Transport Canada defends long delay in car-seat tests

OTTAWA – Transport Canada is defending a long delay in determining whether an infant car seat that separated from its base during a January crash test is safe for babies.

Nine months after the Maxi-Cosi Mico rear-facing car seat detached during one of eight crash tests, the department has only "very recently" conducted additional testing to figure out if the anomaly can be chalked up to an installation problem or to a defect or design problem.

Transport Canada says it now needs time to review the results, but warns more testing could be required to determine if a "formal defects investigation" is warranted, or if an advisory to consumers should be issued.

Research testing and product evaluation requires that tests be repeated many times, and "it is important to conduct them thoroughly, in order to offer the correct advice to the public," Transport Canada said in a statement. "The assessment of the Mico will be conducted in the near future."

In August, the department issued a consumer alert about another rear-facing infant car seat that separated from its base in five of 22 crash tests – 20 months after the first tests were conducted on the Designer 22. Like the Mico, the Designer 22 is manufactured by Dorel Juvenile Group and made for babies under the age of one.

Transport Canada "highly recommended" that parents not use the base of the Designer 22 if it was manufactured before March 2009, but rather secure the seat directly to the vehicle using the three-point belt. The department also emphasized that the car seat, sold under the brands Safety 1st, Eddie Bauer and Cosco, still met Canada’s child-restraint standards.

Rick Leckner, a spokesman for the Montreal-based Dorel Distribution, which imports Dorel products for its parent company, said the company stands by both car seats.

"It was only one of eight tests that showed separation on the testing. To date, we could not replicate that in house; we haven’t had any incidents," Leckner said of the Mico.

"The last we heard is they are doing additional testing to try and determine if, in fact, this was some type of flaw on their end, but at this point, it’s up to them to come back to us and show us, indeed, there is a problem, because as far as we’re concerned, there is not."

Deanna Lindsay, executive director of the Ottawa-based S.E.A.T.S for Kids, a group that educates the public about car seats, said the latest development with the Mico car seat is a "very awkward situation, because we really don’t want to invoke panic in parents."

Lindsay also said Transport Canada is aware the situation is "unfortunate," so has "put a rush" on the matter.

"The more that they rush, the more likelihood mistakes could be made. We don’t want them to make mistakes. These are children’s lives. We want to know for sure, but we also don’t want to, for lack of a better term, screw the manufacturer by putting out a notice that may or may not be true. If they’re going to put out a notice to say, ‘Don’t use this car seat or there’s a problem with it,’ they want to make sure they’re giving the correct information," said Lindsay.

A day after Transport Canada issued its Aug. 5 notice about "potential safety issues" involving Dorel’s Designer 22 car seat, Dorel fired back with its own advisory, saying the consumer information notice was "extremely misleading to consumers."

Dorel pointed out the testing "was conducted under extreme conditions, which do not at all replicate standard Canadian safety standards."

Leckner also said the company used the information from Transport Canada’s crash tests to strengthen the connection between the base and the shell for new models of the Designer 22. The company released the improved model into the marketplace in March to be sold alongside inventory of the older model.

Last week, Transport Canada announced tougher child-restraint standards are coming. In a backgrounder, the department singles out results of its crash-test program, saying the separation of a rear-facing car seat from its base was a reason to bring in a new testing requirement.