Can-Am Defender Recalls: What the CPSC Records Show

What a CPSC Recall Is — and What It Does Not Decide

A recall is a corrective action for a product, carried out with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), that tells owners about an identified hazard and offers a remedy such as a repair. It is not a court ruling. It does not decide that a product injured anyone, and it does not decide that a company owes anyone money.

Federal law gives the CPSC its recall authority. Under 15 U.S.C. § 2064, a manufacturer, distributor or retailer that obtains information which "reasonably supports the conclusion" that a product contains a defect that could create a substantial product hazard, or "creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death," must generally inform the Commission. The same section lets the Commission, after an opportunity for a hearing, order public notice and remedies including repair, replacement or a refund.

The CPSC's regulation explains what "defect" means for reporting purposes. 16 C.F.R. § 1115.4 states that "a defect is a fault, flaw, or irregularity that causes weakness, failure, or inadequacy in form or function," and adds that a defect "can also occur in a product's contents, construction, finish, packaging, warnings, and/or instructions." That matters here, because one of the Defender notices concerns written instructions.

For someone who was hurt, the practical stake is this: a recall notice records a hazard and a remedy, a lawsuit is a set of allegations, and a verdict is a court's decision. Finding your vehicle in a recall notice does not by itself answer whether anyone is responsible for an injury. A useful next question is whether the notice's hazard resembles what actually happened.

The Can-Am Defender: Vehicle Overview

The Can-Am Defender is a side-by-side vehicle, also called a utility task vehicle (UTV): an off-road vehicle whose seats place the driver and passengers next to one another rather than in a line. Both CPSC notices describe Defender models as "side-by-side vehicles" sold under the Can-Am brand by BRP.

According to the 2023 notice, the vehicles it covers were manufactured by BRP Mexico, imported by BRP US, of Sturtevant, Wisconsin, and sold at "BRP Can-Am authorized dealers nationwide." The 2021 notice lists BRP U.S. Inc., of Sturtevant, Wisconsin, as distributor and names twenty HD10 Defender model variants, from the base Defender to the 6X6 versions.

A separate federal standard, 15 U.S.C. § 2089, applies to an "all-terrain vehicle," which it defines as a motorized off-highway vehicle on three or four wheels "having a seat designed to be straddled by the operator and handlebars for steering control." This page does not apply that ATV standard to the Defender; the site's page on the CPSC ATV safety standard covers it for ATVs. Beyond what the two recall notices state, this page says nothing about the Defender's or BRP's safety record. For the wider Can-Am lineup, see the site's page on Can-Am ATV and UTV injuries.

What this means for a reader: the companies named in the notices, and the vehicle's classification as a side-by-side rather than an ATV, shape which records and rules may be relevant. If you are looking into an incident, the purchase papers and the label identifying the exact model are a natural starting point for matching the vehicle to either notice.

CPSC Recall 24-735 (December 2023): Injury Hazard

The CPSC notice titled "BRP US Recalls Side-By-Side Vehicles Due to Injury Hazard (Recall Alert)" carries recall number 24-735 and a recall date of December 14, 2023.

The product, in the notice's words, is "Can-Am® Commander series, Defender series, Maverick Trail series equipped with an HD7 or 700 engines side-by-side vehicles (Model Year 2022 and 2023)." The Defender is one of three series named, and only vehicles with those engines in those model years are covered.

The hazard, as the CPSC page states it: "The operator's guide maintenance schedule section contains incorrect information regarding proper maintenance intervals for the clutch which can lead to clutch failure, including fragments to be ejected from the vehicle if not serviced, posing a risk of serious injuries." The problem described is in the printed maintenance schedule, which connects to the regulation's point that a defect can occur in instructions.

The remedy listed is "Repair." The page states that consumers "should immediately stop using" the recalled vehicles "until they have reviewed the new maintenance instructions," that "BRP will mail a free revised maintenance information booklet to registered owners," and that BRP is contacting known purchasers. The page lists about 14,555 units, plus about 2,285 sold in Canada, sold from October 2021 through October 2023. Under incidents, it states: "The firm has received one report of a clutch malfunction. No injuries have been reported."

If your Defender falls within this notice, the record tells you what hazard was identified and what remedy was offered. It does not establish that a clutch problem caused any particular crash or injury, or that BRP is liable for one. Questions people in this position often weigh next: Does the vehicle have an HD7 or 700 engine? Was the revised booklet received, and was the clutch serviced on the original or the revised schedule? Did the incident involve the clutch at all?

CPSC Recall 21-767 (July 2021): Fire Hazard

The CPSC page titled "BRP Recalls Side-by-Side Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert)" carries recall number 21-767 and a recall date of July 22, 2021.

It covers "Model Years 2020 and 2021 Can-AM Defender HD10 side-by-side vehicles," and the description narrows it further: the recalled vehicles "are equipped with track kits, the Apache 360 LT and the Apache Backcountry track systems, sold separatedly by BRP." The page lists twenty HD10 model names, including the DPS, XT, CAB, MAX, PRO and 6X6 versions.

