Articles Posted in Car Accidents

Another Massachusetts jurisdiction shot down the idea of red-light cameras. Recently, residents gathered at the annual meeting in Raynham and voted 104 to 95 against the idea of petitioning the legislature for permission to install red-light cameras at a number of intersections. Reynham has a population of about 11,000 and all qualified inhabitants were allowed to vote on the issue. Residents want to keep enforcement efforts as they are and don’t agree that these cameras will be beneficial in preventing intersection car accidents in Massachusetts.

Currently, our state does not allow these red-light cameras. Lawmakers have been able so far to resist all attempts to pass authorizing legislation. American Traffic Solutions (ATS) has been trying to take their campaign to small town officials, according to The Truth About Cars. ATS is a privately-owned company that keeps looking at city officials as a means for building new business.

Our Boston personal injury attorneys understand that drivers firmly stand on both sides of the issue regarding these red-light cameras. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), roughly two-thirds of drivers in 14 big cities that have the cameras support their functions. A recent study from the IIHS even concludes that these cameras have reduced the rate of deadly red light running accidents by nearly 25 percent in these same cities.

ATS is no stranger to Massachusetts lawmakers as they’ve previously hired marketing companies to try and persuade Boston officials to launch the red-light program. Previous efforts cost more than $161,000.

Although a majority of big cities support the use of these cameras, there are some opponents. A number of residents view these cameras as an invasion of privacy and tools that are being used specifically to generate revenue for the city. Either way, the IIHS reports that that the issue has gained more supporters than opponents.

“Most drivers don’t buy the argument that it’s somehow wrong to enforce the law just because you’re using a camera to do it,” says Anne McCartt, the Institute’s senior vice president for research. “They understand that this technology is preventing crashes in their cities.”

The Institute study that was released earlier this year illustrated just how effective these cameras are. The study took U.S. cities with populations over 200,000 and compared those that have cameras to those that don’t. These red-light cameras reportedly saved nearly 200 lives in cities that had cameras from 2004 to 2008. The Institute estimates that more than 800 lives have been saved if these cameras had been operating during those years in all large U.S. cities.

Of more than 3,000 people interviewed about the cameras:

-More than 9 of 10 drivers surveyed reported that running a red light is unacceptable.

-More than 8 of 10 say that it a serious threat to personal safety.

-Two-thirds of drivers support red-light cameras.

-More than 40 percent strongly favor the cameras.

-A majority of them say the cameras have made intersections safer.

-Half of surveyed drivers know someone who has gotten a ticket at an intersection with a red-light camera.

-Nearly 20 percent have gotten a ticket themselves.

-Only about half of drivers that received a ticket believe that it was deserved.

-About a fifth of drivers said that they support cameras but are opposed to right-on-red enforcement.

-More than 40 percent of drivers support using cameras for right-on-red violations.

“Right-on-red violations usually aren’t associated with T-bone crashes, but they make intersections much more dangerous for pedestrians in particular,” McCartt says. “The survey results show cities need to do a better job explaining this issue to drivers.”
Continue reading

A number of new systems may be hitting Massachusetts roadways to help track lost or confused older drivers. OnStar and GM’s signature services have always been able to locate vehicles that were equipped with these systems, but for the first time they’re available as add-ons to non-General Motors vehicles. These systems aim to keep track of senior drivers and help prevent car accidents in Massachusetts.

The Alzheimer’s Association markets a number of devices under a program called “Comfort Zone.” These devices include CalAmp tracker and the Sendum tracker. Both of the devices can be yours for less than $300, with an activation fee of $45 and a monthly fee of $44.99. For some, these systems may be worth every penny as they’re able to locate a vehicle in less than 15 minutes.

In today’s economy, our Boston personal injury attorneys understand that this might be a bit pricey. Other devices cost less than $100 to install and only charge of a monthly fee of $14.95. With these devices you can locate either a vehicle or the person carrying the device once a day.

The OnStar system was previously offered on new GM vehicles. But this week launched availability on most all vehicles. This system has a GPS-based feature that allows the contract holder to request information regarding the vehicle’s location. This information is typically obtained through a local law enforcement agency.

