The Stella Awards - Tort Reform Hoax

Have you heard of the Stella Awards - the e-mail that spread through the Internet discussing crazy jury awards for "frivilous" lawsuits.  They aren't true.  For more info, look at the following web link: http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp

Who do you think would have started this e-mail about "frivilous lawsuits"?  Perhaps a business that could save a lot of money by restricting people's right to justice.  Maybe an insurance company? 
For more information about the tort reform see www.georgiawatch.org

Regards,

Michael L. Neff

Brain Injury every 21 seconds

"Every 21 seconds" is an excellent article by Sharon Rolenc, the Public Awareness Director for the Brain Injury Association of Minnesota.  In her article she notes that every 21 seconds in this country, another person sustains a brain injury.   Ms. Rolenc  identifies that common causes of brain injury include motor vehicle crashes, falls, violence, bike/skateboard crashes, sports related concussions, strokes, aneurysms, and diseases such as encephalitis.

Ms. Rolenc states, “Lasting effects of brain injury can vary depending on the individual and the severity of the injury, which makes it very difficult to predict outcomes. When you break your bone, you expect to be back to normal after a few weeks in a cast, under typical conditions. There is a defined, prescribed plan of treatment. But there is no road map that exists for brain injury. This can be extremely frightening for the person experiencing a brain injury and their loved ones – realizing that the doctors just don’t know what to expect.”

The Brain Injury Association of Minnesota was founded in 1984. Its first ten years were devoted primarily to grassroots advocacy for traumatic brain injury (TBI) victims, and developing an information, referral and support network for persons with brain injury. In the last ten years, the Association’s services have grown to include community education and professional development, public awareness events and case management to assist persons with brain injury in their return to home, work, school and the community.

Ms. Rolenc cites a report on TBI by the Minnesota Department of Health, "the burden of injury and violence in Minnesota is not equally shared."The rate of TBI in Black and American Indian Minnesotans is four times the rest of the population. As with other areas of healthcare, a disparity exists in the Black community as well as other communities of color in relation to brain injury.”

Rolenc states, “The only cure for brain injury is prevention and most brain injuries are entirely preventable. A disproportionate number of preventable brain injuries in the Black community include bike crashes, domestic violence, shaken baby syndrome and gang or crime related violence. As with most other populations, motor vehicle crashes are also a major cause of brain injury for Blacks.”

Rolenc also notes that while the effects of brain injury can be devastating, the effects of undiagnosed brain injuries have far worse consequences. Undiagnosed brain injury can lead to: individuals self-medicating their problems through alcohol and drug abuse; domestic abuse and/or family disintegration; troubles maintaining employment; criminal recidivism and homelessness.

For the full article, click on http://www.insightnews.com/health.asp?mode=display&articleID=1742

Regards,

Michael Neff

Loans on lawsuits

Have you been hurt in a personal injury case, can’t work and the bills are starting to pile up? Are you standing a risk of going into foreclosure or being put out of your apartment? Have you been offered a settlement that you think is unfair and thinking about accepting it because you need the money? Now you can receive financial assistance through legal funding. Legal funding is a way to receive an advancement on your settlement so you can maintain your lifestyle, pay your attorney, expert witnesses or other disbursements.

The above questions are those being asked by a new line of businesses that tout themselves as “legal funders”. They include companies like Law Cash. These companies advance monies based on what they believe you will receive at settlement. Typically interest rates tend to be 4-8% a month - much more than a bank would let you borrow money. However, most banks will not let you borrow based on a personal injury claim. Thus, these companies serve as a lender of last resort so that people don’t have to settle their personal injury claims for pennies on the dollar.

Cases that are considered go beyond an auto accident or a slip and fall, to include: Medical Malpractice Animal Attacks Boating/Aviation Injuries Nursing Home Abuse Brain and Spinal Injuries Paraplegic and Quadriplegic Motorcycle Accidents Drug Injuries Back Injuries Negligent Security Wrongful Death/Accident/Imprisonment However, cases are based on riskiness and these companies will not lend on every case. Some companies justify the high interest rates that they charge by not seeking repayment in the event the case is lost. If you have questions about a “law funder”, speak to an experienced personal injury lawyer who can advise you as to whether these advancements are appropriate for you. Regards,

Michael Neff

The Law Offices of Michael L. Neff, P.C.

