News
The Convoluted System of the Veterans Benefits Administration
Battling the Veterans Benefits Administration for benefits is almost second nature to many Armed Forces personnel.
This is a story that highlights some of the incredible problems there are for vets who are trying to deal with the Veterans Benefits Administration (VA). It involves a case we heard about where a retired Marine Sergeant was shot in the head in Vietnam, which resulted in spinal-cord surgery that landed him in a wheelchair for the rest of his life.
The Marine was told by a VA doctor to file to get funding that would allow him to adapt his home and car to handle his wheelchair. Flash forward to 2010, and the Marine is still fighting to get his claims dealt with, since all that has transpired in the last ten years was what appears to be a monumental run around of claim denials, a few rounds with legal interpretations, and dealing with the government bureaucracy. This Marine would get some straightforward information from an Arkansas injury and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law and veteran’s benefits.
Over the last ten years, the Marine took matters into his own hands and went ahead and did his home renovations to the tune of roughly $6,000. He also got his driver’s license suspended; not one of his finer moments, but he noted with some humor that the VA told him he could not drive without special equipment and then told him he couldn’t have that very same equipment for a service related disability. This Marine is definitely not alone in his fight to get his claim honored.
There may be some light on the horizon in the form of VA Secretary Eric Shinseki, who has indicated he wants to clean up the inefficiency and clean out backlogged claims. Sounds good on the surface, but what about the error rate for processing claims? The error rate is actually not the problem in and of itself; the problem is that the whole system needs overhauling (much like the health and immigration systems).
Dealing with the backlog of claims may be nice, but rushing to move them out doesn’t address the underlying problems when it comes to staff making errors. Hustling things along will only mean the claims may be processed faster, but with a higher error rate, because no one is taking the time to make sure they are right the first time.
Overall, Shinseki wants to hit an accuracy rate of 98% by 2015, which also sounds fantastic, but do some math first to figure out what that really means. Let’s say the VA processes 2 million claims; that means a 1% error rate would be 20,000 vets. That’s a whole lot of problems for the vets.
If you find yourself in the revolving door trying to deal with a VA claim and don’t feel like you are getting anywhere, contact a seasoned Arkansas injury and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law and veteran’s benefits. It may be the best thing you have ever done for your health.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law and veteran’s benefits in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
Investment Fraud Stalks Unwary Buyers
Just about everywhere you turn these days, there is some kind scam going on. Sadly, investment scams are at an all-time high.
People want to invest money because they’d like to ultimately “make” money and be comfortable in retirement. Nice thought, and at one time, this was quite “doable.” Since the recession hit, those with investments have lost a lot of money, not their shirt – not yet – but it’s been a depressing ride for many. It’s hard not to understand why those who have lost funds would want to recoup them as fast as they can, any way they can – legitimately that is.
With that kind of investor mindset, it’s not much wonder there are scam and con artists out there that will set up schemes that are too good to be true and go trolling for unsuspecting investors. Unfortunately, even some pretty savvy people who do invest quite often get “had” by a scheme now and then. Of course, there are also the uninitiated investors who may be dabbling in the market and have an inkling of what they are doing, but not enough knowledge and intuition to spot a fraud when it raises its ugly head.
Here are a few things to be on the alert for if you are planning on doing some investing. If the rate of return on your investment is way too high – it sounds fantastic in fact – tone down your enthusiasm, because in cases like this it “is” too good to be true. The truth is that it is very rare for an investment to return more than twice the principle.
Keep in mind too that every investment must be audited and if this is not being done, your radar should go on high alert, prompting you to do some in-depth searching about the “opportunity of a lifetime.” Feeling rushed to fork over your cash? Being pressured to buy in or lose out? Back up a few steps and reconsider what you are doing. If the business offering the opportunity is legit and stable, they aren’t going to be out hustling customers and they won’t be using hard sell tactics either. This is when the word “No” should leave your lips promptly.
Sometimes all you have from the person who is trying to sell you something is their word about their firm or opportunity. Even though you may feel like its overkill to check out the firm’s rep and their investment offerings, do it anyway. The time you check may be the time you find out you should “not” invest your hard earned money.
