[another] Dynafit radical quality issue

I was skiing the other day, and my right ski suddenly wasn't attached to my boot anymore. After a header into a treewell, something did not look quite right with my binding. The rear heel piece had torn completely off the ski, leaving the mounting screws and some plastic behind. When I got home, I took a closer look, and it is clear there is a void that the failure originated (see red arrow below).

So... I emailed salewa usa and got the following response
"Sorry to hear of your situation and we are thankful that you are OK. All Dynafit Bindings have a two year warranty for all manufacturer defect. Looking at your pictures it appears you are using quiver killer inserts and the thread locker you used reacted with the plastic causing it to melt and weaken . This is not covered under warranty since the original screws were not used."

I am using quiver killers, but used plastic safe threadlocker. Additionally, what I assume the rep is saying is melting is clear in the photo - black plastic doesn't melt clear. It is epoxy left over from the original mounting. I'm probably out a binding here, but a pretty crappy outcome from a grossly negligent manufacturing QA process.

Bummer. So glad I bought used Comforts and Verticles instead of the new and improved Radicals.
Seriously though, I don't pay much attention to the tech binding front, but it sure seems the older versions of Dynafits are a good investment.

that is a really weak, unscientific reply from the company. sorry to hear it. I have two pairs of radicals. no problems yet.

Scott wouldn't warranty their cosmos boot that over flexed into high angle aggressive perma ski mode during our bugs to rog traverse. We had to saw the walk mode bar off so that the person with the boot could actually make it out. They replied back that none of their testing 'pros' had experienced this problem and because we sawed the walk mode off no warranty... That's bs, no way am I not going to modify a boot mid traverse and call a heli just so I can get a warranty. I think ski companies are starting to really push back on warranties...

Update: After a month we finally got them to cave and agree to a replacement.

I don't want to take a position on the warranty as a whole at this time, but I would like to point out that the "original screws" thing does have merit.

I almost exclusively run skis with inserts these days, and I've once cracked the base of a binding by using tapered-head screws where flat-bottom screws were required (yes, I knew this was bad, but there was pow, and all I had on hand was tapered heads).

It's hard for manufacturers to test their bindings against all possible screws, so warrantying for original screws only does make sense. It would be a kind gesture to the ski community to provide recommended machine-screw head geometries, threadlocker brands, and torque specs. If they do, we should recognize that doing so is a voluntary act that's contrary to short-term business interest.

Do any other manufacturers have a similar "original screws" policy?

I understand the original screws warranty thing, it makes sense.  However, I'm more disturbed they totally wrote off the large void where the failure seems to have originated.  For such a thin piece of plastic, the void is pretty big.  I would expect a component of this structural importance would have had a better quality assurance process, as injection molding has been a known quantity for quite some time. If one mass produced injection molded part has a significant issue, it's pretty likely that other parts, in the same lot at least, have the same problem.