Two Ravinia Drive Suite 1570

Atlanta, Georgia 30346 404-531-9700

MNEFF@MLNLAW.COM

WWW.MLNLAW.COM - A law firm whose mission is to provide aggressive, competent and caring representation to personal injury victims.

New safety rules for truck drivers

An excellent article by Mike Tierney in Sunday, March 20, 2005's Atlanta Journal Constitution discusses how the new regulations for truck drivers affect Georgia’s motorists. The article gives a good indication on how truck drivers must comply with safety regulations in order to prevent accidents caused by tired drivers.

The link is http://www.ajc.com/today/content/epaper/editions/today/business_24c3df72f371625a0026.html

or read the article below.

Pushing the limit? - Flap over truckers' hours adds headache to demanding profession

On The Road Again --- A soupy fog sits low and hard on central Georgia, but there is no time to waste. At a cup of coffee past 8 a.m., John "The Englishman" Holman guns his 18-wheeler out of the truck stop lot in Fortson and onto I-185, headed south.

Notwithstanding the 23 1/3 tons of pebbles dragging behind his purple Peterbilt truck, Holman is traveling light. He's carrying a shaving kit, a change of underwear and the real indispensable item: a logbook.

In it, Holman records every last detail of his journey: mileage, tonnage, fuel purchased, state lines crossed and, most critically, hours worked. The pages document for the highway patrol, the truck inspectors, the weigh station staff, the tax man --- whoever wants to look --- that Holman is adhering to the hotly discussed and cussed federal hours-of-service rules for big-rig drivers.

Congress, the courts, federal transportation agencies and highway safety advocates have engaged in a free-for-all over the length of a trucker's workday. For now, it is capped at 14 hours --- 11 behind the wheel, followed by a mandatory 10 hours off duty.

If only the issue were that simple. Factions are debating not only maximum driving hours in a day or a week, but also rest periods between weeks and off-duty periods during the course of a day. Truckers are divided about what they think is best, but mainly they just want regulators to settle on uniform rules and stick with them.

Holman must make room in his cab for a 650-page book of regulations, with an "updated monthly" reminder on the cover. He and many colleagues feel buried by layers of restrictions that an American Trucking Associations spokesman says places the industry second --- behind nuclear power --- for regulation.

Holman opposes daily limits on the clock.

"A grown man knows when to go to bed," says the 48-year-old, his British accent untainted by 15 years in the Columbus area, his home since marrying a local. Perched on an air-suspended seat, fiddling with the dial on his satellite radio, triggering cruise control, Holman equates the ride to a spin in a Cadillac. "After 11 hours," he says, "sometimes I feel like I'm just getting going."

Still, he is one tired trucker --- not from the hours but the headaches, enough to make him ponder a drastic career move. High, volatile gas prices. Ever-changing regulations and ever-thickening traffic. Aggressive drivers who cut in front of him without warning. Separate speed limits for cars and trucks. Random drug tests. Overcrowded parking areas at rest stops. Rules that vary from state to state. Speeding tickets at 5 mph above the limit for trucks while cars whiz by.

When his wife once chided him for having no patience, he told her: "Yes I do, Honey. I just used it all up on the road."

A matter of hours

The Federal Motor Carriers Safety Association, charged with reducing injury-causing commercial motor-vehicle-related crashes, implemented the current 11-hour driving shift regulations in January 2004, then hit a roadblock when three public interest groups sued to reduce the road time. The previous edict called for 10 hours' drive time and a 15-hour workday.

Either figure is too long for Public Citizen, which joined with Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways and Parents Against Tired Truckers in the suit.

"After eight hours, drivers rapidly decline in their driving skills," Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook says. "Science shows eight hours is the proper amount."

In July, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington booted the new rules back to the Federal Motor Carriers Safety Association for reconsideration. Then Congress intervened in September and locked in the 11-hour formula for one year while the FMCSA re-evaluates it.

The trucking group ATA says it supports the existing format, though it points out the half-dozen states that permit at least 12 hours for intrastate routes haven't reported spikes in accidents. The Teamsters union, with 600,000 card-carrying truckers, also backs the plan, saying the shift is safe and reasonable for drivers.

The FMCSA is accepting suggestions on a Web site from truckers, who are unlikely to reach a consensus because the pressures on independent drivers who own their rigs are different from those on drivers employed by trucking companies or retail fleets. And, because of truckers' innate individualism.

"Truck drivers," Holman says, "can't agree about anything."

