Elevators Or Other Lifts (excl. Escalators, Hoists, Jacks,

71YOF BROUGHT DOWN BY HOUSE SUPERVISOR DUE TO THE FOLLOWING: THE PATIENT IS A VISITOR IN THE FACILITY WHO WAS IN AN ELEVATOR WHEN THE METAL BAR FELL ONTO THE BACK OF HER LEG AND HEEL. DX:CONTUSION OF RIGHT LOWER LEG.

90YOF WAS USING HER ROLLING WALKER WHEN SHE LEANED TO PRESS THE ELEVATOR BUTTON AND LOST HER BALANCE CAUSING HER TO FALL ONTO LEFT SIDE DX: FRACTURED LEFT HIP

46YOM TRIPPED OVER HIS CRUTCHES WHILE GETTING INTO ELEVATOR, FELL ONTO KNEES AND HIT HEAD ON FLOOR OF ELEVATOR, , DX FALL, KNEE INJURY, HEAD INJURY

24 YOM WAS MANIC AND SWINGING AT RESPONDERS. HE WAS DETAINED, AND ON THE WAY OUT OF HIS RESIDENCE, HE WAS GRABBING AT THE ELEVATOR DOORS, AND CUT HIS LEFT HAND. DX: FRACTURE SCAPHOID LEFT WRIST.

97YOM WAS RIDING IN AN ELEVATOR WITH HIS WIFE WHEN HE HAD A SYNCOPAL FALL TO THE FLOOR STRIKING HIS SHOULDER AGAINST THE ELEVATOR DOOR NO INJURY FROM THE FALL ADMITTED FOR SYNCOPE DX: FALL NO INJURY; SYNCOPE

69YOF PRESENTS POST FALL FROM STANDING. PATIENT FOUND DOWN IN THE ELEVATOR AT HER SENIOR LIVING FACILITY. DX: TRAUMA, FALL, CLOSED FRACTURE OF MULTIPLE RIBS OF LEFT SIDE, CLOSED FRACTURE OF CERVICAL SPINE, INJURY OF CERVIAL SPINAL CORD

96 YOF FROM A NURSING FACILITY WITH AN UNWITNESSED FALL IN THE ELEVATOR. +RIGHT FOREHEAD HEMATOMA DX UTI, FALL

65YOF WITH FALL WHILE GETTING OUT OF ELEVATOR AND FOOT GOT STUCK . PT HAS SHOULDER AND STERNUM PAIN. DX: FALL

88 YOF FROM A NURSING FACILTY WITH AN UNWITNESSED FALL IN THE ELEVATOR. +LEFT FOREHEAD HEMATOMA DX FALL

35YOF WITH HAND INJURY S/P PUNCHING AN ELEVATOR . DX: CONTUSION OF RIGHT HAND

71YOM C/O HEAD INJURY AND HEMATOMA TO RIGHT EYEBROW WITH ABRASION TO SAME AREA S/P PT WAS TRANSFERRING USING HIS CHAIR LIFT WHEN HE FELL AND HIT HIS HEAD. PT IS ON PRESCRIBED ***. DX: HEAD INJURY WITH HEMATOMA AND ABRASION TO FACE

13YOF WITH ANKLE PAIN AFTER GETTING OUT OF ELEVATOR AND TOOK A BIG STEP AND FELL . PT TWISTED ANKLE DX: SPRAIN

Ten year old child suffered a catastrophic brain injury when he became trapped in an Elmira residential elevator manufactured by Cambridge Elevating, Inc. out of Cambridge, Ontario (Canada). The incident occurred because the elevator was designed to run with the elevator car gate open, which is prohibited, and because there was no light curtain to prevent the car from moving when an obstruction exists between the elevator car and the hoistway doors/walls.

A 5 year-old girl suffered crush injuries while using a residential home elevator in a vacation property in Hermosa, California when she became trapped between the accordion door on the elevator car and the hoistway door. She was trapped for an extended period of time and had to be extricated from the elevator by rescue personnel. The girl was diagnosed with fractures of her acetabulum, crush injury, foot drop and apraxia.

To whom it may concern: I am writing this letter in regards to a recent finding about my Waupaca elevator, (serial number qualifies), of 17 plus years. By sheer accident I learned that this elevator has had a recall. I was shocked to hear of this, particularly, because I never received such a notice of a recall. I am 77 years of age and have become VERY dependent on an elevator in a three story home. The risk of a free fall, as I was told was one of the problems, makes use of the elevator a risk, and not one that I want myself or family to take. After going back and forth with a couple of elevator maintenance companies, one of which I have had servicing my elevator for many years, I was given your address as a possible source of help in addressing what follows. I have been told that the elevator recall makes having any needed repairs not legally possible until it is either upgraded or to have a new elevator installed. The upgrade, as of date, would cost $17,000 and a brand new elevator, as of date, would cost $30,000. Apparently, the Waupaca manufacturer assets were sold through a receivership proceeding to Wisconsin Elevator Company, LLC d/b/a Fox Valley Elevator. At this time, there is no remedy available for consumers with Waupaca elevators. My question is, why should I be expected to pay for the recall of my elevator particularly considering the high cost of repair or replacement and ,most important, it's not my fault or responsibility. I find this situation unacceptable. I have several neighbors that have the same elevator, and they are hoping I can find some information or course of action that can be taken. And therein is the reason for this letter. Can you please help me with this situation?? I would greatly appreciate hearing back from you. My home is in [REDACTED], Delaware for your information. I will be happy to provide more information if needed, and to work with you to find a remedy to this problem. Thank you in advance for any and all help

