VAUXHALL has replaced all jacks in a union's car fleet following safety fears - but not those of thousands of ordinary members of the public who own the same model, the Vectra.
Last night, the company indicated it was unlikely to reconsider that position, although acknowledging the design of the jack had been changed since the original safety alert.
A spokesman insisted the old-style jacks ''will not fail'', provided instructions in the owner's handbook were followed.
However, a lawyer expert in liability claims argued Vauxhall should institute a total recall rather than face even a ''potential risk'' of having an injury on its conscience, let alone legal action.
Solicitor Paul Santoni said he was astonished the firm had not instigated a recall programme, and added: ''At the very least, it must be able to identify the batch which included the faulty jack and substitute them.''
Vauxhall confirmed it had replaced jacks - free of charge - in up to 40 Vectras used by staff employed by Unison, the health union. That followed an incident in which a jack had ''failed'', with the union officer narrrowly escaping being hurt in what Unison dubbed ''a near miss'' in health and safety terms.
The car manufacturer declered that, ''in the interests of all concerned'', the material specification of future jacks would be changed.
However, the alteration affects only newly produced cars - with owners of earlier Vectras, unlike the Unison staff, not being given replacements.
Vauxhall told the union it had been unable to produce the same effect on others under laboratory test conditions. That failed to satisfy Unison, which continued to advise staff not to use the supplied model and instead summon the Automobile Association to roadside emergencies.
Vauxhall subsequently agreed it would replace the jacks. In one letter to Unison, its retail support centre said an analysis of the failed jack had indicated the component was structurally sound - but had failed on side lifting.
The letter added: ''We have in view of this failure carried out thorough testing to a number of similar vehicle jacks.
''Although we could not replicate the failure nor condemn the integrity of the part, in order to obviate any possible recurrence of the condition, and in the interests of all concerned, we have changed the material specification of the jacks' lifting jaws.''
Mr Ian Smith, Unison's national health and safety officer, said yesterday: ''We were delighted with that outcome, which followed a near miss. We had to look at the worst possible outcome in health and safety terms: that someone could have been crushed.''
He said the union, on receiving replacements, had not pursued the matter further but acknowledged there could well be wider public concerns in light of what had happened to one of its Vectra users.
A Vauxhall spokesman said the replacements were a gesture of goodwill to a fleet customer and stressed: ''We have yet to hear of a case when a jack has failed when used in accordance with manufacturer's instructions.'' He described the new design as part of an ongoing improvement process.
Lawyer Paul Sanotini, who is representing many victims of the world's worst E-coli outbreak in Lanarkshire, said he believed Vauxhall should replace all the jacks.
He considered Vectra customers would have strong cases should the failure be repeated because a potential defect had been uncovered, albeit in only one piece of equipment.
Mr Santoni said: ''It is clear that problem could be avoided by a vehicle recall, a common practice within the car industry. It is also clear the probability of harm is high when a jack collapses.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article