WASHINGTON (BRAIN) — In a unanimous vote that should benefit legitimate bike suppliers, the Consumer Product Safety Commission ruled that Amazon is a distributor and bears responsibility for products sold by third-party sellers that are defective or fail to meet federal safety standards and has a legal responsibility for their recall.
The CPSC issued the Decision and Order against Amazon.com Inc. on Tuesday. More than 400,000 products are subject to the order, the CPSC said, specifically naming faulty carbon monoxide detectors, hair dryers without electrocution protection, and children's sleepwear that violates federal flammability standards.
Those products, listed on Amazon.com and sold by third-party sellers using the Fulfilled by Amazon program, pose a "substantial product hazard" under the Consumer Product Safety Act, the CPSC said, which added that Amazon failed to notify the public and did not take adequate steps to encourage customers to return or destroy them.
Amazon argued before an administrative law judge and the CPSC that it was not a distributor and bore no responsibility for the safety of the products sold under its Fulfilled by Amazon program.
In complying with the Decision and Order, Amazon must submit proposed plans to notify consumers and the public about the hazardous products and to remove them from commerce by requiring their return or destruction. The CPSC will consider Amazon's proposed plans and address them in a second order in this case. Amazon also must provide refunds or replacements.
In 2021, the commission filed an administrative complaint against Amazon, alleging that the company distributed certain products that pose "a substantial product hazard." The matter was initially tried before a judge who ruled that Amazon was a distributor. Both parties appealed the ruling to the commission, which is considered the record in the case and heard oral argument, resulting in the Decision and Order.
Under the Consumer Product Safety Act, after the commission hears evidence and determines that a product presents a substantial hazard, it might require a manufacturer, distributor, or retailer to warn consumers about the risks and provide remedies to remove it from homes and the marketplace.
Amazon did not contest that the products were hazardous. It argued that it was not acting as a distributor within the meaning of the Consumer Product Safety Act, and therefore was not responsible for taking action.
