According to published reports, Toyota is planning to recall some 300,000 Prius vehicles worldwide to repair a brake problem. The manufacturer supposedly will notify the U.S. and Japanese governments today. Toyota has already recalled more than 7 million other cars for repairs in the U.S. and other countries over a sticky accelerator and floor mats that can get caught in the gas pedal.
General Motors said yesterday that it will start shipping parts to dealers soon to fix about 99,000 2009-2010 Pontiac Vibes equipped with the same sticky gas pedal systems as Toyota's. The Vibe is virtually the same car as a Toyota Matrix. The Vibe also is covered by the floor mat recall, and GM is urging customers to take out removable mats and put them in the trunk until a fix is ready.
Fellow blogger and Social Security Lawyer, Gordon Gates recently updated his blog on the topic of failure to follow prescribed treatment. It is worth reading, and I agree with him that you should avoid this becoming an issue at your hearing.
Under the regulations, your disability claim can be denied if you would otherwise be found under a disability but fail, without justifiable cause, to follow treatment prescribed by a treating source which can be expected to restore your ability to work. See 20 C.F.R. 404.1530 (2009).
Further sub-regulatory authority can be found in the Social Security Rulings that define the necessary elements that must be present before Social Security can deny your claim. See Social Security Ruling 82-59. More recently, the Social Security Administration held that failure to follow prescribed treatment is a factor that can properly be considered in determining your credibility. See Social Security Ruling 96-7p.
If you, or someone you know, is suffering from severe health problems keeping you from working, we advise you to speak with an attorney. We handle cases throughout the state of Texas, but we are always happy to give you a referral if we are unable to assist you.
Poor Toyota. The company finally comes up with a proposed solution to the sticking throttle problem, and now they have a brake problem with the hugely popular Prius model. Here are excerpts from an article in the New York Times about the Prius problems:
No sooner had Toyota dealerships begun to repair accelerator pedals on millions of recalled vehicles than the carmaker said it was considering yet another major recall, this time for problems with the brakes on its Prius hybrid.
Safety regulators in Washington said Thursday that they would open an investigation into the brakes on the 2010 Prius, which had been spared from the recall lists.
The announcement was made hours after Toyota acknowledged that it had identified a flaw in the car’s antilock braking system and corrected it for Priuses built since late January. The car was redesigned for the 2010 model year.
Prius drivers have complained that the car momentarily loses the ability to brake when driven over a pothole or other uneven surface. Toyota said the issue was a result of the antilock brakes’ trying to maintain tire traction. Official in Japan also said Friday that the carmaker was looking into the two other hybrids with the same braking system — the Lexus HS250h as well as a Japanese model, the Sai.
Toyota officials in Japan said Friday that they were considering a recall but no decision had been made yet. If the recall does take place, it would affect at least 103,000 new Priuses in the United States and 176,000 in Japan. A recall in Europe would affect about 32,000 Priuses.
In opening the investigation into the Prius, the highway traffic safety agency said it had received 124 complaints about the brakes on 2010 Priuses. But by Thursday afternoon, its database listed nearly 300 complaints on that issue. Eight of them involved crashes — mostly into the rear of another car at a low speed — and two of the drivers said they had injured their necks.
“It corrects itself almost immediately, but there is that second when it feels like it isn’t going to stop,” one complainant wrote.
Toyota said the problem it identified in the Prius was unrelated to the recall in January of eight other models, totaling nearly 4.5 million vehicles, for accelerator pedals that could stick and the recall in November of 5.5 million vehicles with accelerator pedals that could become trapped under the floor mat. Priuses sold in the 2004 through 2009 model years are included in the floor mat recall, and some Toyota models are covered by both recalls.
A number of our Social Security clients have impairments that do not satisfy Social Security’s Listing requirements. There are just over 100 Listed impairments that are considered disabling despite age, education, and past work experience. To qualify, the individual’s impairment must satisfy the severity and duration requirements of the Listing. Often however, the strict requirements of the Listings are not satisfied. Does that mean you lose? Not necessarily.
Just this week we were able to win a disability claim for our client who, according to the medical opinion of her doctor, had a combination of impairments that were medically equivalent to an appropriate Listing. A finding of medical equivalence occurs when “...one or more of the specified medical findings is missing from the evidence...[but] other findings of equal or greater clinical significance and relating to the same impairment are present in the medical evidence.” 20 C.F.R. 404.1526(b)(I)(2009), 416.926(b)(i)(2009).
