Payment from the overpaid
06.27.08 (8:52 am) [edit]We are only humans and we are bound to commit mistakes at one time or another. Some of us, more often than the other.
However, what if the person who committed mistake is an institution – a huge government institution like the SSA?
Can we still say, to err is human to forgive divine?
SSA overpayment claims, though not totally common, are neither unheard of. Several persons are surprised that one day they receive a letter demanding from them the return of thousand dollars or so of overpayment in their SSA claims.
Overpayment can result from a wrongful computation. With their bunch of analysts, lawyers and accountants, we might ask – how can they commit mistakes?
The answer to that question is theirs to make. What we can question now is the propriety of their claim, demanding money from people who already spent the money they get from SSA several years or ages ago.
Take the case of an orphan who began receiving survivor benefits when her mother died. Three decades later came SSA in his doorstep demanding that he return $662 of overpayment. Of course, the orphan who is now 50 years old cannot pay, or would not pay.
And the old man goes… “Why only now?” Overpayment claim of a childhood debt, however you put it, just didn’t feel right.
To those who didn’t know it yet, there is no time limit for the agency to collect overpayment. However, it would not be as bad as it looks because the system would let you pay it in smaller monthly installments.
Another good thing is that the agency may waive the debt once it determines that the overpayment was not the beneficiary’s fault, he/she cannot meet the necessary living expenses or if it recovers the overpayment.
However, before paying, you can still ask for a re-computation. Who knows, may be the SSA is wrong again.
Benchmark on personal injury damages, I disagree
06.20.08 (8:38 am) [edit]In brief account, tort law is a broad concept that covers personal injury situations. It covers cases of negligence, intentional inflictions and strict liability.
On the practical side, people can potentially be involved in injury situations, at any time, at any time and under any circumstances. With this fact, instead of withholding or enforcing a ceiling on tort damages, sufficient protection to victims must be wage by the government in the matters of law and compensation entitlement.
The lawblog with the heading, "Limiting Claims on Personal Injury: A Tortuous Attempt? ", can relate to this proposition as where the author opined in disagreement in the implementation of a ceiling or a cap in determining compensation for personal injury cases.
In arguing its disavowal to the tort reform, the author contends that the change is all throughout unjust, considering that, each injury is different from another. Putting a cap on the amount of monetary payment will leave those injured severely in disadvantage especially in their chances of a fair compensation.
Secondly, the author expresses the view that instead of setting boundaries, let the court decides on the amount of damages.
Lastly, the author related that claims must be based on allegations properly proved in court with no ceiling limit imposed whatsoever.
The United States tort reform has become a contentious political issue, especially now with the upcoming election. US tort reform advocated the limitation of the number of claims to be filed by the victim, and the capping the awards of damages.
To my mind, this cap or ceiling in the damages awards is not only unjust but also impractical and discriminatory.
Cases are relative, same as the award of damages.
Another Round of Discussion on Personal Injury Claims
06.18.08 (7:51 am) [edit]When talking about personal injuries, the first thing that most people think of is about the issue on compensatory damages. Practically, most injured victims of accidents due to other party’s negligent dealings resort in filing personal injury lawsuits in order to recover suitable amount of remunerations for their medical expenses and other effects of their incurred injuries.
This is has been one of the major considerations made by our legislators in constructing the Personal Injury Law. Since the injured victims may lack the capacity to take all the burden of paying their medical expenses and may suffer loss of earnings and capability to work, the liable party, therefore, has to provide them financial support.
However, sad to say, some discussions are being held by the legislators in attempt of limiting the amount of claims that a personal injury victim may recover. In some states, such limitations were already implemented.
In my point of view, the law should not put a maximum value for a personal injury claim. Our legislators must understand that some cases of injuries can result to continuous medical treatment that can be too expensive. In most occasions, the injured victims’ families are also suffering great effects especially if the victims happen to be the providers.
Any alterations regarding the damages amount may cause further burden to the victims. We all know that pursuing and winning a case alone is too exhausting. I think that our lawmakers should leave the issues on personal injury damages alone. They should not put a cap on how much should the poor victims of other people’s irresponsibility or negligence must obtain.