Some of the OnStar systems can be housed in your vehicle’s rear-view mirror. Not only is the contract holder able to locate a vehicle if it has turned up missing, but the system can also be used to get specific turn-by-turn directions.

The Silver Alert is another system that many places are using to specifically target older drivers. The program was started in Oklahoma in 2005. The Silver Alert program is designed to quickly disseminate descriptive information about a missing person. With quick information distributions, citizens in the affected area can be on the lookout for the missing person and then can notify local law enforcement with any relevant information. Silver Alerts are typically broadcast on signs on the Interstate highways and toll roads. Currently Silver Alert requirements state that a resident must be 60-years-old or older and there must be “a clear indication:” that the elderly person is suffering from some deterioration of “intellectual facilities.”

According to the Alzheimer’s Association, more than 60 percent of Alzheimer’s patients will, at least at one point in their life, wander off and become lost. For this reason, it is important that we keep an eye on our older loved ones and to do your part to help them reach a decision about when it’s time to hang up the keys.
Continue reading

“This is just about public safety. It’s a no-brainer. Let’s get it done,” said Mayor Thomas M. Menino, who has pushed for red-light cameras since 1993. “Other states have it. Why can’t we do it in Massachusetts? What’s the reluctency of the Legislature to pass this? This saves lives.”

Current Massachusetts law does not allow these red-light traffic cameras. Lawmakers have yet to authorize legislation stating otherwise, according to thenewspaper.com. Those opposing the red-lights say that they see them coming in the near future because of the areas budget deficits.

Beacon Hill is currently feeling the pressure as they’re running low on city cash and may be turning to these cameras to make up the difference. They may be next to install these intersection cameras, according to My Fox Boston. Lawmakers continue to argue that the main purpose of these cameras is to reduce your risk of a car accident in Massachusetts and not to make a quick buck.

Our Boston personal injury attorneys understand that these red-light cameras have created a battle between politicians and residents. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, big cities with red-light cameras have been fortunate enough to experience a decrease in fatal intersection accidents of nearly 25 percent. Residents argue that the only thing that is decreasing is their privacy.

Those who oppose these cameras claim that the eye in the sky is only an invasion of privacy and a money maker for a city that is caught in a budget bind. A number of previous bills have failed because officials are reluctant to change a law that requires traffic tickets to be hand delivered. Lawmakers defend the possible move by saying that these cameras will help to crack down on violators while helping out police forces that have faced severe cuts.

“Most drivers don’t buy the argument that it’s somehow wrong to enforce the law just because you’re using a camera to do it,” says Anne McCartt, the Institute’s senior vice president for research. “They understand that this technology is preventing crashes in their cities.”

A recent survey, conducted by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, concluded that 93 percent of drivers said that it is unacceptable to go through a red light if it’s possible to stop safely. To almost no surprise, a third of these drivers admitted to running a red light in the past 30 days.

“Examining a large group of cities over several years allowed us to take a close look at the most serious crashes, the ones that claim people’s lives,” says McCartt, who is also a co-author of the study. “Our analysis shows that red light cameras are making intersections safer.”

Since the 1990s, a number of communities have used these red-light cameras as a low-cost way to reduce intersection accidents and as an alternative way to police these areas. In 2000, only 25 cities participated in such programs. Currently, there are more than 500 cities that are taking advantage of the technology. Still, many motorists view these cameras as nothing more than a scam operated by money-hungry cities.

“Somehow, the people who get tickets because they have broken the law have been cast as the victims,” says Institute president Adrian Lund. “We rarely hear about the real victims — the people who are killed or injured by these lawbreakers.”
Continue reading

The Government Accountability Office recently concluded that only 70 percent of cars and trucks that were recalled ever got repaired within 18 months. If you’re not notified in a timely manner of these recalls, then your risks of being involved in a car accident in Massachusetts quickly increase.

Our Boston personal injury attorneys understand how common these vehicle recalls are nowadays. It’s important that there’s an effective system in place to make sure that consumers are being notified as quick as possible about these dangerous defects. The Government Accountability Office says that the NHTSA needs to step up their efforts in doing so. They suggest that the Administration improves their recall database website and provides notifications to used car buyers more quickly.