Determining equivalency requires a medical judgment. The opinion is rendered after a doctor considers and compares the requirements of a particular Listed impairment to the appropriate symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings in an individual case. While the Administrative Law Judge can choose among conflicting medical opinions – including opinions of equivalence – the judge, as a layman, cannot render an independent opinion on equivalence.
There are various instances where a determination of medical equivalence is appropriate because an individual’s impairment has no relevant corresponding Listing in the regulations. It is also frequently the case that individuals present with multiple related impairments that, in combination, are more severe than any one impairment considered individually. The combination of impairments is, therefore, the basis of equivalency.
Regardless of the disease, you or your lawyer should have a good working list of your symptoms, a knowledge of the degree of certainty of your diagnosis, a general understanding of the consistency between your symptoms and your diagnosis, a good understanding of what evidence might best support your contention that your symptoms are disabling, and which legal theory will most likely be accepted by the Social Security Administration given the particular facts of the case.
If you are considering a Social Security Disability claim, we advise you to speak with an attorney. We handle cases throughout the state of Texas, but we are happy to give you a referral if we are unable to assist you.
The Transportation Department scrambled on Wednesday to keep up the pressure on Toyota, with the agency’s head at one point telling owners of recalled vehicles to stop driving them.
But the department head, Ray LaHood, later tried to clarify what he called “obviously a misstatement,” saying that he meant only to urge Toyota owners concerned about their cars to take them in to dealerships.
In remarks before a House appropriations hearing, Mr. LaHood said his advice to owners of recalled Toyotas was to “stop driving it, take it to a Toyota dealer because they believe they have a fix for it.”
Afterward, at a news conference, Mr. LaHood, backing away from his off-the-cuff remarks, said: “What I said in there was obviously a misstatement.” And in a statement issued by the agency, Mr. LaHood said: “I want to encourage owners of any recalled Toyota models to contact their local dealer and get their vehicles fixed as soon as possible.”
His comments were the latest in an aggressive campaign by his department over the Toyota situation. Last week, Mr. LaHood took credit for the company’s decision to stop building and selling eight models involved in a recall over accelerator pedals that could potentially stick, saying Toyota did not take the step until urged to do so by the department.
Some safety advocates said, however, that Mr. LaHood might be trying to protect federal safety regulators from potential liability issues over their role in investigating defects.
Earlier he told reporters that he planned to call the president of Toyota, Akio Toyoda, about the recalls involving problems with accelerator pedals that could stick.
“I’m going to take the initiative to have a conversation with Mr. Toyoda very soon, to talk to him about how serious this is, and to make sure that he understands,” Mr. LaHood said. “I think he understands, but I’ve never talked to him. I just feel like I need to have a conversation with him.”
These computer safety tips are adapted from a publication by the Texas Young Lawyers Association:
The Chicago Tribune (2/2, Bensinger, Channick) reports, "Hoping to put the brakes on a public relations disaster, Toyota Motor Corp. revealed plans Monday to fix a sticking gas pedal that halted sales and production for eight models and prompted a massive recall." ABC World News (2/1, story 4, 2:00, Sawyer) reported, "The automaker said by the week's end its dealers will begin fixing more than four million vehicles, the ones recalled because of problems with gas pedals and vehicles speeding out of control."
CBS Evening News (2/1, story 3, 2:30, Couric) reported, "Toyota says it should take trained mechanics no more than 30 minutes to fix its sticky gas pedal, but repairing its reputation could take a while longer."
The Wall Street Journal (2/2, Linebaugh et al.) reports Toyota said it's confident the repair and another one involving floor mats, will end the speed-control problem. Jim Lentz, president of Toyota's U.S. sales arm, noted, "These two fixes solve the issues that we know of. ... We have done exhaustive testing, and we have found no evidence of problems with the electronics."
In a front-page story, the New York Times (2/2, A1, Maynard) reports, "Many wonder whether the problem is in the electronic systems that now control many functions that used to be handled mechanically." Edwin M. Baum, head of the product and consumer litigation practice at Proskauer Rose, said, "If they haven't got it [right], they have even bigger problems. Nobody knows right now." The questions "for Toyota are not likely to end. Two Congressional committee hearings are planned, beginning next week."
The Detroit Free Press (2/1, Gardner) reported, "Toyota has been hit disproportionately hard by unintended-acceleration problems because it has been slower than some competitors in introducing braking technology that could have prevented it, according to safety records and consumer advocates." Safety advocates "and other critics said there may be multiple potential causes for sudden acceleration, and therefore, multiple solutions. But the most puzzling potential cause is electromechanical interference."