If for some reason you got had by some smooth dude selling something that cleaned you out, speak to a qualified attorney with experience in this area of the law. You never know, you may be able to recover something.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law and veteran’s benefits in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
The Bus Was in Neutral When It Injured Another Motorist
School bus drivers really need to pay attention to their driving. This driver left his bus in neutral and injured another motorist.
It goes without saying that if someone is driving a school bus, they have a duty of care to pay attention to what they are doing at all times. They are hauling a lot of potential victims should they become involved in a crash like the one in this case.
No one is quite sure why the bus driver in this instance left his school bus in neutral, other than his own comment later that he forgot it was in neutral. What happened here is that a woman was struck head-on as she was waiting for the school bus to proceed forward just after it let some students off.
The bus driver said he’d had problems with shifting the bus into drive after dropping off a physically handicapped student. At that time, the school bus doors were not closed. He radioed for help to the dispatcher while putting the bus in neutral. The dispatcher told the driver what he needed to do to move the bus forward, and that was make sure the doors were closed first.
The bus driver made sure the doors were closed, but didn’t remember he was in neutral. The end result was colliding with another motorist, who was taken to a local hospital for treatment for her injuries. The rest of the students on the bus were not hurt.
“The first thing that comes to mind here is that the driver of the bus obviously did not have enough experience to be driving a school bus. Whether that means he didn’t have adequate training, which could be inferred from him not knowing how the bus moved forward, or was driving a bus he wasn’t familiar with, the results were an accident that could have been worse than it was,” outlined Michael G. Smith, an Arkansas injury lawyer, practicing personal injury law in Little Rock Arkansas.
“As it stands, the woman who was hit has what appears to be a good case to file a personal injury lawsuit to recover, among other things, any medical expenses associated with her injuries and any damages relating to her car,” added Smith, and Arkansas accident lawyer.
As for the school bus driver, until a further investigation is completed, it may not be clear if forgetting the bus was in neutral was his only transgression. He may have been listening to an MP3, texting while waiting for dispatch to respond or even reading a school bus manual. “Whatever the case may be, there is a good chance he will be found responsible for the woman’s personal injuries,” indicated Smith.
In cases like this, it may be that the motorist was not badly hurt – or at least, that is the way things may ‘look’ on the surface,” explained Arkansas accident lawyer Michael Smith. “However, minor injuries have a way of developing into something much more serious later. This is one good reason to talk to a personal injury lawyer if you have been involved in an accident,” he commented.
Learn more by visiting http://www.Arkansaslawhelp.com
Big Rig Blows Stop Sign
This three vehicle pileup, the result of a big rig running a stop sign, killed one.
Traffic signs are put in place for obvious reasons. Those who fail to pay attention to those signs are running a very real risk of serious injury or death, as this case that we heard about demonstrates. A big rig driver blew a stop sign and because he did, he was involved in a crash with another semi and a minivan. The driver of the minivan was killed.
This accident happened when the driver of a tractor-trailer unit didn’t obey a stop sign at a road connecting with a highway. Just as he was sweeping onto the highway, he broadsided another 18-wheeler. The impact was so forceful that one rig was shoved into the northbound lane where it hit a minivan.
The driver of the van was virtually crushed into his vehicle like a sardine in a tin and the Jaws of Life had to be used to extricate him. Unfortunately, his injuries were so severe he died at the scene of the accident. As an Arkansas accident lawyer, we see cases like this quite often. They are never easy for the family and the shock of losing someone they loved is monumental.
Evidently, the drivers of the two big rigs were not badly hurt and managed to walk away from the scene with minor injuries. While the police report indicated that they didn’t believe drugs or alcohol were factors in this accident, there would be a full investigation to determine why the first trucker went through a stop sign.
On the face of this case, the trucker who went through a stop sign will likely be cited for failure to obey traffic signs and possibly speeding and driving while distracted. While there was no mention of a cell phone or laptop in the police report, it doesn’t mean the trucker wasn’t on his cell phone either talking or texting when he ignored the stop sign.
