93 Yr Old WW2 Vet freezes to death after company cuts power

soulsinging

Heatherj43 wrote:

WOW! I'm here in Michign too. I hadn't heard that part. He sounds like he was eccentric. With that said, he obviously has mental issues, so he still needed protection. I am not sure it should had come from the electric company, but somehow nobody caught the fact he needed protection and this was the end result. To me, its just a sign of how we don't look out for each other. These days a lot of people don't even know who their neighbors are. I live in a place that my neighbors and me all know each other, thank God. The elderly are looked after by the rest of us. Their snow gets shoveled. they get looked in on, etc.
Oh and my bill would get to $1000 in about 3 months.

That's why I prefer city living to suburban or rural. I like the anonymity. I don't want to have to talk to neighbors or lift a finger for someone else when I have my own shit to do.

vduboise

chromiam wrote:

Actually the power company didn't cut off his power. They put a limiting device on his meter and once the meter hit a certain point, it shut the power off to the house. All the occupant had to do was go out and reset the device and power would be restored. This guy never went out to reset the device.

Did he know that they put the limiting device on his power? That is the real question. if he did not know that he could turn it on, then its the responsibility of the power company to tell him- face to face- and how to work the device. If he knew, then ...

decides2dream

Commy wrote:

damn. if the last few months are any guide I'de be at a $1000 in 3 months.


the story doesn't say much for the power company. they cut off the power and someone died. that's the bottom line. it says less about our mental health facilities, if someone like this was left on his own. sad story, everyone fucked up. didn't have to be.

it may not say 'much' for the power company...but really, what is it one expects? i see 'balme' being given to the utility, to mental health care, etc......and what exactly are all to do? since when are utilities expected to be social service programs? how are mental helath facilities to just 'know' about someone possibly being mentally ill if he or she don't seek help, and no one in their life informs anyone? i think a wee bit of personal responsibilty, and perhaps family/friend/neighbors...people looking out for those around them.....a bit more to 'blame.' i understnad and agree it's a tragedy what happened, but even in the 'good ole days'...if no one is there watching, taking care, being involved in someone's life....i don't forsee a utlity company, or social service agencies...to just be going door to door checking on the mental health of all. it's a sad story, and many fucked up..you're right....but sometimes, sad and fucked up things just happen....and a lot of times...some people are their own worst enemies too. seems like this man needed help, didn't see it for himself, and didn't havbe anyone actively involved in his life to recognize it either. however, i don't expect a utlity company to figure this out. the man refused to pay, he was allowed to get $1000 in arears...they put a limiter on his meter. i really don't know what they 'should' do in such cases.

then its the responsibility of the power company to tell him- face to face- and how to work the device.

since when is it expected to get FACE-TO-FACE service? seriously? you get a letter, maybe a phone call. it's YOU responsibility to be aware. i realize we are talking about a man's life...but let's also be real, no one is 'owed' services. utilites are businesses like any other. and i imagine in such businesses, they actually give their clients a LOT more slack than others due to the pertinent nature of their business, but 'expecting' face-to-face service, especially nowadays, i think is just...ridiculous? and even if they did infomr him face-toface...so what? how would that make ANY difference? i think issues with the elderly, especially such as this man....childless, widower, alone...are only going to grow. and no, i don't put the burden on the utility, but more on social service programs. perhaps we DO need some sort of registration of elderly who live alone? idk......but people who live alone, especially with little contacts...this is always a problem, no matter their age.

Commy

decides2dream wrote:

it may not say 'much' for the power company...but really, what is it one expects? i see 'balme' being given to the utility, to mental health care, etc......and what exactly are all to do? since when are utilities expected to be social service programs? how are mental helath facilities to just 'know' about someone possibly being mentally ill if he or she don't seek help, and no one in their life informs anyone? i think a wee bit of personal responsibilty, and perhaps family/friend/neighbors...people looking out for those around them.....a bit more to 'blame.' i understnad and agree it's a tragedy what happened, but even in the 'good ole days'...if no one is there watching, taking care, being involved in someone's life....i don't forsee a utlity company, or social service agencies...to just be going door to door checking on the mental health of all. it's a sad story, and many fucked up..you're right....but sometimes, sad and fucked up things just happen....and a lot of times...some people are their own worst enemies too. seems like this man needed help, didn't see it for himself, and didn't havbe anyone actively involved in his life to recognize it either. however, i don't expect a utlity company to figure this out. the man refused to pay, he was allowed to get $1000 in arears...they put a limiter on his meter. i really don't know what they 'should' do in such cases.

maybe it was darwinism. maybe this guy, or his family or friends, maybe they should have done something, maybe there was nothing to be done.


but it still comes down to profit. profit over people. the power company cut a man's power in the middle of winter and he died. because they wanted a check and didn't get it. so he paid that bill with his life. that's it.