The hazard, in the notice's words: "The stock CVT air intake can become completely obstructed with snow causing the drive belt to overheat and break, posing a fire hazard." The condition described is specific: a track kit, snow, and a blocked intake.

The remedy is listed as "Repair." The page states that consumers "should immediately stop using track kits on the recalled vehicles in snow conditions and contact a Can-Am dealer for a free repair." It lists about 34,400 units sold from February 2019 through July 2021, and states: "BRP has received three reports of incidents involving fires. No injuries have been reported."

For a family looking into a Defender fire, the two notices are separate records about separate concerns: recall 21-767 concerns a fire hazard under snow conditions with track kits, while recall 24-735 concerns clutch maintenance information. Neither speaks to a fire or failure outside the conditions it describes, and neither is an admission of fault or a finding of liability. The details worth gathering here are whether a listed track system was installed, whether there was snow at the time, and whether the dealer repair was done before the fire.

What These Records Mean If You Were Hurt on a Defender

Product liability is the area of law under which a manufacturer, distributor or seller may be held responsible for harm caused by a defective product. A recall record can be relevant evidence in a product-liability case, but its relevance to any one incident depends on the facts.

Those facts usually start with matching. Was the vehicle the model, engine and model year a notice names? For recall 21-767, was a listed track kit installed, and did the incident happen in snow? Did the incident occur before or after the recall date? Was the remedy performed, the revised booklet received, or the repair done? A notice about clutch maintenance intervals says little about a rollover on a dry hillside, and a recall never proves that a defect caused someone's injury.

The state where the incident happened matters just as much. Limitation periods (statutes of limitations, the deadlines for filing a lawsuit), fault rules and damages rules differ from state to state, and no single state's rule applies everywhere.

If you were hurt, the records that usually matter include the vehicle's VIN, any recall notice or completion paperwork, dealer service records, the purchase documents, incident or police reports, medical records, and photos of the vehicle and the scene. Injured people and families often keep the vehicle itself in its post-incident condition, along with any separately purchased parts such as a track kit.

Sorting out whether a recall notice fits the vehicle and the incident, and which state's rules apply, is the kind of question a conversation can cover. If you would like to talk it through, you can request a case evaluation with our attorney.

Checking Whether Your Defender Is Covered by a Recall

The CPSC publishes recall notices on cpsc.gov, and each notice identifies the covered vehicles by series, engine, model name and model year. The two notices above are the CPSC pages linked in this article.

A vehicle identification number (VIN) is the code that identifies one specific vehicle. The 2021 CPSC notice states that "the model name and the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) is printed on a label under the glove box" on the covered HD10 vehicles. Comparing a vehicle's model name and VIN against a notice's description is the general way an owner checks whether a recall reaches that particular machine.

Both CPSC pages also list BRP's consumer contact: BRP toll-free at 888-272-9222, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET Monday through Sunday, with recall information on the Can-Am owner pages the notices identify. Both pages note that if a person is "experiencing issues with a recall remedy or believe a company is being non-responsive to your remedy request," they can use the CPSC's recall complaint form to explain the situation to the agency.

Whether a remedy was completed before an incident is a factual question, and it can become relevant in a product-liability investigation. If you are looking back after an injury, the dates matter: when the notice issued, when any booklet or repair reached the owner, and when the incident happened.

How Liability Questions Are Framed in Side-by-Side Accident Cases

If you were hurt on a Defender and are wondering whether BRP, or someone else, could be responsible, the answer turns on which legal theory fits the facts. A rollover or crash, by itself, does not show that a vehicle was defective.

If the question is whether the vehicle itself was at fault, a product-liability claim generally looks at three things. First, was there a defect, in the design, in the manufacturing, or in the warnings and instructions? The clutch maintenance notice is an example of a concern about instructions. Second, did that defect cause the harm you or your family suffered? Third, what losses followed? Whether each is met depends on the facts and the state's law.

If the question is whether a person's conduct played a part, a negligence claim asks whether someone owed a duty of care, breached it, and caused harm as a result. That could involve another driver, a rental operator or a person who maintained the vehicle. If the trail or land itself was the problem, a premises claim concerns its condition. These theories stay separate unless the facts connect them. The site's page on how ATV accident claims work covers the broader framework.

Your own conduct on the ride can also matter. Under comparative fault, an injured person's own conduct may reduce their recovery; in a few places, a related rule called contributory fault may bar it. How each state applies these rules differs, so the same facts can lead to different results depending on where the incident happened.

State law also sets the limitation period, when it starts and its exceptions, and the damages the law may allow. For an injured person or a grieving family, those categories may include medical expenses, lost income and pain and suffering, and, after a death, wrongful-death damages, each depending on the state and the facts. If you are weighing these questions, the state where the incident happened is usually where the analysis begins, and it is a natural first point to raise with an attorney.