Some recalled vehicles are never even repaired. These vehicles are all over our roadways. When a car switches owners, it may be difficult for the car manufacturer to contact the new owners. When a manufacturer isn’t able to contact an owner, the job falls into the lap of the NHTSA.

The NHTSA currently has a database, safecar.gov, which allows motorists to look up their vehicle’s investigations and recalls. Drivers can even sign up to receive e-mail alerts for their specific vehicle. Another perk of the website is that it will provide you with a list of dealers that will perform recall repairs to your car even if the vehicle’s warranty has expired. Many times these repairs will cost you nothing.

It all started after a recent string of Toyota recalls. It wasn’t until then that Congress started to question the effectiveness of the auto safety defect recall process.

In response to these investigations, the GOA reviewed current laws and documents and interviewed the NHTSA and stakeholders about:

– The extent of NHTSA’s role in the recall process. They inquired about how its authorities compare to selected federal and foreign agencies that may also oversee recalls.

-The benefits and challenges of the current recall process for NHTSA and affected manufacturers.

-Some of the possible options for improving the recall process.

Through this investigation, the GOA came up with some recommendation to improve the system. They concluded that in order to encourage vehicle owners to comply with vehicle recalls, they would have to ensure that these owners would be provided with relevant information pertaining to their vehicle. They also concluded that the Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of NHTSA to modify the requirements for defect notification letters to include information that would include the word “urgent” and the VIN number of the recalled vehicle so that the owner recognizes that this recall is specific to their vehicle.

We understand that it is extremely important to stay on top of the recalled vehicle’s list. If you’re vehicle has been recalled and you’ve not been notified, then you face an increased risk of being involved in an accident that could have been avoided if there would have been an effective notification system in place.
Continue reading

Technology is forever advancing, and some would argue that these through these technologies we continue to put our lives in danger for a car accident in Boston and elsewhere in the United States. A recent conference, Telematics Detroit 2011, met to celebrate and to share these new advancements in vehicle technology, according to Government Computer News. But everyone in attendance wasn’t supporting these new features, as David Strickland of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showed up to rain on their parade.

“I’m just putting everyone on notice, a car is not a mobile device,” said Strickland. “I’m not in the business of helping people tweet better. I’m not in the business of helping people post on Facebook better.”

Our Boston personal injury attorneys recognize that many of these new car features have proven to be extremely beneficial to drivers, such as useful IT-based functions, such as Global Positioning System navigation, automated emergency notification and internal diagnostics. There are other features that safety advocates would say do nothing to help increase the safety of drivers on our roadways, like hands-free web surfing apps that allow you to check your Facebook or make a tweet.

Strickland attended, and spoke at this conference, to warn attendees that he and the U.S. Department of Transportation plan on fighting these unsafe technologies. He and the DOT believe that is it these types of advancements that are largely contributing to distracted driving, which oftentimes results in deadly accidents. He continued on by declaring vehicles as mere modes of transportation and not personal infotainment centers.

Participants of the Telematics Detroit 2011 may have not of been the best audience for Strickland to speak to about his anti-entertainment vehicle theory because as their website states, “Telematics is Here to Stay! Take Note of Consumer Demands As the Car Becomes the Ultimate Mobile Device.”

Safe driving advocates clearly oppose these features that the attendees of this conference stand for. Advocates oftentimes point to the Chevy Cruze ad as an example of unnecessary vehicle technology. This was the vehicle ad that aired during the Super Bowl that showed a driver using a built-in car app to read his Facebook updates. Users of this device would say that they’re actually increasing driver’s attention because had their not of been a hands-free device for this function, a driver would have probably used their smart-phone to thumb through the site which would have taken real attention off the roadway.

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, hands-free may eliminate some of the physical distraction but does nothing to eliminate any amount of cognitive distraction. Using a phone, or app, of any type greatly increases a driver’s risk of being involved in a motor-vehicle accident.

As the intention of some of these features seem genuine, many believe the only way to increase safety on our roadways is to eliminate these habits altogether. Strickland, with the help to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, plans on taking on this market in an attempt to save motorists nationwide.
Continue reading