'A traveling man'

A former Merchant Marine from the north of England, Holman aspired to life as a chef. He once dabbled in Atlanta's hotel-restaurant business and still wins the occasional cooking contest.

The after-effects of a motorcycle accident that nearly cost Holman his right leg caught up. As arthritis set in, he sought work that could be performed off his feet --- but not from behind a desk.

"I'd always fancied truck driving," he says. "And I've always been a traveling man. There were parts of the country I hadn't seen."

Holman came a decade late to a profession that was glorified in the 1970s for its manifestation of carefree independence: Rolling down uncongested highways, with no boss in sight, and yakking on a high-tech citizens band radio. Media celebrated the occupation, mainly in movies like "Smokey and the Bandit" and "Convoy."

"Trucking used to be a job that attracted people who worked it an entire career," says Todd Spencer, vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, whose membership includes Holman.

Now, according to Spencer, trucker turnover exceeds 100 percent annually. "It isn't the people, it's the job," he says, alluding to a bounce in fuel rates that led to repossession of some 250,000 trucks from 2000 to 2002.

Some shipping companies are dealing with a driver shortage by recruiting immigrants and training them to take the wheel. Holman primarily blames gas prices for his substantial net loss last year. "Terrible. The worst I've had," he says.

As a self-employed driver, Holman took enough tax deductions to allow him to stay on the road, above water, even as his peers pulled out in droves.

"I'm almost 50," he says. "It's a young man's deal."

The average driver in the independent group has 18 years' of experience.

"I'm concerned that, when these guys are gone, who's going to come in behind them?" says Spencer, who foresees an influx of younger drivers among the next wave. He frets that, swayed by an immature sense of invincibility, they might push the limits of law and common sense, thus heightening the risk of accidents.

"The difference [in age] between the two is going to play out on the highway."

Dueling studies

Trucks are involved in a disproportionately high rate of fatal accidents. Supporters of stricter regulations cite fatigue as a factor.

Public Citizen has compiled a daunting list of studies that conclude longer hours at the wheel lead to more wrecks, including one that asserts the crash risk for drivers after the eight-hour mark doubles.

The industry answers with findings from its own studies, one that indicates speeding is the leading factor in truck accidents, with drowsiness ranking 11th. In apparent contradiction to the safety group findings, the regulation-setting FMCSA reports that two-thirds of fatal accidents involving trucks occur during the first four hours of a shift, while only 4 percent happen after eight hours.

Passenger vehicles cause three of every four car-truck accidents, attests the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, a nonprofit dedicated to reducing road injuries.

Holman, who drives ultra-defensively, references that study almost every time a car wiggles dangerously close to him.

"You can't get mad. You have to laugh at it," he says.

Truckers contend the issue of hours at the wheel has been oversimplified by proponents of reduced shifts. While stopped to load and unload cargo, they generally are not paid. And they are at the mercy of the shipper or receiver who can keep them idling for long periods, thus complicating the task of finishing their day within 14 hours.

The average wait, according to Spencer, is between 33 and 43 hours a week. "It's impossible to schedule work and sleep in that scenario," he says, pining for a return to the brief stretch in the early 1980s when truckers were compensated for waits beyond two hours. "It's an astounding time of inaction."

Many observers on this divided highway of opinion contend the new rules have motivated shippers and receivers to load and unload with greater urgency, assuring that their products get delivered on schedule.

"This makes them operate more efficiently," ATA spokesman Mike Russell says.

'It gets in your blood'

By the time Holman traverses into Florida, the sun has burned off all fog, and traffic is light. The truck glimmers, droplets of water flying off from its $65 wash. The scenario reminds him why he chooses to keep on truckin'.

"I do love it," he admits. "It gets in your blood. You are running a business. And you have an office with a view."

Holman has pulled everything from cantaloupes to cadavers. He has driven through every state in the lower 48. His least favorite? "California. They hate truckers," he says, wincing at the memory of a $1,000 ticket for inadvertently listing the wrong day in his logbook.

Holman wishes he had room on his downsized rig for the sticker that graced its predecessor: "If it weren't for truckers, you'd be hungry, homeless and naked."

He frequently reaches for his CB to converse with fellow truckers, assuring them it's safe to change lanes or warning them about "bears" (patrolmen with radar guns) up ahead. Rarely does he pass a truck without a friendly wave.

And he considers work-vacation jaunts last year with his son as suitable for framing. It's some consolation for missed memories: He has been on the road for eight of his son's 12 birthdays, mostly during extended runs to the West Coast.