Toyota faces at least 12 lawsuits. Bloomberg News (2/2, Fisk) reports that Toyota "faces at least 12 lawsuits seeking class-action status in the U.S. and Canada connected to the company's recalls over sudden acceleration of its vehicles." A lawsuit "was filed on behalf of all Canadian owners, operators, lessors and passengers of Toyota vehicles with an electronic throttle system called ETCS-i, Rochon Genova LLP," according to a Toronto law firm. "Consumers in Texas sued on Jan. 29 on behalf of all owners of Toyota and Lexus models equipped with the throttle system in that state."
The Houston Chronicle (2/1, Flood) reported, "The family of a Houston woman whose car sped through a stop sign and smashed into a cement wall, killing her on impact a week before Christmas, filed what is likely the third acceleration-related wrongful death lawsuit against Toyota in the nation Monday. Trina Renee Harris, a 34-year-old mother of two, died on impact when her 2009 Toyota Corolla slammed into an East Hardy Toll Road cement divider at Barry, leaving no skid marks, Houston police reported. Her husband, Michael Harris, filed a lawsuit Monday against Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., gas pedal maker CTS Corp. and Fred Haas Toyota World, which leased her the car."
Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, today announced that 15 healthcare providers and networks have received $17.4 million in contract awards to provide electronic medical records to the agency. These electronic medical records, which will be sent through the Nationwide Health Information Network (NHIN), will significantly shorten the time it takes to make a disability decision and will improve the speed, accuracy, and efficiency of the disability program.
“Using health information technology will improve our disability programs and provide better service to the public,” Commissioner Astrue said. “We’ve seen a significant increase in disability applications. To process them, the agency sends more than 15 million requests annually for medical records to healthcare providers. This largely paper-bound workload is generally the most time-consuming part of the disability decision process. The use of health IT will dramatically improve the speed, accuracy, and efficiency of this process, reducing the cost of making a disability decision for both the medical community and the American taxpayer.”
The contract awards are funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. They will require awardees, with a patient’s authorization, to send Social Security electronic medical records through the NHIN. The NHIN, a safe and secure method for receiving access to electronic medical records over the Internet, is an initiative of the Department of Health and Human Services supported by multiple government agencies and private sector entities.
For the last year, Social Security has been successfully testing health IT to obtain electronic medical records. Disability applications processed with electronic medical records from the test sites in Massachusetts and Virginia have significantly reduced processing times. Some decisions are now made in days, instead of weeks or months. Social Security expects to receive more than 3.3 million applications in fiscal year (FY) 2010, a 27 percent increase over FY 2008.
Here are a few frequently asked questions and general answers we give to our clients preparing for their disability hearings before Administrative Law Judges at the Social Security Administration. These only scratch the surface, but give you a good idea of questions you might ask your lawyer. These are general answers that apply to most cases, and are not intended to be a guide in any particular case.
1. What time do I show up at my hearing? The hearing notice from the judge probably will ask you to arrive 30 minutes before the hearing is set to start. If you are able to show up a little earlier than that, it may be helpful if you need to make extra copies of items that need to be added to your file.
2. What should I bring to the hearing? In addition to any witnesses who are to testify on your behalf, we advise our clients to bring their prescription medications in a clear plastic bag.
3. Do I have to talk to the judge or will my lawyer communicate with the judge? Different judges handle hearings differently. One judge may want to hear almost entirely from the claimant. In those cases, the judge is relying on the lawyer to point out particular legal theories that support a favorable decision, and to bring to the judge's attention any important evidence in the record. Some judges will divide the questioning up between the judge and the attorney or let the attorney present all the questions to the claimant. Always remember to answer the question asked and ask for clarification of questions you do not understand. Your witness, if you have one, should not jump in and answer questions that are being asked of you. It is also acceptable to answer that you do not know or do not recall, when that is true. Lawyers also can cross-examine any experts the judge has invited to your hearing.
4. How long does the hearing last? Hearings can run in the range between 30 minutes to one hour. The average seems to be around 45 minutes. If there are experts invited to testify, this makes the hearing last longer because there will be more people who need to testify.
5. When do I find out if I won? You will not know the official answer on the day of your hearing. The official decision is the written decision signed by the judge. This will come by mail usually 60 to 90 days after the date of hearing.