Motha Judson

This post should have ended....the power co. is not at fault. He had the money...end of story.

decides2dream

Commy wrote:

maybe it was darwinism. maybe this guy, or his family or friends, maybe they should have done something, maybe there was nothing to be done.


but it still comes down to profit. profit over people. the power company cut a man's power in the middle of winter and he died. because they wanted a check and didn't get it. so he paid that bill with his life. that's it.

in reality, what do you seriously expect a business to do? the utility is not a charitable organization...and he also received a few months grace period, being able to build up to $1000 owed, a notice was put on his door, or in the mail?..i don't remember the article fully now, about the meter restricter.....so honestly, what else is to be done? seriously? when does personal responsibility and choice come into it? the man HAD the $$$, but refused to pay. when it did get restricted, he could've turned it back on, but he didn't...he could've called the utility, a friend, family, social services...but HE didn't. and yes, i personally believe he must've had some form of dementia, mentall illness....something.....but i don't hold the utility responsible for that. it's a business, of COURSe it comes down to profit. i cannot honestly think of any compnay that doesn't...even the best, most generous companies....b/c to remian in business, one must make a profit. i think mixing up for-profit business with the idea of charitable organizations, social services, etc....is a bit much imo. the real tragedy is that this man apparently had NO ONE at all in his life enough to realize he needed help. was my first impression when i first read the article, it seems to hold true now that further info has come out.

soulsinging

decides2dream wrote:

in reality, what do you seriously expect a business to do? the utility is not a charitable organization...and he also received a few months grace period, being able to build up to $1000 owed, a notice was put on his door, or in the mail?..i don't remember the article fully now, about the meter restricter.....so honestly, what else is to be done? seriously? when does personal responsibility and choice come into it? the man HAD the $$$, but refused to pay. when it did get restricted, he could've turned it back on, but he didn't...he could've called the utility, a friend, family, social services...but HE didn't. and yes, i personally believe he must've had some form of dementia, mentall illness....something.....but i don't hold the utility responsible for that. it's a business, of COURSe it comes down to profit. i cannot honestly think of any compnay that doesn't...even the best, most generous companies....b/c to remian in business, one must make a profit. i think mixing up for-profit business with the idea of charitable organizations, social services, etc....is a bit much imo. the real tragedy is that this man apparently had NO ONE at all in his life enough to realize he needed help. was my first impression when i first read the article, it seems to hold true now that further info has come out.

I think the point you're missing is that it is a bit depressing that we all think any sort of personal service or face-to-face business contact is an absurd expectation, and that there is something wrong with a business's pursuit of its profit costing someone their life, regardless of the circumstances.

soulsinging

Commy wrote:

but it still comes down to profit. profit over people. the power company cut a man's power in the middle of winter and he died. because they wanted a check and didn't get it. so he paid that bill with his life. that's it.

You probably don't believe me, but I completely agree with you.

Sian-of-the-dead

This is so so sad

I have to say that I do believe the energy company is at fault. More effort should be made with elderly customers, they DON'T understand everything and do get confused easily. Someone should have explained the new system to him, someone should have come to see him about his outstanding debt... I know in this country energy companies take your date of birth so they are fully aware of your age.
I'm sure the old boy planned to pay what he owed but damn, someone at the company should have noticed that his power had ceased to work. Surely they have some sort of indication that the trip system has kicked in and not been reset?!

This could have so easily been avoided... but then why would they care? As some have already said, it's all about profit. :evil:

decides2dream

soulsinging wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

in reality, what do you seriously expect a business to do? the utility is not a charitable organization...and he also received a few months grace period, being able to build up to $1000 owed, a notice was put on his door, or in the mail?..i don't remember the article fully now, about the meter restricter.....so honestly, what else is to be done? seriously? when does personal responsibility and choice come into it? the man HAD the $$$, but refused to pay. when it did get restricted, he could've turned it back on, but he didn't...he could've called the utility, a friend, family, social services...but HE didn't. and yes, i personally believe he must've had some form of dementia, mentall illness....something.....but i don't hold the utility responsible for that. it's a business, of COURSe it comes down to profit. i cannot honestly think of any compnay that doesn't...even the best, most generous companies....b/c to remian in business, one must make a profit. i think mixing up for-profit business with the idea of charitable organizations, social services, etc....is a bit much imo. the real tragedy is that this man apparently had NO ONE at all in his life enough to realize he needed help. was my first impression when i first read the article, it seems to hold true now that further info has come out.

