Ad here on AD by a Law Firm

[LadySekhmet]

Did you see that the lawyers will keep 35%-55% of the settlement? These days there are lawsuits for everything.

more people = class action = more $$$

Sometimes people don't realize that it takes years...maybe 4 or 5 years for a case to settle. When I sued someone for a severe dog attack (13 times, unprovoked, with forever scars), I had to wait 4 years until a settlement was made out of court. Now, imagine if we had to go through trial? That would have been an additional 1 or 2 years.

Class Action suits are probably much longer because they need to gather up evidence from EACH person, surgeon, audiologist. Then the plaintiffs have to go see Advanced Bionics doctors of choice, to make sure the records are correct. The plaintiffs would probably be poked and prodded all the time - maybe go through cat scans, x-rays, interviews for hours, etc etc to back up evidence.

Anyone wants to go through that? Isn't it much easier to just get surgery, be totally knocked out, replace the device (which I think more often than not, AB will replace for free), and be turned on and have a happy life? I know there's a few people here and bloggers that had a bad implant, and they were more than happy to go through surgery to replace it. It doesn't only happen to AB, it happens to Med El and Cochlear. It just so happens that AB had more awareness. CORRECT ME: Med El has higher failure rates than AB and Cochlear. Is anyone suing them?

Oh well...that's life.

 

[jillio]

Did you see that the lawyers will keep 35%-55% of the settlement? These days there are lawsuits for everything.

Yes, the lawyers get paid for their services. But the doctor that implanted the people in question with a faulty device also got paid, as did AB for the manufacture of the faulty devise.

If someone was injured, or forced to undergo a second surgery because of the negligence of Advanced Bionics in this case, they deserve to be compensated for that.

I don't see this as frivolous. I see it as holding AB accountable for knowing shipping out devises that did not meet the safety standards prescribed by the FDA, and consciously and willfully taking action that they knew put people at risk all in the name of higher profit margins.

 

[shel90]

Yes, the lawyers get paid for their services. But the doctor that implanted the people in question with a faulty device also got paid, as did AB for the manufacture of the faulty devise.

If someone was injured, or forced to undergo a second surgery because of the negligence of Advanced Bionics in this case, they deserve to be compensated for that.

I don't see this as frivolous. I see it as holding AB accountable for knowing shipping out devises that did not meet the safety standards prescribed by the FDA, and consciously and willfully taking action that they knew put people at risk all in the name of higher profit margins.

Do u think that the lawyers are doing it to help out patients or doing it because they see $$$? Sometimes it is hard to trust lawyers. My grandpa went thru a class action suit and got little from it while the lawyers reaped with the $$$. It left him feeling very bitter cuz he and the others were victims.

 

[jillio]

Do u think that the lawyers are doing it to help out patients or doing it because they see $$$? Sometimes it is hard to trust lawyers. My grandpa went thru a class action suit and got little from it while the lawyers reaped with the $$$. It left him feeling very bitter cuz he and the others were victims.

I hate to say it, but money is probably their biggest motivation.

 

[LadySekhmet]

I don't see this as frivolous. I see it as holding AB accountable for knowing shipping out devises that did not meet the safety standards prescribed by the FDA, and consciously and willfully taking action that they knew put people at risk all in the name of higher profit margins.

Care to back up that the reason behind the "bad devices" is because AB wants money?

If AB wanted a higher profit margins, then why are they willing to tell all the patients that had bad implants that they will replace it for free? For someone who went through the procedure of getting the implant, which for many took quite a long time, and find they have a bad implant. They want to hear, so most likely, they will accept AB's offer.

 

[jillio]

Care to back up that the reason behind the "bad devices" is because AB wants money?

If AB wanted a higher profit margins, then why are they willing to tell all the patients that had bad implants that they will replace it for free? For someone who went through the procedure of getting the implant, which for many took quite a long time, and find they have a bad implant. They want to hear, so most likely, they will accept AB's offer.

If it had not been a matter of profit margins, AB would not have shipped the devices. They would have scrapped them. Nor would they have ever awarded the manufacturing contract to an unapproved manufacturer. AB also, following the recall of the faulty parts, continued in more than one instance, to still ship them out.