If you need help with a Social Security Disability claim, we advise you to speak with an attorney. We handle cases throughout the state of Texas, but we are always happy to give you a referral if we are unable to assist you.
The Dallas Morning News has a good article today about judges struggling to keep jurors from doing their own Internet research during trials. Here are the opening paragraphs:
In Florida, a mistrial was declared recently after a federal judge learned eight jurors had researched the drug case on the Internet.
In England, a juror was dismissed from a sexual assault case after asking how she should vote on her Facebook page.
And in Dallas, state District Judge John Creuzot recently terminated someone from a pretrial drug diversion program after a probation officer discovered Internet postings showing that "what he was saying that he was doing was exactly contrary to what we thought he was doing," Creuzot said, noting the man's plan to get drunk on graduation day.
Now, the defendant "could be indicted and have a criminal record," Creuzot said.
Welcome to the 21st-century legal world, where immediate access to information infringes on traditional courtroom sanctity.
In Florida, a mistrial was declared recently after a federal judge learned eight jurors had researched the drug case on the Internet.
In England, a juror was dismissed from a sexual assault case after asking how she should vote on her Facebook page.
And in Dallas, state District Judge John Creuzot recently terminated someone from a pretrial drug diversion program after a probation officer discovered Internet postings showing that "what he was saying that he was doing was exactly contrary to what we thought he was doing," Creuzot said, noting the man's plan to get drunk on graduation day.
Now, the defendant "could be indicted and have a criminal record," Creuzot said.
Welcome to the 21st-century legal world, where immediate access to information infringes on traditional courtroom sanctity.
Toyota continues to have problems with its throttle assembly, and the company doesn't seem to be getting any closer to a solution. The throttles are manufactured by CTS Corporation, and Toyota and CTS have put out differing statements as to the cause, and even the effect of the throttle problem.
Toyota says the pedal assembly has a friction issue that may make the pedal "harder to depress, slower to return, or, in the worst case, mechanically stuck in a partially depressed position." On the other hand, CTS says the friction problem accounts for only a handful of cases, "and in no instance did the accelerator actually become stuck in a partially depressed condition."
This is rapidly becoming a public relations nightmare for Toyota, and a huge boost for competing car makers, who are aggressively courting potential buyers of Toyota vehicles. This situation is reminiscent of the late 1980's when complaints were made that certain Audi sedans would suddenly accelerate. Several people were seriously injured in accidents, and the problem received widespread television coverage. An investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration essentially absolved Audi from any blame, but the damage had already been done, and sales of Audi cars plummeted. Audi did make changes to prevent their cars from being shifted out of Park unless a foot was on the brake pedal.
Toyota needs to find a solution quickly, before further damage is done to a fine auto manufacturer.
CourthouseNews.com reports on a lawsuit involving the Medtronic InfuseBone Graft, and alleged "off-label" marketing by Medtronic. Here are excerpts:
Medtronic pays doctors to promote a medical device for off-label uses, and the InfuseBone Graft is "unreasonably dangerous" because its active ingredient can travel from the implant site to the esophagus or trachea, turning soft tissue into bone, a married couple claims in Los Angeles Superior Court.
John and Robin Webb say the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Medtronic's InfuseBone Graft only for lumbar, dental and tibial surgeries, but that Medtronic recommends it for cervical spine fusions.
The product allegedly netted $815 million for Minnesota-based Medtronic in fiscal year ending April 2008.
The Webbs say using the bone graft in cervical spine surgeries is "unreasonably dangerous for the patient" because the active ingredient can travel to the esophagus or trachea, causing calcification, and making it difficult to swallow, breathe or eat.
"While physicians may use FDA-approved medical devices in any way they see fit, companies are not permitted to ... pay doctors inducements or kickbacks to promote off-label uses," according to the complaint.
The Dallas Morning News reports that a Texas law that allows patients "to see a mediator for...unexpected hospital bills" requires the intermediary to "decide whether a physician or hospital is acting in 'bad faith' during the mediation process." But, "the law is vague on what constitutes bad faith, mediators say," so they "are reluctant to participate." Some mediators also note that because "physicians and hospitals can choose the mediator in a patient billing dispute," mediators could be blacklisted "from future cases," because the law requires "whistle-blowing to the Texas Medical Board." The Texas Department of Insurance is expected to "set up regulations for the law" after hearing mediators' concerns.
From the American Association for Justice news release.
