar for locking the safety feature out. I have 3 riders bought used and the variety of methods for disabling the safeties is truly ingenious which has saved me a lot of time disabling them myself.
It is impossible to foolproof anything as long as fools are so ingenious besides if total safety is ever attained what will the lawyers do for a living?
As a plaintiff's attorney, I
As a plaintiff's attorney, I do believe that if judged by todays or 1982 standards, the mower contained a serious safety defect which would have and did cause serious bodily injury. However common sense and utility should have long sense come into play. To hold this manufacturer liable for injuries caused by a 30 year old design flaw in a product that has a life span of about 10 years. This person should have long ago replaced this model with a newer more efficient and safe one.
More efficient and safe?
I'm still using a Craftsman garden tractor from the mid '70's. It's only safety switch prevents starting it with the mower engaged probably mostly to cut the drag on the starter than any idea that someone will be stupid enough to turn the starter while holding onto the blades.
I realize that if such common sense was more prevalent your services would be much less used however I can't help wondering how many safety features forced on industry are not from any need but to keep your kind employed.
Mower Safety
I find it completely insane when common sense,
and being careful is not held to a higher standard than
engineering safety features which are not required.
Lots of things are are available for our safety, but manufacturers
do not need to supply every one of them. In some cases people
bypassing safety features makes them more dangerous than before. There are many people who bypass the operator
presence control on mowers because they are frustrated by them
by tying the handle back with wire or string, which makes it much harder to shut off in case of an emergency.
Why on earth should anyone be held liable for a 30 year old design
that works fine, as long as people are careful? The operator more than likely knew the risk, as he had used the product for some time. Mower manufacturing is an extremely cost concious business. If you charge $5 extra bucks for a safety feature that many people to this day do not want, you may be at the mercy of market forces.
I believe that machines should be designed to be as safe as reasonable, not completely safe, or we would all be in germ proof nerf, and that's no way to live life.
Leave a comment