Posts Tagged ‘Pennsylvania’

Do you really think insurance companies are on your side?

If you do, think again.

Take Progressive Insurance for example.

They recently proposed a plan in Pennsylvania where they’d offer you a 30% discount on your auto insurance – if you install a wireless monitoring device in your vehicle that would let them keep track of your driving so they can be sure that you are safely operating your vehicle.

Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/KLH49

The proposal, which was outlined in a story last week in The Philadelphia Inquirer, has apparently been temporarily withdrawn, according to the paper, but it appears that it could resurface once Progressive makes some changes to the idea.

Whatever happens from Progressive’s end – or if such ideas are proposed by additional insurance companies – this is a very bad idea for motorists.

How so?

Well, it’s essentially like driving with a police officer sitting right next to you in the passenger seat, even when you are a careful, law-abiding driver.  Under the plan, your friendly, neighborhood insurance company will now serve as witness, judge and jury any time you make a mistake or do something they don’t approve of while you are driving.

And how will they repay you?

Let’s see – by raising your rates, perhaps canceling your insurance and who knows what else? Just imagine the possibilities.

At MyPhillyLawyer, we can imagine the possibilities and they’re not too consumer-friendly.  In fact, this is a Big Brother invasion of privacy at its core.

It’s amazing that Progressive even came up with such an invasive idea, and even more incredible that they actually thought that consumers would find it appealing.

With a 30%  “discount”  as bait, we think an idea like this is an excuse for Progressive to find more reasons to charge higher rates to drivers who will let them track their driving habits.

That’s outrageous, and it’s something you don’t want to allow them to do in your car.

Even more scary – what if you’ve done nothing wrong, but they believe you’ve done something worth penalizing you for in the end, based on the readings from the device in your car or truck?

Good luck with that.

According to the Inquirer story, Progressive’s so-called “MyRate” plan gives drivers discounts of up to 30%  “if they drive fewer miles, stay off the roads during the accident-prone hours after midnight, and avoid hard braking.”  Such plans are already being offered in New Jersey and 19 other states, according to the story.  Those kinds of driving habits are monitored by Progressive to decide whether you are a safe operator and are worthy of lower rates.

A Progressive spokesman told the Inquirer that the device that’s installed in a vehicle doesn’t have GPS but that it “can measure acceleration forces, and can use speed and time data to derive ‘rates of acceleration and braking,’” according to the story. On the other hand, another Progressive spokesperson said that while the wireless devices can compute such information, that the company won’t use it for judging an operator’s driving.

Right. That’s easy for them to say, but if they do decide to use the information in the future, the affected driver is the one holding the bill.

And what if you brake hard to avoid a pending collision that would have been someone else’s fault?  Now you are the one who can be penalized because you braked hard to avoid such a crash?

That’s ridiculous.

In a 17-page state filing that describes the proposal, Progressive said it won’t invoke surcharges on Pennsylvania drivers  “for habits it considers bad,”  based on the information that is collected by the monitors, according to the Inquirer.

Sorry, but that is a huge leap of faith.

They want us to actually believe that they’re looking to start collecting this kind of information and then they promise they’re not potentially going to use it against you later?

That’s very hard to believe, no matter what the insurance company is saying.

Do they think that drivers are stupid?

So far, about 25% of Progressive’s eligible drivers in states that have the program have enrolled, for a total of about 100,000 drivers, according to the Inquirer story.

But at MyPhillyLawyer, we say don’t fall for all the promises and glitz.

Instead, we suggest that you pass on such programs because no matter what a big insurance company is telling you, they’ll find some way to ultimately hurt you through your participation.

And you don’t need to make it any easier for them to raise your rates, cancel your policy or make your life more difficult.

That’s not worth any kind of discount at all.

Protect your rights and protect yourself.

Let’s keep the eyes and ears of the insurance companies out of our motor vehicles.

Have you been injured in an accident? Generally, you only have two years from the date of the accident to file a personal injury claim. It is important that you contact a lawyer right away so as not to miss your opportunity to recover compensation for your injuries.

However, there are some exceptions to this rule. In this month’s video blog, Attorney Dean Weitzman of MyPhillyLawyer explains the exceptions to the general statute of limitations and who they apply to.

A U.S. Court of Appeals got it right recently when it ruled that a teenaged girl whose semi-nude photo was transmitted via a cell phone text message cannot be charged with felony child abuse charges.

That was the correct decision in this so-called “sexting” case that got big headlines and showed just how ridiculous the legal system can get when it is fueled by ideologies rather than by reality.

