R.I. Orders Paint Makers to Pay $2.4 Billion to Clean Up Lead

September 17, 2007

  • September 17, 2007 at 1:46 am
    housepainter says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    How ridiculous and absurd-
    Why don’t they bring in the retail paint and hardware storekeepers who sold lead based paint.

  • September 17, 2007 at 1:53 am
    ST says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    where are the parents’ responsibilities in this issue?

  • September 17, 2007 at 1:57 am
    Angry says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Anyone who had any involvement: makers of paint, painters who applied, owners of property at that time, makers of brushes & rollers, scrapers, drop cloths, etc. Sue ’em all. Bankrupt everyone.
    This paint was outlawed in 1978. Unless they can show that Sherwin, et al kept making it they should not be liable.
    There’s no way $11,500 is gonna get rid of lead paint from a house. Way too little and then you need to factor in govt waste as well.

  • September 17, 2007 at 2:08 am
    Mainemiss says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This decision is bizarre…there are plenty of things which it has been discovered are harmful to our health which manufacturers originally thought were making a better product.

    Can you imagine if other states pick up the banner…

  • September 17, 2007 at 2:11 am
    exjarhead says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    since it wasn’t regulated that lead based paint was banned until 1978 why not bring in the feds and state governments for their derilection of duty from protecting us from everything…

  • September 17, 2007 at 2:17 am
    Nan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    At least the lead paint mfg made money from their sales. In MA I’m assessed a $25 annual “surcharge” to renew my INSURANCE LICENSE to deal with lead paint. What do I, as an insurance agent, have to do with lead paint illness? It does cause serious problems in children though. The chips are sweet but the real culprits are doors and windows where paint rubs and becomes fine dust. It gets inhaled and you never see it. There are no easy answers for this one!

  • September 17, 2007 at 3:48 am
    Claims Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Lead paint is not inherently dangerous as long as you don’t eat it or sand it making it a fine dust. It doesn’t need to be removed either. Acceptable remediation is to pain over it. The state is trying to pass off some its social problems to the private sector. Nobody realized lead was a problem while it was being used. It’s not right to retrospecively apply knowledge to old problems. This country spends so much time and money driving by looking in the rearview mirror it’s going to collide with future problems very soon.

  • September 17, 2007 at 4:56 am
    clm mgr says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Nan is correct. Also, lead in an industrial setting is an environmental hazard which may have nothing to do with lead-based paint. Many of these children with health and mental problems blamed on lead paint were continuously exposed to environmental lead in their neighborhoods by virtue of industrial activities in the neighboring areas. How much lead in any form do children have to ingest or inhale before there is any detectable trace in their systems? Then, what concentration in a child’s system is enough to cause any problems? Hopefully the Court satisfied itself with responses to these questions before imposing this judgment.

  • September 18, 2007 at 5:32 am
    some guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I was injured in a car accident in 1983 when I hit another car head-on. I am going to sue the car maker because they did not have the forsight install airbags in the car, even though it was made in the 70’s. We all know that cars should have airbags now, so I should be able to sue them, right?

  • September 20, 2007 at 4:02 am
    Mary B. says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Oh didn’t you get the memo ST, stating that parents are free from any type of responsibility and accountibility towards the children they spawned. The trial bar issued that memo BTW.

    This plan and lawsuit is complete B.S. and a waste of time and money. The people that own their homes or the landlord should be responsible for the cleaning and not the paint companies.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*