Vigil Forced To Honour Money-Back Guarantee

[bob.dino 1]

http://skysurfer.com.au/forums/index.php?showtopic=196&st=0&gopid=990&

Synopsis: Taupo Tandem Skydiving bought a number of Vigils from Advanced Aerospace Designs for sale to customers. They didn't work particularly well. TTS replaced the units with ones from other manufacturers and attempted to take advantage of AAD's money-back guarantee. AAD refused to refund the money. TTS took AAD to court in Belgium, and has won a judgement against them. AAD have said they will appeal.

I know no more than this.

[mjosparky 4]

Very interesting, Thanks!

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[reusch 0]

ups!! that could become expensive for them!

[billvon 3,116]

I wonder what happened to the Vigil-on-world-team issue - did those people get their cutters/units replaced by Vigil?

[LukeOliver 0]

http://www.vigil-aad.com/pdf/WorldTeamResponse_005.pdf
Feb 16, 250kb

Apparently so.
Text in this PDF does not copy and paste nicely :-/

[kelpdiver 2]

so how did they 'not work particularly well?'

short of batteries having short lives, they either work or fail horribly (no fire or misfire).

[bob.dino 1]

Quote

so how did they 'not work particularly well?'

No idea. It was an Irishman living in Australia's paraphrase of a Belgian lawyer writing a press release in his third or fouth tongue on a technical subject for general consumption. Who knows what the original problem was...

So, to reiterate:

Quote

I know no more than this.

[breadhead 0]

Quote

so how did they 'not work particularly well?'

"Following numerous ill-timed firing ... "

Weird.

[LukeOliver 0]

I believe this ultimately dates back to 2003, prior to the recall for additional static shielding. There were issues then - misfires? ground fires? - I believe that's well established, and the issue may well have been before the courts since then.

[thelem 0]

"Following numerous ill-timed firing, the Vigil's manufacturer, Advanced Aerospace Designs, was forced to acknowledge that its products had incompatible malfunctions with its one and only function: Saving skydivers' lives."

The way I read this (and my instinct from the summary in the opening post) is that the actual units purchased have not malfunctioned, but they have design problems that have caused other units to misfire.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I believe this ultimately dates back to 2003, prior to the recall for additional static shielding. There were issues then - misfires? ground fires? - I believe that's well established, and the issue may well have been before the courts since then.

that makes sense.