A property insurer is suing Amazon and a third-party seller to recover more than $452,000 it paid on a house fire blamed on a defective battery.
In a complaint filed June 11, 2026, in federal court in Kentucky, Homesite Insurance Company of the Midwest says the trouble started with a small online purchase. The Guarino family bought a "boogostore Solar Charger Power Bank" through Amazon's website in September 2024, the filing says, from a third-party vendor called Shenzhen Ente Intelligent Co. The order total was $63.59. The device shipped through Amazon's "Fulfillment by Amazon" program.
On December 8, 2024, a fire broke out at the family's Glasgow home. The complaint says it began on a living room couch where the charger sat, when the battery "malfunctioned, overheated, exploded, and/or ignited." Homesite paid its policyholders "in excess of $452,123.61" for the damage and is now suing to recover that money - a move called subrogation, where an insurer that covers a loss takes over the customer's right to pursue whoever caused it.
For claims teams, the strategy is the story. Homesite leans on a regulatory development. It says that on July 29, 2024, the Consumer Product Safety Commission "issued a unanimous decision and order categorizing Amazon as a 'distributor'" under the Consumer Product Safety Act. That label matters: a distributor sits inside the stream of commerce, which is where product liability lives. The complaint says the agency found Amazon's fulfillment program "fits squarely within its definition of a 'distributor,'" citing Amazon's control over storing, screening, and shipping other sellers' goods.
Two contract clauses stand out for insurers. Under Amazon's seller agreement, the filing says, vendors agree to indemnify Amazon for product claims, and once a seller's sales cross an "Insurance Threshold," that seller must carry liability coverage naming Amazon as an additional insured. The catch, according to the complaint: "Amazon takes no proactive steps to determine whether third-party vendors satisfy the Insurance Threshold and procure the insurance mandated by the BSA." The coverage is required on paper. The complaint says no one verifies it.
Then there is the recovery problem. The complaint says the second defendant, Shenzhen Ente, is a foreign corporation located in Shenzhen, China, and that service will run through the Hague Service Convention. It also says Amazon does not require its sellers to keep a US agent for legal process. For a subrogating carrier, that often means the manufacturer is hard to reach and the marketplace is the only realistic target.
Homesite brings ten counts across both defendants, including negligence, strict products liability, and warranty claims. It points to Amazon reviews it says described batteries "expanding, swelling, popping, and in some instances becoming twice its normal size," arguing the company knew or should have known of the risk.
The allegations have not been tested in court. Neither Amazon nor Shenzhen Ente has responded, and no judge has ruled.