I think the point you're missing is that it is a bit depressing that we all think any sort of personal service or face-to-face business contact is an absurd expectation, and that there is something wrong with a business's pursuit of its profit costing someone their life, regardless of the circumstances.

i am not 'missing' that point. in fact, if they did put a notice on his door...who knows? perhaps they knocked first, and didn't get a response. i simply think the point is, too many like to point fingers elsewhere, and oftentimes in the wrong direction. yes, this man would more than likely be alive to day if not for a restricter being put on his meter. i understand that, and i do sympathize. however, beyond that there are a LOT of varibles, least of which...this many apparently had no one in his life, he had the ability to pay......and there is other responsibility in the mix here outside the utility company imo. btw - i DO agree "that there is something wrong with a business's pursuit of its profit costing someone their life, regardless of the circumstances"...but i also see, it's not just that simple. what cost this man his life...was his own refusal to pay, and/or to seek out help, etc. it is not solely the responsibilty and burden of the utility imo.


my utility co. knocks on my door once a month to read our gas meter b/c it is inside our home. we rarely are home to let him in, so we read it ourselves and mail or phone it in. someone put the notice on his front door about the restricter and i would imagine they would've knocked too. i don't know how much else one expects. that's all.

soulsinging

decides2dream wrote:

i am not 'missing' that point. in fact, if they did put a notice on his door...who knows? perhaps they knocked first, and didn't get a response. i simply think the point is, too many like to point fingers elsewhere, and oftentimes in the wrong direction. yes, this man would more than likely be alive to day if not for a restricter being put on his meter. i understand that, and i do sympathize. however, beyond that there are a LOT of varibles, least of which...this many apparently had no one in his life, he had the ability to pay......and there is other responsibility in the mix here outside the utility company imo. btw - i DO agree "that there is something wrong with a business's pursuit of its profit costing someone their life, regardless of the circumstances"...but i also see, it's not just that simple. what cost this man his life...was his own refusal to pay, and/or to seek out help, etc. it is not solely the responsibilty and burden of the utility imo.


my utility co. knocks on my door once a month to read our gas meter b/c it is inside our home. we rarely are home to let him in, so we read it ourselves and mail or phone it in. someone put the notice on his front door about the restricter and i would imagine they would've knocked too. i don't know how much else one expects. that's all.

What we expect is that a gas company will not cut heat during one of the coldest winters ever until they have done absolutely everything possible to figure out what's going on in that house.

decides2dream

soulsinging wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

i am not 'missing' that point. in fact, if they did put a notice on his door...who knows? perhaps they knocked first, and didn't get a response. i simply think the point is, too many like to point fingers elsewhere, and oftentimes in the wrong direction. yes, this man would more than likely be alive to day if not for a restricter being put on his meter. i understand that, and i do sympathize. however, beyond that there are a LOT of varibles, least of which...this many apparently had no one in his life, he had the ability to pay......and there is other responsibility in the mix here outside the utility company imo. btw - i DO agree "that there is something wrong with a business's pursuit of its profit costing someone their life, regardless of the circumstances"...but i also see, it's not just that simple. what cost this man his life...was his own refusal to pay, and/or to seek out help, etc. it is not solely the responsibilty and burden of the utility imo.


my utility co. knocks on my door once a month to read our gas meter b/c it is inside our home. we rarely are home to let him in, so we read it ourselves and mail or phone it in. someone put the notice on his front door about the restricter and i would imagine they would've knocked too. i don't know how much else one expects. that's all.

