Filip Di Sanza was injured when he tripped and fell over a raised metal sidewalk grating, which covered a vault containing a Con Edison transformer.

After it was named a party to DiSanza’s personal injury lawsuit, the New York County Supreme Court granted Con Edison’s motion to dismiss the case.

The utility provided testimony of an employee who inspected the area less than five months before the incident and found no defect. While Di Sanza presented post-accident photographs of the defective grate, he was unable to demonstrate how long the condition had existed and, as a result, his expert’s analysis of the accident’s cause was viewed as nothing more than “speculation.”

Since Con Edison established that it neither created nor had “actual or constructive” notice of the defect, the Appellate Division, First Department, agreed with the dismissal.

For Di Sanza, that outcome must have been extremely grating. Don't you think?

To download a copy of the Appellate Division’s decision, please use this link: Di Sanza v. City of New York

Posted by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq. at 12:00 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0) | Comments (0)

Earlier this afternoon, I received a message from New York City Councilmember John C. Liu's office about the power outage which impacted some 10,000 residents of Flushing, Queens, on June 1, 2007, and Con Ed's anticipated inability to service the needs of its customers this summer. 

The text of that e-mail reads as follows:

Council Member John C. Liu is urging energy conservation as the hottest days of the summer approach and our fragile electrical infrastructure continues to be vulnerable to outages. Unless conservation measures are taken, we will all face the kind of power outage that has already confronted Flushing, Queens earlier this month.

***

Agnes Kim, Director of Operations, Office of Council Member John C. Liu

While energy conservation is certainly an admirable goal, it does not excuse Con Edison's continuing failure to address a deteriorating, and obviously inferior, infrastructure.

Only moments ago, Eyewitness News reported scattered power outages in the South Bronx and Manhattan's East Side. (What's next?)

It's time to stop the posturing and for our political leaders to use whatever mechanisms they may have at their disposal to put an end to this nonsense.

And they can begin by kiboshing the utility's request for a proposed 36% rate hike.

With Con Edison reporting about $12 billion in annual revenues and holding some $25 billion in assets, why must millions of New Yorkers passively sit back and await another disaster (or photo op) before our political leaders will take any affirmative steps? 

Our federal, state and local officials need to take action, NOW!

Posted by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq. at 4:30 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0) | Comments (0)

After nine days without power, New York City's residential customers impacted by the recent outage may file claims seeking to recover damages "for actual losses of food spoiled due to lack of refrigeration," up to a maximum of $350. While all claims must be "itemized," losses in excess of $150 are typically required to be accompanied by proof (like cash register tapes, store or credit card receipts, canceled checks, identifying price labels or UPC bar codes from merchandise, and photographs of spoiled items). As a goodwill gesture, though, Con Edison has recently announced that it is waiving its "proof" requirement for the victims of the July 2006 outage. (Isn't that gracious?)

Considering the relatively low compensation being offered, we think the utility's form requires needless information and detail. Con Edison knows full well who was impacted by the outage. Why compound the inconvenience customers experienced--many living nine days without services like air conditioning, elevators or refrigerators--with tedious paperwork that requires them to identify each food item by type, quantity ("pounds, ounces, dozen"), and cost?

And, in our opinion, reimbursement of up to $350 is an insult. Consumers should be fairly and adequately compensated for their losses. Even Attorney General Elliot Spitzer has called for change. In a press release, dated July 24, 2006, Spitzer demanded a hike in compensation levels. In fact, his office recommended an increase in the monies payable to consumers back in March 2000, to no avail.

We believe enough is enough and call for legislative action. With about $12 billion in annual revenues and $25 billion in assets, Con Edison can afford to cut the victims of the July 2006 outage a bigger break.