Pride Mobility Lift Chair company makes lift chairs for the disabled and handicapped. Their power outage backup is so weak it only goes half way and leaves the individual stuck in the sitting position. It's made that way. Several very reasonable battery backups are available for $50. Pride's is made for 2 small 9 volt batteries and do not come with the chair. Many others are 550 volts and up and can be used for wireless phones and computers with 8 backup plugs. Besides they are rechargeable too. Prides are not and must be replaced frequently. The attitude of this company is to pass off any complaint without considering any action whatsoever. Pride chairs have been made this way for many years and they are stuck in the mud and refuse suggestions to help. They do not take any suggestions or complaints seriously and are putting their customers at risk. I recommend someone seriously look into this matter an see if you do not agree that the elderly, handicapped, disabled are not worth a better safety power backup system. CONSUMER UPDATE: Pride Lift Chairs leave the handicapped person with unreasonable risk for injury or worse during times of power outages. Their battery backup system is inadequate and underpowered. My efforts to get Pride to seriously consider correcting this hazard goes without suggest. Pride lift chairs come with only a non rechargeable 2-9 volt battery backup system that does not lift the handicapped. It is made to only half work. That is to sit only not lift so a person can get out of the chair during power outages. It only moves from a reclining position to sitting. If the power goes out while sitting the system does not move. There are several reasonable rechargeable battery systems costing $55 to $75 with 550 to 750 volts each that will lift the handicapped person from recline to sitting and standing. Prides system leaves one stranded while the others lift just like the chair is designed to do using public electric power. This company is so

Waupaca Elevator Co. Issued a safety notice stating • Potential failure of portion of the lifting mechanism resulting in a possible unexpected drop of your elevator". Waupaca further states: "there are no means to visually inspect the gear system• It is not a product defect it’s due to normal wear" but it has no way to substantiate that claim since there is no definition of what is normal wear. Waupaca is awaiting an approval from CPSC on a safety device that would prevent the elevator from dropping. In our senior community there are fifty two affected Waupaca home elevators. Seniors purchased the elevators for convenience and personal safety which is now being called in question by the very company at produced the elevators. Seniors are now apprehensive and scared to use their elevators. Incidents have occurred where consumers have been injured, however Waupaca is not willing to state as to when, how many, and severity of the injuries. Waupca has agreed to inspect and install a new safety device which will prevent an unexpected elevator drop soon as CPSC approves the device. However, Waupaca does not address the issue of faulty engineering. Subliminally Waupaca suggest that the owners of the elevators pay for the dangerous and faulty power/gearbox; cost approx $10,000.00. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER AND DOCUMENTATION.

Pertinent to recall 16-238 - Porta Elevators EMDL (Electro-magnetic Door Lock) failure. We have had a hoistway door open when the elevator car is not at the floor (twice). This results in a fall hazard in an open hoistway. We have circa 2005 Generation #1 Plastic Door Locks. The problem appears to be a Porta EMDL not properly engaging to hold the door shut. In reviewing the recall it is difficult to tell whether our issue is pertinent to the plastic part of the latch or the overall mechanical function of the door lock. Either way we have had a door come open twice when the car was not on the floor. The behavior feels as though the latch was only partially engaged and when pulled it held for a moment and then released. IMPORTANT NOTE: We have an American Crescent Elevator that incorporates the Porta products including the EMDL's. To my knowledge Porta does not manufacture elevators but products that are used in residential elevators. It would seem like the actual elevators that incorporate the recalled product should be listed?

5/6/2016: Another competitor was at the consumer's home and their rep. informed her of the recall (CAP# 15-189). The consumer was never notified about the recall. Same day, the consumer called the mfr's Recall # (800) 361-2836. and has called them every business day since that time. No one has returned the consumer's call even though the people she spoke to said that they would. 5/7/2016: The consumer called the retailer: 810-985-4457 and she spoke to a rep., who informed her that they no longer sold this mfr's brand of stair lifts. The consumer does not want risk being injured by this lift.

The consumer stated that someone was inside the residential elevator and it suddenly stopped and dropped between the 2nd and 1st floor. The consumer stated that the doors locked when the elevator stopped, but fortunately they were able to force the door open. The consumer stated that no one was injured. The consumer stated that there was damaged to the elevator shaft and they had to straighten the track. The consumer stated that the elevator was no longer usable. The consumer stated that she contacted the manufacturer and they informed her that the roller for her elevator broke because the washer on top of the roller split. The consumer stated that she asked the representative if a recall would be issue and the representative said no. The consumer stated that the company provided the parts for she had to pay for labor. The consumer asked the manufacture Waupaca to pay the labor costs. The consumer stated that she believes that this product should be investigated since it poses a safety hazard to consumers. The manufacture representative stated the rollers were made in China and not made properly.