But as he sinks in financial quicksand, Holman is exploring an option that would separate him from family for much longer periods. He filled out an application to train for a trucking gig in Iraq or Afghanistan, where hefty paychecks are offset by high danger.

For now, Holman navigates his truck through Jacksonville, where he sheds the rocks, then motors a few miles more to load up with limestone. To get as close as possible to the 24 1/2 ton limit without exceeding it, each ton being worth $25 to Holman, he takes three spins onto a scale --- adding a bit here, releasing a bit there. A cheeseburger, bought four hours earlier for the road, is half-eaten. Meal breaks are a luxury and, with less than seven hours to meet time restrictions and check into his $25 hotel room in Monroeville, Ala., he beelines across Florida.

The next morning, after polishing off his first full meal in more than a day, Holman updates his logbook. The expedition, which will conclude with a haul of 24 1/4 tons of white gravel fetched in Shorter, Ala., will generate $613. But he will spend $531 on fuel, which burns at 5 1/2 miles to the gallon, almost as inefficient as a stock car at the Daytona 500. Two tires preceding the trip cost $313. None of which counts the $800 annual license fee, the $180 monthly oil changes, the $700 yearly brake work, the $39.95 a month for an attorney ...

Then again, he will be home by midafternoon, not to depart again until dawn the next morning. "That will feel like a day off," he says.

A thousand miles and 30 hours after embarking, Holman guides his truck north onto I-185N, shifting up to 10th gear and flicking one of 20 switches or knobs next to the wheel. He is in the home stretch, minutes from completing a safe, smooth jaunt, unimpeded by reckless drivers.

Then a car, without signaling, zigs in front of Holman with little room to spare.

He smiles and says, "Must be getting close to Atlanta."

THE ISSUES

How many hours truckers can work each day, currently 11 hours of driving and 14 hours total. Safety groups prefer as few as eight hours of driving.

* Maximum work hours in a week, currently 60.

* The "restart" period, or hours off between weeks, currently 34.

* "Off-duty" hours during the course of a workday, when truckers could eat or rest with the clock stopped, currently none

Good Insurance Claims Advice

 

This was originally posted by from Mike Cerf on a (prairielaw forum)

Most insurance carriers,   believe it or not, do not like complaints. They take the claims person away from the   everyday task of working on claims or management tasks.

The following might help with general complaints

 

The first thing you must   understand is the organization itself. Claim departments by in large are structured as   follows:

 

1. Adjuster
 

2. Supervisor

 

3. Unit Manager, over   several supervisors by line of business

 

4. Assistant Manager, over Unit   Managers, but not in all offices

 

5. Claims Manager or Claims Vice President, in charge of local office

 

6. Regional Claims Vice   President- In charge of several offices in a region

 

7. Home Office Claims. At   the home office you have several levels:  

 

Field Management - Senior VP in charge of regional managers

   

 

Technical Management -   Vice Presidents in charge of lines of business, such as auto, general liability, property    

 

 

   

 

Major Claims - Such as   asbestos, lead paint, or those claims with long occurrence type exposures. They may also   handle large and complex claims. (Large being over $750,000).    

   

Excess Claims - Some Home Offices do not have an excess unit.

 

 

 

The contact order is   upward starting at the adjuster.

What   moves a carrier to resolution of an issue is a focused complaint that causes   people above the adjuster to get upset that they are being troubled with such   a minor issue. But, keep in mind, that   the higher you go the greater your chances of success in   resolving your complaints.

One thing you rarely see is an effective, documented complaint

 

For example, very few   people confirm conversations with the adjuster or who they talk to. Also, very few people   cc (carbon copy) the next level. When you raise the voice of concern over claims handling,   documentation is everything in dealing with an insurer. If you write to an adjuster, cc   his or her next in line, and request a written response in a set time frame. Do not make   the letters threatening, make them to the point and polite. Be the good guy and put the ball   in their court. If you are nasty, your next contact might be from counsel, and thus, no   more communication with the insurer.

 

Always ask them what   their policy is on the issue you have raised. Make sure you ask for them to reply in   writing and once again set a deadline. Ask them if they need information from you and when   they need it.

Be  Polite, Be Prompt, Be Persistent

 

Your complaints should be   followed up by a phone call and ask if they received your letter. Do they need anything   from you to respond, if so what? Be sure you note your time deadline. Ask them who is   handling the problem and who will respond to your request? Continue to be the good guy.   Provide an extension if they ask for one and as always, confirm in writing what was agreed   to and ask when they will respond.