For a copy of Con Edison's "Residential Claim for Food Spoilage," please click on the following link:
http://coned.com/customercentral/brochures/residential_claim.pdf

For a copy of the Attorney General's press release, dated July 24, 2006, please click on the following link:
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2006/jul/jul24b_06.html

For a copy of the Attorney General's March 2000 report, entitled "Con Edison's July 1999 Electric Service Outage," please click on the following link:
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/telecommunications/blackout/coned.pdf

Posted by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq. at 8:25 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0) | Comments (2)

In our local papers, including today's New York Times, Kevin Burke, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Con Edison, has published a full-page open letter addressed to the hundreds of thousands of Queens residents who were recently without power for some nine days. Interestingly, Mr. Burke deliberately skirted words of apology, regret, or remorse. Rather, he expressed an "awareness" of the hardships faced and "gratitude" for our neighbors' "patience and strength." Burke assured that the utility would work to restore public "trust and confidence" and offered the following action plan:

Moving forward, I promise you that we will find out what caused this extraordinary series of events in our system, and we will repair, rebuild and improve the damaged infrastructure.

Well, Mr. Burke, it seems that you won't need to look very far to uncover the outage's cause.

In a press release dated July 24, 2006, Attorney General Elliot Spitzer noted that the problems which precipitated the recent blackout were identical to those which plagued our City back in July of 1999; some seven years ago. In March of 2000, the AG's office identified the effects that intense heat had on the utility's underground cables and offered thirteen specific recommendations, none of which appear to have been implemented by the company since the report's original release. In particular, the AG suggested that Con Edison:

- develop a test for detecting equipment vulnerable to heat stress, overload or other sudden failure;

- establish a protocol for power grid management that includes mandatory reporting to local and state officials;

- improve crisis communications with customers, government and the public, including more accurate reporting of customer power loss and the time needed to bring customers back on line; and

- increase the amount the company pays customers for food and perishables ruined by lack of refrigeration, and compensate customers for appliances damaged by power outages.

With about $12 billion in annual revenues and $25 billion in assets, Con Edison is supposedly one of the nation's largest investor-owned energy companies providing electric, gas and steam service to more than 3 million customers in New York City and Westchester County. In view of the expansive breadth and scope of the company's reach, the utility's failure to heed the warnings of the late 1990's is completely indefensible and cause for concern. It strikes us as a deliberate act of neglect, omission or disregard that warrants pubic rebuke and reproach. And, unlike our City's Mayor--who recently suggested that the utility deserved our "thanks"--we believe there should be formal hearings and the utility's management held accountable (criminally and/or civilly) for the mishap. At a minimum, some penalty or sanction of a substantial nature should ensue.

We're sorry, but expressing "gratitude" and proffering vague assurances that significant infrastructure problems will be addressed in the future (when they have been ignored in the past), just doesn't cut it.

For a copy of the Attorney General's press release, dated July 24, 2006, please click on the following link:
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2006/jul/jul24b_06.html

For a copy of the Attorney General's March 2000 report, entitled "Con Edison's July 1999 Electric Service Outage," please click on the following link:
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/telecommunications/blackout/coned.pdf

-------------
The text of Mr. Burke's open letter follows:

To the Residents of Northwest Queens

The recent power outage in Queens was a painful ordeal for residents and businesses in the area. I am deeply aware of the many hardships you faced--disruption of daily routine, enduring the heat without air conditioning and the uncertainty as to when everyday life would resume. I am grateful for your patience and strength which were severely tested during the outage. While you endured, Con Edison worked hard to restore service, and we will strive to restore your trust and confidence in us.

I am proud of the men and women of Con Edison who work long hours under difficult conditions to serve New Yorkers every day. We thank the crews from other utilities that came to our aid when we needed it most. We also thank the City of New York, especially the Office of Emergency Management and the Police Department, and the Red Cross for providing much needed support services to residents in the area.

Moving forward, I promise you that we will find out what caused this extraordinary series of events in our system, and we will repair, rebuild and improve the damaged infrastructure.

In a crisis affecting thousands, it's easy to forget the Con Edison employees are committed to delivering energy safely and reliably every day. It is a commitment we take seriously.

Sincerely,
s/
Kevin Burke
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Con Edison

Continue reading "SHAME ON YOU, MR. BURKE!" »

Posted by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq. at 5:59 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0) | Comments (0)