They tell the patients that they will replace them for free because they were at fault for the recall. Its called PR.

 

[jillio]

Had to finish my reply in another post. It cut off some of my words.

Here it is:

Not to offer to replace for free would negatively affect the number of implants they sell in the future. Most people would think twice about purchasing a devise from a company that knowingly and willfully put patients at risk, and then refused to correct the harm they caused.

 

[shel90]

Had to finish my reply in another post. It cut off some of my words.

Here it is:

Not to offer to replace for free would negatively affect the number of implants they sell in the future. Most people would think twice about purchasing a devise from a company that knowingly and willfully put patients at risk, and then refused to correct the harm they caused.[/QUOTE]

Just knowing that gets me steamed!

 

[LadySekhmet]

Had to finish my reply in another post. It cut off some of my words.

Here it is:

Not to offer to replace for free would negatively affect the number of implants they sell in the future. Most people would think twice about purchasing a devise from a company that knowingly and willfully put patients at risk, and then refused to correct the harm they caused.

Good point, but doesn't it waste AB's money for shipping out devices for free regardless?

Cochlear kind of does the same thing, they ship out processors for free if the processor fails. They get the bad processor and do investigation of why, that's how they can improve on their products.

Sometimes I just wish we had a REAL person that knows the ins and outs of AB/Cochlear/Med El to tell us "This is what happened...." to set the record straight because we all are talking about different things that may or may not have happened.

 

[jillio]

Good point, but doesn't it waste AB's money for shipping out devices for free regardless?

Cochlear kind of does the same thing, they ship out processors for free if the processor fails. They get the bad processor and do investigation of why, that's how they can improve on their products.

Sometimes I just wish we had a REAL person that knows the ins and outs of AB/Cochlear/Med El to tell us "This is what happened...." to set the record straight because we all are talking about different things that may or may not have happened.

They just take it out of their advertising budget. And, no doubt, get a federal tax break on the cost.

What we do know is that AB knew they were using an unapproved manufacturer. They knew that those devises were not up to safety standards. They willingly changed to the substandard manufacturer, and continued to supply devices to clinics without notifying the FDA that the manufacturer had been changed, thus not allowing the FDA to properly assess quality of devise. They also knew the devises were faulty when the recall was issued. And they knowingly shipped out more of the recalled devises to other unsuspecting patients after the recall.

 

[LadySekhmet]

They just take it out of their advertising budget. And, no doubt, get a federal tax break on the cost.

What we do know is that AB knew they were using an unapproved manufacturer. They knew that those devises were not up to safety standards. They willingly changed to the substandard manufacturer, and continued to supply devices to clinics without notifying the FDA that the manufacturer had been changed, thus not allowing the FDA to properly assess quality of devise. They also knew the devises were faulty when the recall was issued. And they knowingly shipped out more of the recalled devises to other unsuspecting patients after the recall.

The only problem I have is that I need solid proof of this, not just someone who may or may have read it somewhere that's may be "iffy".

I know you do a LOT of research. It's not that I don't believe you, I just need to see it through my own eyes that you're 100% correct. Ya know what I mean?

Is it through FDA site or something?

 

[shel90]

The only problem I have is that I need solid proof of this, not just someone who may or may have read it somewhere that's may be "iffy".

I know you do a LOT of research. It's not that I don't believe you, I just need to see it through my own eyes that you're 100% correct. Ya know what I mean?

Is it through FDA site or something?

That would be the lawyers' job to prove it hence "burden of proof".

 

[LadySekhmet]

That's my point - jillio is making statements without burden of proof, that's what *I* need. It has nothing to do whether I believe her or not. I'm sure she may be right, but why should I take her own words for it? She doesn't work for AB, nor has AB implants. Hence why I need solid proof.

 

[jillio]

The only problem I have is that I need solid proof of this, not just someone who may or may have read it somewhere that's may be "iffy".

I know you do a LOT of research. It's not that I don't believe you, I just need to see it through my own eyes that you're 100% correct. Ya know what I mean?