 

I can't stress enough how   important it is to document all contact with your insurance company. They will   try to handle your complaint by phone with no records, but you must make sure that   everything gets documented. Keep precise phone records and note everything that was said,   when, and by whom.

 

Suggestions for   medical matters:

 

1. Send the adjuster a letter, attach to   the letter a narrative report from the Doctor, Radiologist, etc...  If   the injury was missed, have the doctor point out how an injury can go for a   few days without pain and notice.

 

2. Ask the adjuster to support in   writing his or her position from a medical perspective, noting they are not a   doctor. The medical basis for their reason; not their opinion, but the medical   opinion and/or medical basis they rely upon to support the conclusion they   have reached and ask for a copy of that opinion. Put a time limit on the   request; use the Unfair Claims Practices Act as a reference, also.

 

3. Next step is to go right to the   claims manager with a copy of your letter; you can call the office for the   manager’s name. But demand a response in writing.

 

4. Also, find out what region this   office reports to. The switchboard will usually tell you. Carriers have a   pecking order as pointed out above. Work your way right up the chain and ask   for a response in writing at each step.

 

5. Ask them what their practice and   policy is to resolve an issue such as you raise, who is the decision maker you   must speak with, and always ask in writing.

 

6. Complain to the State Insurance   Commissioner if you do not resolve the case in a method you find fair.

 

Do not allow them to respond in any   format that does not address the medical issues they rely upon, be specific,   what medical opinion and/or literature can they point to that with a medical   certainty rules out the injury occurred as you have set out. Point to your   doctor’s opinion and ask them where your doctor is incorrect.

Mike Cerf
Expert Witness Insurance Claims
Sherwood, Oregon

503-925-1937
mcerf@teleport.com

Are you in good hands with Allstate?

Allstate ranks last in NJ Report ranking auto insurers by complaints
based on article by Jonathan Tamari published in the Asbury Park Press 02/2/05 - for full article - http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050202/NEWS/502020310

A February 2005 article noted that a new report measuring customer complaints against auto insurers in New Jersey found that Allstate finished worst.  "This report gives consumers an idea of how insurance companies compare with each other in terms of customer satisfaction," Banking and Insurance Commissioner Holly C. Bakke said in a statement.

MetLife had the worst ratio of complaints compared to the number of vehicles it insures, 16 complaints and 60,994 vehicles as of June 30. The company, in a statement, said its sale of some New Jersey business affected its ranking. MetLife, which also ranked among the 10 worst companies for complaints in 2003, said it expects better results this year.

Allstate, the state's second-largest insurer at roughly 723,000 cars, had the most total complaints filed against it in 2004, with 42 deemed "valid." The next-closest company, Liberty Mutual, had 27 valid complaints and roughly 483,000 cars.

An Allstate spokesman did not return a phone call seeking comment.   Maybe you aren't in such good hands after all.  Better insurance companies include USAA and Travellers.  From my personal experience, State Farm, Liberty Mutual, Progressive, and Safeway are nearly as bad.  If you want the name of an insurance agent who sells for more than one insurance company, send me an e-mail at mneff@mlnlaw.com or call me at 404-531-9700.

Regards,

Mike Neff

Fraud in Car Wrecks?

ALLSTATE’S SWOOP AND SQUAT TV AD
    How much fraud is really going on?

    Have you seen this TV ad warning about the swoop and squat?  Allstate talks about fraud being a big problem in auto accident claims.  According to Allstate this is a $20-30 billion problem that costs every driver hundreds of dollars each year. I would agree that any fraud at all is a terrible thing and those people should be prosecuted and incarcerated.  However, Allstate doesn’t say what percentage of claims it alleges are fraudulent.  Is fraud involved in 10%, 5%, 1%, or even less of the car wreck claims Allstate handles ?  Where did they get the $20 billion dollar annual figure? 

    According to its website, www.allstate.com, the National Insurance Crime Prevention Bureau has estimated this figure as the annual loss.  Well, what is the National Insurance Crime Prevention Bureau?  Its not a governmental organization.  According to its website, www.nicb.org, its membership includes more than 1,000 commercial and personal line property/casualty insurers, workers' compensation insurers, self-insured organizations, car rental companies, parking garages and public transit authorities.  So it appears that the insurance companies are the ones calculating what is fraud and what isn’t fraud.  Does anyone think the might be overstating the problem just a little bit? 