He may also have been hunting for a map, watching a movie on his laptop or picking something up off the floor. There may also be the possibility he was under the influence of prescription drugs or had been driving too long and was exhausted. If any of these scenarios is the case, the family of the minivan driver will have a good case to file for a wrongful death lawsuit with an Arkansas accident lawyer.
In cases like this, it is best to discuss all options with a skilled personal injury lawyer with extensive experience handling 18-wheeler accidents. There are usually a number of things that need to be done right away, not the least of which is to preserve evidence, gather reports, pictures and medical records. Time is truly the enemy in crashes involving 18-wheelers, so don’t wait to speak to an Arkansas accident lawyer to find out what your rights are and what to expect if you have a viable case.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law and veteran’s benefits in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
Bill to Improve Veteran’s Health Services
A new act may finally provide the kind of care and support veterans and their families deserve.
Just last month a piece of bipartisan legislation quietly passed into law – the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act (Caregivers Act). While the title might not say much about what it contains, the bill is designed to not only improve, but reform veteran’s health services.
The intention is that wounded vets get more support, as well as their caregivers (that includes family or others). Of note is a provision that expands care for female veterans (over 1.8 million), one that offers improved mental health services and one that provides increased access to health care for veterans living in rural parts of the US.
This type of legislation has been a long time coming and it is hoped it will make an enormous difference in the lives of those who volunteered to fight for their country; its right, its freedoms and its sovereignty. Many vets are hard pressed to get the help they need when they return from war zones.
Unfortunately, many veterans are injured in ways that cannot be “seen” – post traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, anxiety, etc. – and because no one can “see” their injuries, they are often shuffled around from pillar to post without getting the medical help they need. Filing for disability is typically a major undertaking. Many times veteran’s claims are denied and often it is many months, if not years, before a claim is resolved.
Statistics relating to veteran’s care indicate that at least 21% of active duty, 24% of retired or separated service members and 15% of those in the reserves are being cared for by a friend or family member who had to quit their job to care for them full-time. The Caregivers Act offers these caregivers assistance and support to handle the stress (mental health services and counseling) of caring for a disabled vet, as well as respite care for families and other caregivers. This new legislation’s intent is to provide health care and a service stipend for caregivers living with wounded vets from the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts.
Many laws have been passed to help vets, all with seemingly good intentions. Unfortunately, most were ultimately watered down to the point of being completely ineffective by the courts’ interpretations. Only time will tell whether or not this new Act will accomplish what it says it intends to accomplish.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law and veteran’s benefits in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
Single Vehicle Crash Causes Death and Serious Injuries
Seatbelts do save lives, but only if people choose to wear them. This case confirms that.
In this particular case, Deena Ricard (names have been changed to protect the victims) and her 21-year-old daughter were on their way home from a day out. For some unknown reason, Ricard lost control of her car, was ejected from the vehicle and sustained fatal head injuries.
Prior to emergency services crews arriving on the scene, an off-duty nurse and police officer happened on the scene and administered first aid to both of the victims. Unfortunately, Ricard was pronounced at the scene, while the daughter was taken to the nearest hospital to have her injuries treated. Thankfully, they didn’t appear to be life threatening on first glance.
The important thing to note though is that just because an injury doesn’t look serious at first blush, complications may arise later. For instance, whiplash is a silent injury, as no one can really see it, but it can cause untold pain and agony and other problems later. In addition, external bruising may only be a minimal indictor of internal trauma, and traumatic brain injury is a real concern in car crashes.
According to the police report, neither passenger in the single vehicle crash was wearing seat belts. They don’t know if alcohol or any other intoxicant was a factor or not, and blood tests were called for on Deena Racine. What is also not known is if the driver was on a cell phone talking or even texting, or doing something else that caused her to lose control of her car.
Even though the daughter in this case was apparently not seriously injured, that really won’t be determined until later when she has been completely assessed by a doctor. In the meantime, she would be best advised to speak to an Arkansas injury lawyer. If the young daughter had a place of her own, children, a husband and a job, she may be entitled to compensation for lost wages, medical expenses, and other related expenses such as tests, counseling and therapy.