This press release is from Toyota:
TORRANCE, Calif., Jan. 26 -- Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., today announced that it is instructing Toyota dealers to temporarily suspend sales of eight models involved in the recall for sticking accelerator pedal, announced on January 21, 2010.
"Helping ensure the safety of our customers and restoring confidence in Toyota are very important to our company," said Group Vice President and Toyota Division General Manager Bob Carter. "This action is necessary until a remedy is finalized. We're making every effort to address this situation for our customers as quickly as possible."
Toyota announced it would recall approximately 2.3 million vehicles to correct sticking accelerator pedals on specific Toyota Division models. Toyota has investigated isolated reports of sticking accelerator pedal mechanisms in certain vehicles without the presence of floor mats. There is a possibility that certain accelerator pedal mechanisms may, in rare instances, mechanically stick in a partially depressed position or return slowly to the idle position.
Toyota's accelerator pedal recall and suspension of sales is confined to the following Toyota Division vehicles:
2009-2010 RAV4,
2009-2010 Corolla,
2009-2010 Matrix,
2005-2010 Avalon,
Certain 2007-2010 Camry,
2010 Highlander,
2007-2010 Tundra,
2008-2010 Sequoia
No Lexus Division or Scion vehicles are affected by these actions. Also not affected are Toyota Prius, Tacoma, Sienna, Venza, Solara, Yaris, 4Runner, FJ Cruiser, Land Cruiser and select Camry models, including all Camry hybrids, which will remain for sale.
Due to the sales suspension, Toyota is expected to stop producing vehicles on the following production lines for the week of February 1 to assess and coordinate activities. The North America vehicle production facilities affected are:
No other North American Toyota vehicle production facilities are affected by the decision to stop production.
The sticking accelerator pedal recall is separate from the on-going recall of Toyota and Lexus vehicles to reduce the risk of pedal entrapment by incorrect or out of place accessory floor mats. Approximately 1.7 million Toyota Division vehicles are subject to both separate recall actions.
Confirming some suspicions, and according to USA Today, Toyota says it knew there were problems with accelerator-pedal assemblies from supplier CTS late last year, but not enough to warrant a recall. Here are excerpts from the article:
The automaker says it hurriedly announced last Thursday a planned recall of 2.3 million Toyotas, back to 2005 models, because the defect trend had picked up. "The quickness that this all came together is one reason why I don't have numbers" of complaints, the automaker's U.S. safety spokesman, John Hanson, says. "And why we don't have a fix."
The recall includes an unspecified number of 2009-10 Pontiac Vibes, designed and built by Toyota for General Motors' now- discontinued Pontiac brand. Vibe is similar to the Toyota Matrix that's part of the recall.
Hanson has said it could be weeks before Toyota determines a remedy and gets it approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Toyota says it has no direct reports of injuries or deaths. But the day Toyota announced the recall, ABC News broadcast a report, prepared before the recall announcement, linking the problem to four deaths.
The car company says that the latest sticking-throttle recall is separate from one it announced in November. That one involved 4.3 million Toyota and Lexus models. Their gas pedals might get caught under floor mats and send the cars out of control.
"I think it's questionable" whether the two recalls are separate, says Jesse Toprak, vice president of industry trends for TrueCar.com, an auto-pricing and industry-tracking site.
Toyota says 1.7 million vehicles are affected by both recalls. Toprak notes that Toyota first identified the previous recall as a floor mat issue, then said the accelerator pedals themselves were partly at fault. Now, most vehicles in the sticking-throttle recall announced Thursday also are involved in the November recall.
Toyota says drivers whose throttles stick open should shift into neutral, pull off the road and call a dealer. Dealers have been told to help on a "case-by-case basis," until Toyota can fix the problem.
Toyota won't say how much leeway dealers have — whether, for example, they can install new pedal assemblies, or provide long-term loaner cars until there is a recall remedy.
Toyota says the problem appears to be due to premature wear of some mechanical parts in the CTS throttle assemblies. Hanson says that means new vehicles should be risk-free, at least long enough for Toyota to come up with a fix.
Hanson says the first symptom of the latest throttle problem is when the gas pedal feels rough, instead of smooth, when the driver presses down. The next stage: The throttle pedal doesn't return promptly when the driver lets off. Finally, the throttle sticks open even after the driver's foot is removed.
Hanson says drivers should contact dealers if they experience the first step and not wait for the gas pedal to begin working sluggishly. "We don't want that vehicle on the road, and we want to keep that owner mobile. We'll do whatever we can on a case-by-case basis," Hanson says.