    For a little more about Allstate’s perspective, you might want to go to  www.allstate.com/About/PageRender.asp?page=fraud.htm.  Of course, for a different perspective on whether Allstate is fairly representing the problem, I recommend www.allstateinsurance.org.  I’d be very interested to hear what people think about this issue.

Regards,

Michael Neff
Atlanta, Georgia

Black Boxes track speed

This below CNET.com article looks at the advances in technology that may help determine who is at fault for auto and truck accidents.  The "black box" or satellite tracking data is crucial evidence to persue to establish fault and damages in personal injury lawsuits.

http://news.com.com/Rocky+road+for+car+black+boxes/2009-1041_3-5604449.html

by John G. Spooner
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
March 9, 2005 4:00 AM PST

As James Fitzgerald wheeled his tractor-trailer down Interstate 40 near the Nashville International Airport last summer, little did he know that a small black box aboard the truck might later help clear him of homicide charges.

His truck collided with a police car, killing an officer who had stopped to assist a disabled vehicle. Police alleged that Fitzgerald was traveling at least 80 mph at the time of the crash, and he was jailed on charges of vehicular homicide and aggravated assault.

But the 25-year-old trucker pleaded not guilty, and when his trial begins this summer, the black box will be his star witness. According to Fitzgerald's lawyer, Patrick McNally, data from the device shows that the truck was traveling at the legal limit of 70 mph.

"I think juries are much more inclined to rely upon electronic devices that measure speed than personal opinions of speed," McNally said in an interview with CNET News.com. "We live in an electronic age, and we've all learned to rely on electronic devices."

The case represents an unusual twist in the controversial use of digital information in cars. Although Fitzgerald views his truck's electronic data as a benefit, others say such technologies contribute to an increasingly Orwellian society where individuals' every move is monitored. Many are particularly galled by the notion of applying these technologies to the automobile on the open road, a symbol of American freedom that often represents a rite of passage from adolescence to adulthood.

The debate has intensified as manufacturers increasingly turn to high technology to differentiate their products in the hypercompetitive auto market. This tech trend has produced many features that have been credited with improving safety, including airbags, antilock brakes and stability control systems.

The annual death toll from car accidents fell from 43,005 in 2002 to 42,643 in 2003, according to data from the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, or NHTSA. Injuries from accidents also declined. The agency attributes the changes to more-crashworthy cars and increases in safety belt use.

Despite these operational benefits, however, critics see a dark side to the use of information about motorists derived from devices such as black boxes. Noting that many drivers are unaware that their actions are being recorded, they say rights to privacy could be violated in the absence of regulations governing how the data can be used and interpreted.

"If you were squealing your tires or not wearing your seat belt, they'll say, 'We're going to start sticking you with fines so that you won't do that anymore,'" said Eric Skrum, a spokesman for the National Motorists Association, a group that describes itself as dedicated to protecting the rights and interests of motorists.

Skrum's group, along with the Consumers Union and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, are among those calling for the establishment of rules ensuring the protection of privacy in the use of black-box data. The Consumers Union and EPIC have raised their concerns in filings to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.

In a June 2004 announcement, the NHTSA proposed requiring manufacturers to include information about black boxes in owners' manuals for cars equipped with the technology. Although the federal traffic agency continues to gather feedback on its latest set of black-box recommendations, it's too early to say how the input will shape the agency's final ruling, a representative said. For now, the NHTSA has left it up to the courts to decide whether to admit the data as evidence.

According to the New York Law Journal, for example, a judge allowed information from a black box to be used at the trial of two New York men charged in a collision that left two people dead. The device installed in the men's car, a 2002 Chevrolet Corvette, indicates that it was traveling at 130 mph immediately before the crash.

A few states are joining the debate. A California law that went into effect in July 2004 requires manufacturers to provide customers with information on black boxes in cars and states that the data cannot be obtained without a court order or the owner's permission.

In North Dakota, Republican state Sen. Ray Holmberg has submitted a bill that would require automakers to disclose the presence of the boxes in new cars' owners' manuals and require dealers to disclose information about them in purchase contracts. The bill would give control of data collected by black boxes to vehicle owners, stating that the data can be downloaded by someone other than the vehicle owner only if it's being used for safety research or diagnosing problems, or if it's court-ordered or needed for crash reconstructions or investigations by law enforcement. The bill would also prevent black-box data from being used in court, unless ordered by the court or allowed by participants in the proceedings.