If you find yourself in a situation like this, don’t hesitate to call on an experienced Arkansas injury lawyer. You need to know what your rights are, how the system works, and what you may and may not be able to recover in terms of compensation for any personal injuries.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
Ignoring a Red Light Killed His Brother
Accidents happen anytime, anyplace and anywhere. A driver’s negligence may kill another person, requiring the services of an Arkansas injury lawyer.
Just when you think you’re doing OK, driving along minding your own business, you are involved in a major car crash; a crash that kills your brother. This happened because you ignored a red light. In reality, this accident should never have happened, but for your negligence in not obeying traffic signals.
Eddy and Freddy Kroger (names have been changed to protect the victims) were in their 2002 Dodge pickup and traveling east on Main Street. As Eddy got near the local intersection of Main Street and the highway he was going to take to get home, he (for some unknown reason) ignored the red traffic light. In doing so, he turned right into the path of oncoming northbound traffic.
By then, it was too late for Eddy to do anything, as his truck was struck by a 2007 Volvo tractor trailer. The big rig hit so hard it pushed the Dodge pickup into another 18-wheeler with a load of windows on it. Even though the Volvo tractor trailer tried to avoid this fatal accident, he had no time to stop and no place else to go to get out of the way. In trying to miss the Dodge, the Volvo trucker also hit another car at the red light intersection.
When the dust settled, the Dodge driven by Eddy Kroger was sandwiched between the 18-wheeler and the delivery truck carrying a load of windows. The right side of the truck was completely caved in. Even though EMS crews worked quickly to free the brothers, Freddy was pronounced at the scene. Eddy was taken to hospital with serious injuries. The Volvo driver and the delivery truck driver were not injured, but their vehicles were damaged.
Multi-vehicle collisions are difficult for anyone to survive, particularly when they involve big rigs. In this case, since the Dodge truck driver was at fault by turning right in front of oncoming traffic because he ignored a red light, the Volvo driver and delivery truck driver may be able to sue for property damages. Freddy’s family will be able to sue for wrongful death. Family or not, Freddy’s death left them without a husband, father, brother, uncle and friend.
If you have been involved in a similar accident, or even in a two vehicle crash, seek the advice of an experienced Arkansas injury lawyer. Find out what your rights are and if there are grounds to proceed to file a lawsuit, don’t wait too long or the Statute of Limitations may run out.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
When a Wreck Involves Truck Negligence
Personal injury lawsuits are based on the fact that injuries happen to a person because someone else was negligent. 18-wheeler accidents are often good examples.
Let’s take a look at a hypothetical big rig accident, based on reality – and truth is often stranger than fiction facts, this accident should never have happened. It was a dreary day out on the highway when two huge trucks collided; one rig slammed into another one stalled on the highway. Traffic was diverted for several hours while the truckers were transported to medical facilities and the mess was cleaned up.
Thankfully, both drivers only had minor injuries, something the police in attendance found amazing. This wreck was one of the worst they had ever seen; a 9 on a scale of 1 to 10. The devastation to both of the 18-wheelers was phenomenal and even Haz-Mat officers on the scene were astounded that anyone actually survived the crash. Diesel fuel sloshed all over the highway as a result of the accident, creating an even more delicate situation in terms of potential fatalities should a spark set the fuel off.
The trucker driving the second vehicle rammed into the back of the first big rig and yet fortunately lived to tell about it. If you take a good look at the circumstances of a case like this, the potential for a really major disaster was just looking for a place to happen, but was diverted in this instance. The trucks could have struck another vehicle, another vehicle could have slammed into them, the diesel fuel could have ignited and engulfed both rigs, and both drivers may have perished at the scene.
While the cause of the accident is under investigation, the police may find that it was bad road conditions and the driver that rear-ended the stalled semi wasn’t paying attention to the road. They may also find the driver was texting while driving, exhausted, running late and trying to catch up, or his rig blew a tire.