This is has been one of the major considerations made by our legislators in constructing the Personal Injury Law. Since the injured victims may lack the capacity to take all the burden of paying their medical expenses and may suffer loss of earnings and capability to work, the liable party, therefore, has to provide them financial support.
However, sad to say, some discussions are being held by the legislators in attempt of limiting the amount of claims that a personal injury victim may recover. In some states, such limitations were already implemented.
In my point of view, the law should not put a maximum value for a personal injury claim. Our legislators must understand that some cases of injuries can result to continuous medical treatment that can be too expensive. In most occasions, the injured victims’ families are also suffering great effects especially if the victims happen to be the providers.
Any alterations regarding the damages amount may cause further burden to the victims. We all know that pursuing and winning a case alone is too exhausting. I think that our lawmakers should leave the issues on personal injury damages alone. They should not put a cap on how much should the poor victims of other people’s irresponsibility or negligence must obtain.
Higher Standard of Care for Safer Truck Driving
06.16.08 (7:50 am) [edit]Imagine sharing the road with 80,000 pound truck about 65 to 75 feet in length. I bet you will be terrified by its huge frame and deafening sound.
If by mere looking at it gives you chill, then how much more if you or your vehicle collided with it. It must be a gruesome scene.
Cars and other vehicles are definitely no match for these monstrous beasts. It is unavoidable to not go near them as they may share a lane as your car or go alongside with them on the road.
Under California law, commercial driver's license may not be issued until and unless the applicant passes a written and driving test for the operation of a commercial motor vehicle in compliance with the minimum Federal standards.
This pertains to Commercial Drivers License (CDL) Manual. It is yet another essential document that outlines the minimum standard of care for the safe operation of trucks. The aim of the CDL Manual is to impart the knowledge required by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations to the truck drivers.
The foregoing requirement is what the author of the blog entitled, “Truckers have Higher Duty of Care ” would have meant.
Indeed, drivers of huge drivers must exercise and observe the standard of care as strictly as possible. This is their duty not only to the other motorists but to the public as a whole.
If by mere looking at it gives you chill, then how much more if you or your vehicle collided with it. It must be a gruesome scene.
Cars and other vehicles are definitely no match for these monstrous beasts. It is unavoidable to not go near them as they may share a lane as your car or go alongside with them on the road.
Under California law, commercial driver's license may not be issued until and unless the applicant passes a written and driving test for the operation of a commercial motor vehicle in compliance with the minimum Federal standards.
This pertains to Commercial Drivers License (CDL) Manual. It is yet another essential document that outlines the minimum standard of care for the safe operation of trucks. The aim of the CDL Manual is to impart the knowledge required by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations to the truck drivers.
The foregoing requirement is what the author of the blog entitled, “Truckers have Higher Duty of Care ” would have meant.
Indeed, drivers of huge drivers must exercise and observe the standard of care as strictly as possible. This is their duty not only to the other motorists but to the public as a whole.
How to Deal with Employment Discrimination
06.02.08 (7:46 am) [edit]Although many employees in California, particularly in Los Angeles, are experiencing some sort of discrimination from their employers, only a few understand their rights and pursue legal actions for suitable compensation.
As for example, age discrimination is defined as an illicit employment performance. Under the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act or ADEA and California Fair Employment and Housing Act, the elderly people who are still capable of working should be treated fairly on the employment setting.
As provided under Title VII, employees are given protection against discriminative performances of their employers in any aspects of employment such as:
- hiring and terminating
- compensation, task assignment, or employee classification
- promotion or layoff
- employment advertisements
- recruitment and testing
- use of company utilities and amenities
- training programs
- fringe benefits
- retirement benefits and disability leave
- other terms of employment
For once, it is indeed necessary for the workers to learn the basics of the Employment Law. However, for those who have already experienced any discrimination from their employer, it is much better to consult an employment attorney and have your case be expertly evaluated.
Do not take chances of patching up things with your employer alone for this may only lead to further problems. Let your attorney give you some legally accepted advice and subsequently represent you if you wish to demand compensation from your abusive employer.
You should always remember that your employer also has the capacity of hiring his own attorney to defend his own side of the story. Without a legal advocate to safeguard your rights, you may get up one day losing your case and potential recoveries.