Holmberg says he believes other state legislators will follow California and North Dakota and begin regulating how black-box data can be used.

"Once it's accepted as something under your seat, it's very easy for, I would say, do-gooders, to say, 'We want to gather more information,'" Holmberg told News.com. However, he said, "I want to make it clear that they do have legitimate purposes for safety and gathering data regarding how a car handles in an accident. I don't have any problem with that."

Various estimates show that 15 percent of the 270 million cars on the road in the United States today contain some type of data-recording device. Roughly 65 percent of the 16.7 million new cars sold in the United States during 2004 were equipped with them, said Kevin Mixer, an analyst with Boston-based market research company AMR Research.

That means the number of black boxes on U.S. roads will rise significantly as newer models are sold. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in its announcement last June recommended that manufacturers install the devices in all vehicles beginning in September 2008, though automakers are not required to do so.

General Motors has installed the most black boxes to date, although Ford has also used data recorders widely in its lines. BMW, Chrysler, Honda, Isuzu and Toyota install boxes in some models, Mixer said.

Proponents of the boxes argue that concerns over privacy are overblown. Manufacturers might want to use the data to understand how their vehicles are performing, Mixer said, but "they're not interested in the fact that Kevin has a lead foot."

Others aren't so sure. "If they were being honest about this and it was for research, they could do this through a volunteer process," said Skrum of the National Motorists Association.

From a legal perspective, McNally views black-box data as he does other evidence obtained through a search warrant or wiretap. Courts must balance the competing interests of a vehicle owner's right to privacy against an outside party's interest in knowing specific information.

"When you distill it out to its bare element," McNally said, "a person who's driven a car in a proper manner generally has no problem with someone checking the event data recorder."

Regards,

Mike Neff

Misleading SUV ads

If you are considering buying an SUV, be aware of the dangerous ways that SUVs are very different than automobiles. Below is an interesting article about the perspective of the "Car Talk" guys heard on NPR.

Regards,

Mike

Michael L. Neff
The Law Offices of Michael L. Neff, P.C.
Two Ravinia Drive
Suite 1570
Atlanta, Georgia 30346
404-531-9700
MNEFF@MLNLAW.COM
WWW.MLNLAW.COM - A law firm whose mission is to provide aggressive, competent and caring representation to personal injury victims.

http://www.dailyhampshiregazette.com/classifieds/story.cfm?id_no=30500572005

Advertising for SUVs shows corporate irresponsibility

By TOM & RAY MAGLIOZZI

[ Originally published on: Saturday, March 05, 2005 ] Dear Tom and Ray:

Regarding your recent criticisms of sport utility vehicles: I understand your position that most people don't need them, and I agree that some people drive them recklessly, but to suggest that accident victims or their families sue the manufacturer is totally irresponsible. Almost any product can be used inappropriately. McDonald's says its hamburgers are good, but eaten exclusively or in inappropriate amounts, they'll make you fat. The answer is not to sue McDonald's; the answer is to be responsible for your own actions. The same logic applies to SUV drivers. To suggest that manufacturers be sued for the irresponsible actions of their customers only invites frivolous lawsuits that will drive up the cost of automobiles for all of us. You should be ashamed.

_ Kenneth

RAY: We're not that good at ''ashamed,'' Kenneth. It's something we should probably work on.

TOM: We got a lot of hate mail about this, Kenneth, but we're going to stand by our comments. You are absolutely right that there's a personal-responsibility component when a moron drives his SUV at 70 mph in a snowstorm and takes out a family of four when he spins into a ditch. But we think the manufacturer, through its advertising agency, bears some responsibility, too.

RAY: Television is absolutely plastered these days with video of SUVs barreling through snowdrifts at high speeds - throwing snow in all directions as they move unstoppably through arctic conditions. The message is clear: If you buy our vehicle, you'll be able to drive like this.

TOM: And so when someone DOES drive like that, is he entirely at fault for the results? Isn't the manufacturer also responsible for telling the guy that his vehicle is designed to be driven that way - even when it's not safe to do so?

RAY: If McDonald's ran advertisements that said, ''Eating nothing but McDonald's day and night is good for you,'' wouldn't you hold McDonald's at least partially responsible for the health of people who followed that advice - and then had to buy SUVs because they couldn't fit into normal cars anymore?