We last wrote about this case in January, when the second in a line of overzealous Wyoming County, Pa., prosecutors was continuing to pursue felony child abuse charges in connection with the cell phone photo.

Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/Figure8Photos

The photo was discovered on a cell phone when several phones were confiscated in 2008 by officials in the Tunkhannock School District, there the girl was a student. Interestingly, no evidence was ever presented to show that the girl herself distributed the photo. It was apparently sent by a friend, according to news accounts of the incident.

The pictures were found on the phones and then-district attorney, George Skumanick Jr., was called in.  Skumanick, who labeled the photos “provocative,” began a criminal investigation and later told the parents of about 19 school district students that he would prosecute the students on felony charges due to their conduct if they didn’t agree to probation and undergoing a counseling program.  The counseling program was to include lessons to help the girls learn how their actions were wrong, what it means to be a girl in today’s society and about non-traditional societal and job roles.  The parents of 16 of the teens allowed their children to go through the counseling program to avoid criminal charges, while the parents of three of the girls decided to fight the case on the grounds that the prosecutor was simply wrong in his handling of the matter. In the midst of the case, Skumanick lost a re-election bid and his replacement then took over the reins of the case.

The American Civil Liberties Union entered the case on behalf of the girl and her parents and saw it through the Appeals Court ruling, which was announced last week.

In it’s ruling, the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Third District in Philadelphia wrote that felony charges in the case would violate the girl’s Constitutional rights forbidding compelled speech. The court also ruled that the charges would usurp her parent’s rights to raise their daughter, according to a story in The Legal Intelligencer.

This case should have never gone this far in the first place.

It was a case of teens being silly, teens being teens.

They participated in a stupid teen-aged prank, then were threatened with serious felony child pornography charges which carry a possible 10-year prison sentence. A conviction like that for a childhood prank would likely have haunted them for life, in addition to requiring mandatory registration on government-kept lists of child sex offenders.

It was an overreaction from the start by the district attorney and the school district.

Thankfully, the U.S. Court of Appeals wisely put the kibosh on this ridiculous attempted prosecution.

The issue is certainly not over, however, elsewhere around the country where similar cases involving teens and sexting are still being reviewed, according to a story in The New York Times.

States around the country are looking at how to deal with these kinds of cases. “Some of the 14 states considering legislation would make sexting a misdemeanor, while others would treat it like juvenile offenses like truancy or running away,” The New York Times reported. Others believe that decriminalization and education are better approaches, the story said.

For now, it is a legal arena to watch to see what happens.

Like it or not, this will have an impact on our children and our communities.

Let’s hope that the legal system continues to get it right.

And in the meantime, let’s talk to our children and tell them that this is not responsible behavior on their part. That can make more of a difference than all the laws and prosecutions in our nation.

Medical malpractice lawsuits are the talk of Washington, again, as President Obama seeks to reassure Republican lawmakers that he is willing to listen to them and consider their recommendations for fixing healthcare. For most of these Republican Senators and House Representatives, there is but one solution to our nation’s woes and that is tort reform.

Even though analysts and experts have shown time and time again that medical malpractice lawsuits make up but a small amount of our country’s healthcare bill – these lawmakers are intent on limiting patient recourse following a preventable, medical mistakes.

What kind of injuries are we talking about?

How about Martin Harnett? Martin passed away this year – 14 years after the doctor present at his delivery ignored signs of distress, leaving him with cerebral palsy and in need of care, 24/7.

What about Marcus Murray, who went to the hospital with an aortic tear, following a heart attack? Marcus suffered severe and permanent damage after he was refused treatment at a Pennsylvania hospital because he did not have insurance. He too will now require care around the clock, for the rest of his life.

Still, some lawmakers persist in making medical malpractice the great crusade of healthcare reform. They point to it when they need something to blame for the rising costs of healthcare and the increasing number of Americans who cannot afford it. By this logic, one would assume that, as healthcare costs have increased, so have medical malpractice lawsuits – right?

This just isn’t true.

In a recent article, David Wenner, of The Patriot-News, points out that Pennsylvania medical malpractice lawsuits have actually decreased – nearly 40 percent between 2000 and 2008. As for those cases that were brought to trial, a mere 20 percent resulted in patient victories. Even with this decrease, health care costs have continued to rise.

These results aren’t limited to Pennsylvania. Even in states like California, where tort reform has already been enacted, many citizens have been left without healthcare as costs continue to rise. Still, lawmakers supporting tort reform like to point a finger at lawyers and say that “frivolous lawsuits,” are keeping healthcare from more Americans.

The truth?

