Report Summary
While lower oven was on, consumer said his CO alarm went off. He called FD & they confirmed high levels of CO. FD & energy co tech confirmed that problem was limited to oven. He said CO alarm went off again after tech replacing the upper & lower burners in the oven.
Product Details
- Product Description: 4 burner gas range with a dual oven
- Manufacturer/Importer/Private Labeler Name: WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION
- Brand Name: Gemini
- Model Name or Number: MGR6772DDS
- Serial Number: 15684948CR
- UPC Code:
- SKU#:
-
Date Manufactured:
- Retailer: Sears
- Retailer State: Indiana
-
Purchase Date:
9/6/2004
- Product Category: Kitchen
- Product Type: Appliances
- Product Code: Gas Ranges or Ovens (279)
Incident Details
- Incident Description: The oven was on approx. 350 degrees for a couple hours. The consumer conducted a few test and he said that the lower oven emits excessive levels of CO after about 3 hours of use. The consumer noticed the problem when his CO alarm went off, while cooking. The CO alarm is in his bedroom, which is adjacent to his kitchen.
6/3/2015. Their CO alarm went off and displayed a reading of 46 ppm. The consumer called the local Carmel Fire Department and went outside. The fire department came out and confirmed that there was a high level of CO in the home. The firemen notified the consumer's local gas company, Vectren Energy, who also sent a technician out to verify the problem. The Vectren tech. confirmed the fire department's findings and advised the consumer to contact the manufacturer's local service company. Both the fire department and the energy department technician confirmed that the range burners were operating correctly and that the problem was limited to the oven.
6/4/2015: The consumer contacted the mfr. the next day and they sent out a technician a few days later. The mfr's tech. confirmed that the oven emitted excessive levels of CO. The tech. ordered replacement parts and came back out a week later to replace the upper and lower igniters in the oven. The tech. tested the oven after installing the new igniters. He left the oven on for approx. 5 - 10 minutes, but his detector did not identify excessive CO levels, neither did the consumer's CO tester. The tech. was very busy and could not spend a lot of time (hours) at the consumer's home.
8/19/2015: The consumer's CO alarm went off again and displayed approx. 33 ppms for CO levels. The consumer called the service tech. again and he called Whirlpool, who he said owns Maytag now. The technician agreed to come back out. The rep. in Whirlpool's Safety Dept. said that the consumer should have this issue looked at again and provided him with a Concession Number: [REDACTED], so that he would not be charged for the return service visit.
* The consumer discontinued use of the oven while waiting for the tech. to come back out.
Approximately a week later, the mfr's tech. came back out and checked the oven again, but he could only test it for 5 - 10 minutes, due to how busy he was.
The consumer decided to conduct his own test with the oven on 350 degrees. The consumer said that his CO tester does not register ppm in the range of 0 - 30, but does once the levels exceed 30 ppms. After 2 hours: 58 minutes, he got a reading of 31 ppms. The levels progressively increased and after 5 hours, the levels reached 38 ppm. At that point, he turned the oven to the off position, for fear of inhaling too much CO. During this time the consumer had the CO detector in close proximity of the range.
8/25/2015: The consumer checked the lower oven again and he called Whirlpool again and told them that the service tech. would have a hard time identifying the problem, because he could not spend the amount of time necessary to get the excessive reading. The mfr's rep. offered the consumer a discount of the purchase of a new range. The consumer declined that offer due to concerns of the same thing occurring with another range/oven made by this mfr.
8/29/2015: The consumer also decided to test the upper oven, because he was only using the lower oven in the previous instances above. The consumer's tester can measure Max CO levels manually, when it's less than 30 ppms. The consumer found that when the upper oven is in use, it emitted a Max CO level of 18 ppm. The consumer discontinued use of the lower oven. He also sent his test results to their service tech. and to Whirlpool. The mfr. provided the consumer with a Reference Number: [REDACTED], that is related to this issue.
9/7/2015: The consumer received a response back from the service tech., who advised him to discontinue use of the lower oven and indicated that the would contact the mfr. for a further response. However, the consumer has never received any further responses from the mfr.
The consumer also followed up with the service tech. a few more times, but he did not get any further replies from him.
The consumer is concerned about the excessive levels of CO associated with this oven and the fact that the mfr's has not been able to correct the problem.
THERE IS ALSO A CONCERN THAT WITHOUT A CO DETECTOR A CONSUMER WOULD HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE THAT A HAZARDOUS OR DEADLY CONSITION EXISTS
-
Incident Date:
6/3/2015
- Incident Location: Unspecified
Victims Involved
-
- Injury Information: Incident, No Injury
- My Relationship to the Victim: Unspecified
- Sex:
- Victim's Age When Incident Occurred:
Comments from the Manufacturer/Private Labeler
Additional Details
-
Submitter has product?:
Yes
-
Product was damaged before incident?:
No
-
Product was modified before incident?:
No
- If yes to any, explanation: The consumer has the produt and has contacted the mfr.
-
Have you contacted the manufacturer?:
Yes
-
If Not, Do you plan to?:
- Report Number: 20151013-78AA5-1523780
-
Report Date:
10/13/2015
-
Sent to Manufacturer/Importer/Private Labeler:
11/27/2015
-
Report First Publication Date:
12/11/2015
- Category of Submitter: Consumer
|