TOM: And hamburgers are easier to understand than SUV handling. Most people know that if you eat nothing but Big Macs, you're going to wind up in stretch pants 30 days from now. But most people DON'T know what the limit of an SUV is - or the limits of physics.

RAY: They don't know that on snow, once you exceed the limit of the tires' grip, it doesn't matter if you have eight-wheel drive - you're going off the road, and taking with you whoever is in your path.

TOM: Since people are dying as a result, we feel that these irresponsible ads - and their misleading messages - need to be stopped. And in America, like it or not, a successful lawsuit - which hits companies in the pocketbook - is the fastest way to stop irresponsible corporate behavior.

Whiplash preventable

Below see an article that ran in Friday's Atlanta Journal Constitution about ways to prevent whiplash injuries from car wrecks.

Heading off whiplash injuries
Improved restraints required in all passenger vehicles, beginning in 2009
Warren Brown - Washington Post
Friday, March 11, 2005

Washington --- Most components of cars and trucks sold in the United States are covered under more than 500 rules, regulations and amendments to Title 49, Chapter 301 of the U.S. Code --- the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.

The first of those rules, collectively known as the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, took effect March 1, 1967. It requires the installation of seat belts in passenger vehicles.

The regulations mandate minimum standards new cars and trucks must meet to help provide basic safety for the U.S. motoring public. That is important to know in a traffic environment where the minimum may not be good enough.

Look at what are commonly called ''headrests,'' covered under FMVSS 202. The standard has been on the books since Jan. 1, 1969 --- and it hasn't been modified since.

But the kinds and numbers of cars and trucks on American roads, and the annual mileage accumulated by them, have changed dramatically since then, as have the types and severity of crashes in which those vehicles are involved.

The upshot, according to federal and auto insurance safety experts, is that most headrests, as we have come to know them, are good for nothing.

They don't rest anything, primarily because that was never their intended purpose. They were, and are, supposed to help control the movement of vehicle occupants' heads in rear-end collisions, thus reducing the chances of debilitating neck whiplash injuries.

But relatively few cars nowadays --- eight out of 62 automobiles tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and other insurance groups last year --- have head-restraint systems that do a good job of protecting necks in crashes. Fifty-four of the vehicles tested received ''poor'' ratings in the insurers' examination.

(For further details, check ''Status Report,'' Nov. 20, 2004, at www.iihs.org.)

Now, the perennially underfunded and understaffed National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which enforces and oversees the implementation of federal auto safety rules, has decided it must do something.

Auto manufacturers agree, and they have vowed to work with NHTSA and the insurers to come up with head restraints that do what they are supposed to do.

The manufacturers' compliance is a mixture of volunteerism and avarice.

In truth, and contrary to conventional wisdom, most FMVSS rules are mere codifications of things the car companies had done and were doing in the first place.

Modern engine ignition systems, for example, did not come about because the government required them. They developed as customer satisfaction items.

To wit: The ancient hand-crank ignition systems of the late 1800s and early 1900s tended to spring back with force, breaking hands and busting jaws.

They were hard sells.

Today, there are no major car companies operating in the mistaken belief that consumers are not interested in safety.

In the matter of head restraints, Swedish automakers Volvo and Saab began making significant improvements a decade ago, putting pressure on their competitors to do the same.

Rival General Motors Corp. partly responded by buying Saab Cars, and Ford Motor Co. did the same by taking over Volvo Cars.

Put another way, the auto industry now has an investment interest in complying with FMVSS updates and in staying on the good side of the world's auto insurers.

NHTSA is requiring the installation of improved head restraints in all passenger vehicles, beginning in 2009.

But the agency does not dictate the kinds of devices that should be made. Instead, NHTSA sets minimum performance parameters. That means most head-restraint systems should be better than those that exist today, but it does not mean they all will be equal.

In general, auto insurers and NHTSA want the new restraints to be higher and closer to the head for passengers seated front and rear.

''A head restraint with inadequate geometry cannot begin to protect many taller people from neck injury in rear-end crashes,'' the insurance institute says in its Jan. 31 ''Status Report'' on the matter.

But it will take more than rearranging head-restraint geometry to bring needed improvements, the report says. Manufacturers will have to re-examine the design of vehicle seats as well, making sure that the seats cannot rotate backward in a rear-end collision.

''A seat also has to allow an occupant to sink into it, moving the head closer to the restraint,'' the report says.

The Saab Active Head Restraint is standard in all models. Swedish automakers Volvo and Saab began making significant improvements a decade ago. / Saab