These lawsuits are making sure that someone’s son, daughter, mother or father is getting the care they need because of a mistake that left them exposed and helpless. These lawsuits make sure that there are consequences for major medical mistakes, so that some other family will not have to suffer the same pain.

Tort reform may be worth considering, but it is not an end-all solution to America’s healthcare problems and, to claim that it is, is to ignore the truth.

Below is a great video featuring Senator Richard Durbin, during a bipartisan healthcare debate.

Related Resources

• Pennsylvania data shed light on national malpractice debate (Penn Live)

There’s yet another effort underway in the state Legislature to try to change the decades-old laws that forbid beer sales in convenience stores and grocery stores across the Commonwealth.

Right now, you also can’t buy a six-pack of beer in a beer distributor in Pennsylvania — you can only buy a full case by law. You are, however, able to buy individual six-packs of beer from bars and restaurants that have liquor licenses which permit them to make such sales.

According to a story this week in The Philadelphia Inquirer, state  Sen. John C. Rafferty Jr., a Montgomery County Republican, is the latest state lawmaker to try his hand at expanding the legal sale of individual six-packs through beer distributors and grocery and convenience stores across the state, arguing that it’s about “consumer choice” and opening up freer competition for beer sales. Some convenience store executives, including Stan Sheetz, the CEO of the Sheetz convenience store chain, support the idea, according to the Inquirer. “We support this bill because it treats adults like adults and it protects the rights of beer drinkers,” Sheetz told the paper at a rally held in Harrisburg to promote the effort. His company has tried in the past to gain permission to sell individual six-packs of beer but has been stymied in the courts. That hasn’t deterred his company, however.  “Our beer laws are backward, they’re counter-intuitive, they’re inefficient, and they’re hypocritical,” he told the Inquirer.

Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/janisr

Well, he just may be right about Pennsylvania’s beer sale laws. They may truly be backward and counter-intuitive and inefficient and even hypocritical. But that’s fine, because they’re also smart. There are already plenty of places to buy beer here, at beer distributors by the case and in bars and restaurants by the six-pack.  No one who wants to buy beer is being denied the opportunity to buy the stuff.  But we certainly don’t need to make beer sales available at every street corner of every town and city across this state. We’ve got enough problems with under-aged drinking, drunk driving, alcohol-related crimes and other social ills caused by alcohol abuse.

Make it easier to buy and consume beer across the state just to allow a bigger revenue stream for stores and beer companies? That just doesn’t make sense from any standpoint at all.  It’s not an idea that would get a great reception from groups that are fighting these same kinds of problems every day, including Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD).

That would be a decision that would likely mean more alcohol-related vehicle accidents, crimes and incidents of under-aged drinking.

It’s a bad idea, a terrible precedent and an idea with no social merit. In fact, it’s irresponsible and wrong.

We need more libraries on street corners, more senior centers, more drug and alcohol treatment programs and more youth centers.

What we don’t need are more places to buy beer.

In a recent article, William Bender of the Philadelphia Daily News reports on the atrocity of disabled adult abuse. He rightly points out that Pennsylvania is one of only five states that have no abuse investigation law protecting these vulnerable citizens. As a result, abusers at group homes and other disabled care facilities can simply walk away with little or no repercussions if the victim does not or cannot testify against them.

This needs to stop.

By failing to advocate for mentally disabled adults, we are failing to care for a large part of our population – a population that does not have the mental capacity to care for itself. We assume that if you’re not too young and you’re not too old, then you should be able to stand up for your rights and protect yourself against others. But the truth is, these people can’t and we need to do it for them.

Some of the problem is that disabled adult abuse is widely under reported. When someone is abused, their emotional pain does not fade away with the bruises and scars. It remains inside and can cause a person to withdraw. Combined with the fact that some disabled adults cannot effectively communicate their thoughts and feelings, the abuse can go on for years without proper attention.

As a personal injury law firm in Philadelphia, MyPhillyLawyer gets calls from people who recognized signs of nursing home abuse or financial abuse of their aging parents and want to know their legal options. Regardless of whether they have a case, we praise their proactive efforts and that they spend enough time with their loved ones to recognize something is wrong.

If you have a disabled child, friend or sibling, you should do the same. Visit him or her often and pay attention to signs of physical and verbal abuse and neglect. Report any strange bruising and ask intuitive questions if a loved one refuses to talk.

Perhaps most importantly, be proactive about talking to your representatives and demanding the legal protection of your disabled loved ones. The Pennsylvania legislature has an opportunity to make a difference in the lives of others. Now it’s time for us to take action and make sure that it does so.

Read the full article on disabled adult abuse.