Is it through FDA site or something?

The original link to the article in the oringinal thread regarding the FDA suit in this forum will substantiate. But if you wish, you can also check the FDAs website.

 

[jillio]

That's my point - jillio is making statements without burden of proof, that's what *I* need. It has nothing to do whether I believe her or not. I'm sure she may be right, but why should I take her own words for it? She doesn't work for AB, nor has AB implants. Hence why I need solid proof.

How could they have not known that they were using an unapproved vendor? They sent orders out to this vendor, and purchased components from them. Likewise, how could they have not known that they failed to notify the FDA of a change in vendor? How could they have not known that they were shipping out defective devises when a recall had already been issued, yet they continued to ship the same model?

To have done all this without knowledge means that the entire company was unconscious.

No, I don't work for AB, or I would have blown the whistle on their practices long before it reached the stage where the FDA ordered recalls of already implanted devises and fined them 1.1 million dollars. And having an AB implant has nothing what so ever to do with whether or not one can read the information and process it.

 

[rick48]

Good point, but doesn't it waste AB's money for shipping out devices for free regardless?

Cochlear kind of does the same thing, they ship out processors for free if the processor fails. They get the bad processor and do investigation of why, that's how they can improve on their products.

Sometimes I just wish we had a REAL person that knows the ins and outs of AB/Cochlear/Med El to tell us "This is what happened...." to set the record straight because we all are talking about different things that may or may not have happened.

You are right, the only facts are that the FDA brought an action against AB and its CEO that contained certain allegations. The FDA and AB settled the action and the fines were paid. There were no findings of fact and no admissions of liability. Unless someone on this board was either a party to this matter or an attorney representing either side, then they are merely speculating as to liability, motives and the validity of the allegations.

I have no idea as to the validity of the FDA's allegations and/or the motives why AB settled the case but I do know that the reasons why a party settles a matter are varied and a settlement does not equate to a finding of liability and/or culpability against either party.


Rick

 

[jillio]

You are right, the only facts are that the FDA brought an action against AB and its CEO that contained certain allegations. The FDA and AB settled the action and the fines were paid. There were no findings of fact and no admissions of liability. Unless someone on this board was either a party to this matter or an attorney representing either side, then they are merely speculating as to liability, motives and the validity of the allegations.

I have no idea as to the validity of the FDA's allegations and/or the motives why AB settled the case but I do know that the reasons why a party settles a matter are varied and a settlement does not equate to a finding of liability and/or culpability against either party.


Rick

Right, and AB just agreed to pay out 1.1 million in fines, with the CEO being personally responsible for another 75,000 dollars in fines for no reason.

And speaking of 1.1 million in fines.....that's a hefty amount of cash. Can you explain to me again how it is that CI companies are not concerned with profit margins?:roll:

 

[jillio]

You know, has anyone considered the fact that these "allegations" as a poster put it, have been all over the news. If AB was completely innocent, why haven't they brought suit over defamation issues?

Likewise, why would they agree to pay out 1.1 million in fines of their oh, so little profits if they were not guilty of the "allegations". Innocent people don't plea bargin. Guilty criminals do.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

I saw a link for an ad title saying " Cochlear Implant Injury. Been injured by a defective cochlear implant? Contact us"

I clicked on the link and I guess there is a class-action lawsuit forming against Bionics for people who got injured or emotionally injured by defective implants.

Is that the same company that the FDA sued or a different one?

If it is a different one, then it shows that these companies are there for profit rather than for the people they serve according to the link.

Wow, really? I would like to find this link. I have a friend who contracted streptococcal meningitis back in 2002. She nearly died after being implanted with an AB model that had a positioner. She may be very interested in any info regarding a class action suit.

 

[shel90]

You know, has anyone considered the fact that these "allegations" as a poster put it, have been all over the news. If AB was completely innocent, why haven't they brought suit over defamation issues?

Likewise, why would they agree to pay out 1.1 million in fines of their oh, so little profits if they were not guilty of the "allegations". Innocent people don't plea bargin. Guilty criminals do.

I was thinkin the same thing last night. If they were so innocent then why pay out so much money?