"HID kit" vendor spanked by NHTSA!

I just got pointed to this from last summer. It put a smile on my face -- a big one at first, which then got smaller when I looked at the date of final determination compared to the date when the proceedings started. The short version: NHTSA spanked a vendor of "HID kits" (but took three years to do it), making them issue recalls and paybacks.

Love how the one guy

examined archives of Panda Power's Web site using www.waybackmachine.org (a Web site maintained by the Internet Archive, a 501(3)(c) non-profit corporation). He referenced archived pages of Panda Power's Web site that showed its HID Conversion kits installed on motor vehicles, photos of headlamp output on streets in residential neighborhoods, and banners that indicate "offering HID kits for any vehicle."

Click to expand...

He blew a MAJOR hole in THAT "defense"! Not that it was much of a defense; on the face of it, the products DO FIT regulated automotive equipment. It's just as non-defensible as selling a product that is noncompliant and just putting "For Off-Road Use Only" on the packaging. It was a nice "one, two punch" with Daniel Stern reminding the NHTSA that the law is clear on this, and then the next guy showing the NHTSA that they were lying sacks of PIAA bulbs.

I think my favorite part of the vendor's (lame) attempt at defense has to be where they say they shouldn't be punished because the "HID kits" they sold were for tractors, not cars (yeah, right) and most of the ones they sold in 2007-08 had probably already failed by 2010 when NHTSA came knocking. That's sort of like, "Your honor, yes I did steal that $12,000. But I shouldn't be punished because I spent it already so I don't have it any more."

Or maybe "Your honor, yes I was driving 70 mph in a 25 mph school zone, that is correct and I admit that. But the car's ability to go 70 mph was intended for highways, not for school zones, and I sold that car, so I don't have it any more, so yeah, I shouldn't be punished."

Scheinwerfermann said:

Or maybe "Your honor, yes I was driving 70 mph in a 25 mph school zone, that is correct and I admit that. But the car's ability to go 70 mph was intended for highways, not for school zones, and I sold that car, so I don't have it any more, so yeah, I shouldn't be punished."

Click to expand...

"But the car broke down before the court date, so I think the ticket should be dismissed" is more like it

I just received a link to this as well, really wish this would happen more often and in a more timely manner.