What we expect is that a gas company will not cut heat during one of the coldest winters ever until they have done absolutely everything possible to figure out what's going on in that house.

gotcha.
guess i am a realist. that's all.



let me ask you this:
what IF the utility went to the house, had a face-to-face convo with the man....and he still refused to pay...and they informed him, in detail, about putting on a restricter, or turning off his power., etc....and he said he didn't care? then what? is the utility to get involved to the point of continuing to offer free service, even tho he had the ability to pay...and are they to alert social servivces, and continue to supply power, etc, until something can be done? i am merely asking....how far is a company meant to go? 'absolutely everything possible' is quite a tall order, and as i said.,.....i just don't imagine ANY company doing such. i guess i really don't expect one to either. i am not defending the big, bad corproations...i am merely questioning expectations. as i said, back in the days of a lot more face-to-face customer service, even then..i think there is a line, and doing 'absolutely everything possible'....probably didn't always happen either.

decides2dream

ok, i looked at the article again:


On Jan. 13, a worker with the city-owned utility installed a "limiter" on Schur's electric meter after four months of unpaid bills. The device restricts power and blows like a fuse if usage rises past a set level. Electricity is not restored until the device is flipped back on by the homeowner, who must walk outside to the meter.

Bay City Electric Light & Power did not contact Schur face-to-face to notify him of the device and explain how it works, instead following its usual policy by leaving a note on the door. But neighbours said Schur rarely, if ever, left the house in the cold.

At some point, the device evidently tripped and was not reset, authorities said. Schur's home was heated by a gas furnace, not electricity, but some gas furnaces do not work properly if the power is out.



i will definitely say the company SHOULD have knocked on the door and explained, at the very least. if they do manage to go door-to-door to put out notices, they could knock. i still say there are more 'responsible' than the utility alone tho. just my own thoughts.

soulsinging

decides2dream wrote:

gotcha.
guess i am a realist. that's all.

let me ask you this:
what IF the utility went to the house, had a face-to-face convo with the man....and he still refused to pay...and they informed him, in detail, about putting on a restricter, or turning off his power., etc....and he said he didn't care? then what? is the utility to get involved to the point of continuing to offer free service, even tho he had the ability to pay...and are they to alert social servivces, and continue to supply power, etc, until something can be done? i am merely asking....how far is a company meant to go? 'absolutely everything possible' is quite a tall order, and as i said.,.....i just don't imagine ANY company doing such. i guess i really don't expect one to either. i am not defending the big, bad corproations...i am merely questioning expectations. as i said, back in the days of a lot more face-to-face customer service, even then..i think there is a line, and doing 'absolutely everything possible'....probably didn't always happen either.

I'm a realist too. Like I said, it's just depressing that this is what we've come to. I'm not surprised this happened like this, just sad that this is what we are to the modern economy... balance sheets, numbers, that's it.

If they had done this, in the middle of winter, they should have filed a lawsuit to recover their money. This can be enforced by subpoena and jailtime and court-ordered payments. There are plenty of ways to recover their money without shutting off heat in the middle of winter.

In return, answer me this... how is saying "pay me now or else" and then cutting heat when it's 30 below zero different from a loan shark saying "you have until Tuesday or we break your legs?" At a certain point, you're not allowed to threaten someone's life or physical safety in your efforts to get your $. Period.

soulsinging

decides2dream wrote:

i will definitely say the company SHOULD have knocked on the door and explained, at the very least. if they do manage to go door-to-door to put out notices, they could knock. i still say there are more 'responsible' than the utility alone tho. just my own thoughts.

That's how I understood the scenario initially. I agree there are others that are partly responsible. But when it comes down to it, they're the ones that cut his heat and I think they bear the bulk of the responsibility. In tort terms, they were the last people that acted that could have prevented this. In human terms, when a child is abducted we could all say "how come her parents weren't watching " or "why didn't someone at the mall notice and do something"? But when it comes down to it, the biggest share of responsibility falls on the person that took the actions that resulted in the tragedy.

chromiam

Actually the heat was never cut... the ELECTRICTY was. It just so happens, that apparently, this man's furance was controlled by electricity (electric ignitor) (mine is as well).

decides2dream

soulsinging wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

i will definitely say the company SHOULD have knocked on the door and explained, at the very least. if they do manage to go door-to-door to put out notices, they could knock. i still say there are more 'responsible' than the utility alone tho. just my own thoughts.

