Browsed by
Month: May 2016

Takata Airbag Recall Can Take Months

Takata Airbag Recall Can Take Months

Some drivers are waiting months before their vehicles are being fixed because of the massive amount of recalls from faulty Takata air bags. Those who are unable to get their airbags replaced quickly are struggling to figure out how to get around during the month-long wait for repair. Many people, especially those under the age of 25 are having real difficulty finding an alternative to driving their recalled vehicle, which only puts more drivers at risk of serious injury.

Although some dealerships are lining up rental vehicles for those who have to wait months for their vehicle to be fixed, consumers complain that all dealerships need to be forced to offering credits for rental cars while the wait is so long. A West Palm Beach car crash law firm also noticed that there needs to be an alternative for drivers under the age of 25 and those with low insurance coverage or credit scores, because they’re often the ones who are unable to secure a rental vehicle in the first place.

Takata Airbag Recall Can Take Months & More Recalls Are Expected

The Takata air bag incident is the largest vehicle recall in United States history that American car owners cannot ignore. Takata airbag inflators were installed in 28.8 million vehicles and once the vehicle deploys the airbags as result of a crash, it can also cause metal shrapnel to propel into drivers and passengers. Over 100 people have already been injured by these faulty airbag inflators and ten have died in the United States alone. Even though this problem is very serious and the longer passengers wait, the more dangerous their vehicles become, a majority of defective car owners have not gotten their vehicles fixed.

There’s also a chance that Takata has to recall even more vehicles if they cannot prove that their newer inflators aren’t a safety risk. That could increase the years of vehicles recalled to cover model years 2000 to 2015 by 16 different automotive brands.

Proposed Bill in New York Gives Cops Cell Phone Access

Proposed Bill in New York Gives Cops Cell Phone Access

Chances are that you’re aware of a breathalyzer, which monitors your blood alcohol level in the event that your are driving under the influence of alcohol. Now New York police officers want to use a similar device in order to determine whether someone was using their phone at the scene of a car accident. New York lawmakers have presented a bill that would make it possible to access cellphone records in order to protect people from others who make accident claims while they’re driving distracted. Civil liberties groups on the other hand believe that this “textalyzer” device will interfere with the cellphone privacy rights of United States citizens.

West Palm Beach car wreck lawyers are following the proposed bill closely, as if the bill passes, New York will be the first state in the nation to use a cell phone scanning device. The Distracted Operators Risk Casualties (DORCs) advocacy organization heavily supports the proposed bill, since they want to take preventative legal action to reduce and catch those who are involved in texting-related car accidents.

New York Proposed Bill Gives Cops Cell Phone Access, Sorta

Although there are privacy concerns about the proposed bill that allows access to cell phone information, Cellebrite, the Israeli technology company who invented the textalyzer device recently announced that the version used by New York state police would only be a scaled-back version of their phone-scraping technology that won’t give officers access to applications or conversations on the phone. The device will only be used to determine whether the phone was being operated at the time of an accident, with the ability to look further into whether the phone was being used when the police officer obtains a warrant to search the driver’s phone.

Although the company seeks to respect the privacy of drivers’ personal information without violating their rights, the bill includes language that gives law enforcement “implied consent” to testing drivers’ cell phones at the crash scene. This is not a violation of Fourth Amendment rights because no phone data will be taken from the technology, but some civil liberties groups are worried that these claims aren’t as accurate as people are being lead to believe.

000-017   000-080   000-089   000-104   000-105   000-106   070-461   100-101   100-105  , 100-105  , 101   101-400   102-400   1V0-601   1Y0-201   1Z0-051   1Z0-060   1Z0-061   1Z0-144   1z0-434   1Z0-803   1Z0-804   1z0-808   200-101   200-120   200-125  , 200-125  , 200-310   200-355   210-060   210-065   210-260   220-801   220-802   220-901   220-902   2V0-620   2V0-621   2V0-621D   300-070   300-075   300-101   300-115   300-135   3002   300-206   300-208   300-209   300-320   350-001   350-018   350-029   350-030   350-050   350-060   350-080   352-001   400-051   400-101   400-201   500-260   640-692   640-911   640-916   642-732   642-999   700-501   70-177   70-178   70-243   70-246   70-270   70-346   70-347   70-410   70-411   70-412   70-413   70-417   70-461   70-462   70-463   70-480   70-483   70-486   70-487   70-488   70-532   70-533   70-534   70-980   74-678   810-403   9A0-385   9L0-012   9L0-066   ADM-201   AWS-SYSOPS   C_TFIN52_66   c2010-652   c2010-657   CAP   CAS-002   CCA-500   CISM   CISSP   CRISC   EX200   EX300   HP0-S42   ICBB   ICGB   ITILFND   JK0-022   JN0-102   JN0-360   LX0-103   LX0-104   M70-101   MB2-704   MB2-707   MB5-705   MB6-703   N10-006   NS0-157   NSE4   OG0-091   OG0-093   PEGACPBA71V1   PMP   PR000041   SSCP   SY0-401   VCP550