FirstAlerts
Recalls & Safety Alerts

Modine Recalls Airedale Heat Pump Ventilation Fans Over Fire Hazard

CPSC announces recall of about 6,061 ventilation fans in Airedale heat pumps due to fire risk after 11 reported incidents.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 6:54 p.m. ET
On August 20, 2026, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission () announced a recall of ventilation fans in Airedale ClassMate® DX Cooling and Air Source Heat Pumps and SchoolMate® Water/Ground Source Heat Pumps, manufactured by Modine Manufacturing Company of Racine, Wisconsin. The recall notice states that the ventilation fan motor can short circuit if water gets on the circuit board, causing the units to overheat and posing a fire hazard. Modine has received 11 reports of incidents that resulted in fires, totaling at least $2.7 million in property damage. No injuries have been reported, according to the recall notice. The recall involves about 6,061 units in the U.S. and about 735 sold in Canada. Affected models include CMD, CMP, SMG, SMW, and CMS with specific ventilation configurations. To identify affected units, consumers should check the model name and serial number on the serial plate on the underside of the control unit. The brand name Airedale is on a sticker on the front of the unit. Consumers should stop using the recalled heat pumps immediately and contact Modine for written instructions to unplug the recalled ventilation fan or switch the internal disconnect to the "off" position. They should contact their Modine distributor to arrange for a free inspection and service. Service technicians will inspect and repair or replace the recalled fans. The recall notice is the source for all details. The database records no other enforcement action by Modine Manufacturing Company.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 22:54current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.