The stalled semi may have not have been flagged properly according to safety regulations. It may have been parked in an inappropriate location and may not have had warning flares set out. In other words, just about anything could have happened to cause this colossal collision. Most of the things we have mentioned as being possibilities have their origin in negligence on the part of the driver who ran into the stalled truck.
If negligence can be proven, the injured driver of the other truck just may be able to file a personal injury lawsuit and recover damages for his injuries. For cases like this, it’s best to speak to a dedicated and skilled Arkansas personal injury lawyer and get the straight goods; not just something you want to hear.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
Justice says Med Mal Caps Only Benefit the Insurance Companies
This won’t surprise too many of you, but medical malpractice caps for damages only benefit insurance companies. They don’t benefit the victims.
It’s a total no-brainer that medical malpractice caps for damages sustained in a medical malpractice case are detrimental for the victim. It’s the innocent victim that was harmed so seriously that their whole life has been forever altered. They may face the rest of their lives trying to cope with significant injuries acquired due to the negligence of some physician.
Capping damages at $250,000, something proposed in the about-to-be health care reform bill, will punish the victim and not adequately compensate them for their true expenses over the rest of their lives. If the law is about justice, capping medical malpractice damage awards is not just. It’s a thinly disguised ploy by insurance companies (who support tort reform, by the way) to keep their expenses down and not have to pay out such high damage claims.
Interestingly enough, many large insurance companies insist they really only want to keep the price of soaring med mal insurance down. Well, in states that have the med mal cap in place already, the prices of medical practice insurance have continued to climb, cap or no cap. Look to the insurance company’s coffers for the reason for that.
Insurance companies also claim that high damage awards create defensive medicine; medicine where doctors go overboard and order expensive tests to be safe. Frankly, any good doctor will order what they feel is necessary, not what they think they should order to keep their malpractice insurance rates down. The only thing defensive medicine does is increase the cost of medical care to the end user.
It should be noted that the American Association for Justice has recently released a new report that reveals tort reform (capping med mal damage awards) which has succeeded in providing a lovely windfall of cash for the insurance companies. On the other hand, patients and doctors continue to pay ever increasing premiums.
Here is what is really interesting though: those insurance companies who insure physicians for malpractice showed their profits as being 24% higher in states with med mal caps on the books. So in 2008 alone, those same insurers raked in 3.5 times “more” in premiums than they paid out. What happened in states with no caps? Insurance companies still did really well in amassing just slightly over twice that they paid out for claims.
This clearly demonstrates what many people have been saying for years, that there is “no” relationship between the high cost of med mal insurance premiums and health insurance premiums. However, the reality is insurance companies “want” you to think that there is a relationship. Right now there are at least 30 states that have malpractice caps.
You’d be right on the money (pun intended) if you automatically thought those insurance companies are making high profits. Ready for this? In 2008 (just imagine what the figures are now) the average profit for the 10 largest med mal insurers was “higher” than 99% of Fortune 500 companies.
This isn’t right, ethical or moral. Speak out and tell people what “your” opinion is about penalizing victims of medical malpractice by ensuring their damage awards will not be enough to allow them to cope with their injuries for the rest of their lives.
Michael G. Smith is anArkansas personal injury lawyer and Arkansas accident lawyer, practicing personal injury law in Arkansas. Learn more by visiting Arkansaslawhelp.com
US Supreme Court Deals Blow to Veterans Seeking Disability Comp
The Supreme Court on April 21, 2009 struck a blow to veterans seeking to dispute medical claims denied by the Veterans Affairs Department. Reversing a lower court decision, the justices found that veterans must prove that any alleged mistakes made by the VA ultimately resulted in the denial of their claims. The lower court had ruled that the burden was on the VA. The case is Shinseki v. Sanders.
Challenges to the sufficiency of the notice given to vets by the VA in connection with a disbility claim has historically been a fertile source getting the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to remand cases where claim had been denied. This ruling will probably do away with most notice arguments, because the vet is required to show that the defective notice changed the outcome of his or her case, which is not possible in most instances.
Vets have to work for legislative changes to bring this archaic system into the 21st century.