That's how I understood the scenario initially. I agree there are others that are partly responsible. But when it comes down to it, they're the ones that cut his heat and I think they bear the bulk of the responsibility. In tort terms, they were the last people that acted that could have prevented this. In human terms, when a child is abducted we could all say "how come her parents weren't watching " or "why didn't someone at the mall notice and do something"? But when it comes down to it, the biggest share of responsibility falls on the person that took the actions that resulted in the tragedy.

i agree with your example, however......this was an ADULT, not a child. and obviously, the biggest issue there is more than likely dementia/mental illness. b/c in any other scenario that this were to occur, an adult, even at 93 would CALL SOMEONE...the utility company, a friend or family member....someone, and it never would've escalated to this scenario. obviously this man should not have been living on his own, and that makes me think, who's responsibility is that? so while i do hold the utility responsible, i see a lot more than that. obviously, we see it just a wee bit differently.


and chromiam, you are right. i think my post above quoted that point too...or else i just remember it from recently rereading.

decides2dream

soulsinging wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

gotcha.
guess i am a realist. that's all.

let me ask you this:
what IF the utility went to the house, had a face-to-face convo with the man....and he still refused to pay...and they informed him, in detail, about putting on a restricter, or turning off his power., etc....and he said he didn't care? then what? is the utility to get involved to the point of continuing to offer free service, even tho he had the ability to pay...and are they to alert social servivces, and continue to supply power, etc, until something can be done? i am merely asking....how far is a company meant to go? 'absolutely everything possible' is quite a tall order, and as i said.,.....i just don't imagine ANY company doing such. i guess i really don't expect one to either. i am not defending the big, bad corproations...i am merely questioning expectations. as i said, back in the days of a lot more face-to-face customer service, even then..i think there is a line, and doing 'absolutely everything possible'....probably didn't always happen either.

I'm a realist too. Like I said, it's just depressing that this is what we've come to. I'm not surprised this happened like this, just sad that this is what we are to the modern economy... balance sheets, numbers, that's it.

If they had done this, in the middle of winter, they should have filed a lawsuit to recover their money. This can be enforced by subpoena and jailtime and court-ordered payments. There are plenty of ways to recover their money without shutting off heat in the middle of winter.

In return, answer me this... how is saying "pay me now or else" and then cutting heat when it's 30 below zero different from a loan shark saying "you have until Tuesday or we break your legs?" At a certain point, you're not allowed to threaten someone's life or physical safety in your efforts to get your $. Period.

i don't think it's just modern society to blame, i think it's society, in general. has it gotten worse in modern times..perhaps...but i think it's always existed to some extent.


as far as your scenario, they didn't cut his heat, they cut his electricity...and they didn't cut it either...they put a resticter on it that he could've reset himself to turn back on! seriously...read and argue the actual points in the article. :P beyond that, i honestly don't know. the man HAD the $$$, but refused to pay. and if he didn't have the $$$, if he tried to negotiate, i am sure something could've been worked out. i think, again due to demntia, he was more than likely non-communicative with the utility outside of refusing to pay. even landlords, eventually, can evist due to lack of rent payments, etc. as i said, i am not defenind the big bad corporations...but even mom and pop situations have to make their $$$ too, be paid for services, etc....for them to remian in business. would this one man's lack of payment break them? probably not. however, if they actually ent to the point of developing and installing restricters on meters, lack of payment IS an issue, and one they have to take seriously to remian in business. honestly, i am just seeing it - realisitically - from both sides.



btw - you never did answer my Q.....where is the line of doing 'everything absolutely possible' to be for a business? this isn't family or friends...but a business. an important one, yes...but when one refuses to pay, just how much is a company to get involved in their client's lives? as i said, we all agree...it's a tragedy. but let's face it, if dementia or something wasn't in the mix, this never would've happened. people reach out for help. this man didn't.

Fahka

Electricity and gas companies are the devil.. they don't care if he is 93, served in a war or anything else. They don't give a shit. They are a company, just like the cable. It is sad that they don't at least give people a grace period or simply just calling the customer before its shut off might make a world of difference. (I am almost POSITIVE this isn't the first time something like this has happened)


It is really sad and i feel even worse for the soul less bastards who saw this man as a number.. and not a human being.

soulsinging

decides2dream wrote:

btw - you never did answer my Q.....where is the line of doing 'everything absolutely possible' to be for a business? this isn't family or friends...but a business. an important one, yes...but when one refuses to pay, just how much is a company to get involved in their client's lives? as i said, we all agree...it's a tragedy. but let's face it, if dementia or something wasn't in the mix, this never would've happened. people reach out for help. this man didn't.

I did answer the Q, my answer was that the line is that the company doesnt' shut off power in mid-winter, period. Under any circumstances. They can get recourse through the courts if it comes to that. As for the distinction between electric and gas, it's immaterial to me. Electric driven heat isn't exactly uncommon. This is a foreseeable and preventable event.