93 yo Freezes to Death in House when Power Shut Off!

madanthonywayne

Morning in America
Registered Senior Member
Despite the subzero temperatures, the power company decided to cut off the power to a 93 year old WW2 vet. The result? The guy was found frozen to death in his own home a few days later. Ironically, the electric bill was found on his counter with a bunch of money clipped to it.
TV5 and WNEM.com has learned about new circumstances surrounding Marvin Schur’s death.

A limiter on Schur’s electric meter is being blamed for the man’s death. Now Bay City said it will notify customers before their power is shut off.

Michigan’s Attorney General Mike Cox said Tuesday he would review the case.

One local lawyer said the question remains: Who is accountable in the war veteran’s death?

Czuprynski, a constitutional attorney, said the city could be liable. "I really think it's a disgusting situation and it's a shame that Bay City is put beneath this light."

Czuprynski said Bay City could be liable for Schur's death.

It was 32 degrees inside Schur's house when neighbors found his body.

Bay City Electric Light and Power sent Schur a shutoff notice through the mail a few weeks ago.

Then crews placed a shutoff notice on his front door. A few days later, Schur was found by neighbors.

Bay City Electric Light and Power, which is owned by the city, said a limiter was placed on Schur’s electrical line.

The device limits the power that reaches a home, and it blows out like a fuse if power consumption rises past a set level.

The manager of Bay City said the limiter was tripped sometime between the time of installation and the discovery of the man's body.

The city manager said city workers keep the limiter on a house for 10 days, then shut off power entirely if the homeowner hasn't paid utility bills or arranged to do so.

TV5 checked with Consumers Energy and Detroit Edison Tuesday to see if those companies use limiters. They said they do not.

A Consumers spokeswoman said it has never used limiters. DTE said it doesn't use limiters because the Michigan Public Service Commission discourages use of the devices.

TV5 also found out that Bay City isn't regulated by the state agency because it's a municipal company.

It has a review board that sets its standards. Now it could be sued as a result of its policy on limiters and the fact that it didn't personally notify Schur about the device.

Czuprynski said usually cities can't be sued, but that might not be the case in the death of the World War II veteran.

Officials in central Michigan say the 93-year-old man who owed more than $1,000 in unpaid electric bills froze to death inside his home -- where the municipal power company had restricted his use of electricity.

Neighbors and friends of Schur want answers as to how this could happen.

“Now that we do know it was hypothermia, there’s a whole bunch of feelings that I’ve got going through me,” said Jim Herndon, a neighbor of Schur’s. “There’s anger, for the city and the electrical company.”

Bay City officials said changes are on the way in an attempt to not let another instance like this happen again.

An autopsy determined Schur died from hypothermia in the home he lived in for years.

A medical examiner who conducted the autopsy on Schur told TV5 and WNEM.com that Schur died a painful death due to the hypothermia.

Dr. Kanu Varani has done hundreds of autopsies, and he said he’d never seen a person die of hypothermia indoors.

A neighbor who lives across the street from Schur is angered that the city didn’t personally notify the elderly man about his utility situation.

Schur’s neighbor, Herndon, said Schur had a utility bill on his kitchen table with a large amount of money clipped to it, with the intention of paying that bill.

Right now the city said the situation is still under investigation.

A memorial service for him will take place Wednesday at 11:00 a.m. at the Gephart Funeral Home in Bay City. http://www.wnem.com/news/18566890/detail.html#-
 
What's different this time?

Madanthonywayne said:

Despite the subzero temperatures, the power company decided to cut off the power to a 93 year old WW2 vet. The result? The guy was found frozen to death in his own home a few days later. Ironically, the electric bill was found on his counter with a bunch of money clipped to it.

What's the alternative? Make an exception because he's old? Because he served in World War II?

Don't get me wrong; I think the situation is abhorrent. And it's symptomatic of our American values that place money above everything else.

What I don't get, though, is what makes this different. Ironically, the bill was found on his counter with the money? He should have sent it in. At least, that's what we would normally hear from those whose political affiliations make a big issue out of "personal accountability". By that doctrine, nobody is to blame for Schur's death but Schur himself.

So what's different this time? Really, I'm curious.
 
What's the alternative? Make an exception because he's old? Because he served in World War II?

Don't get me wrong; I think the situation is abhorrent. And it's symptomatic of our American values that place money above everything else.

What I don't get, though, is what makes this different. Ironically, the bill was found on his counter with the money? He should have sent it in. At least, that's what we would normally hear from those whose political affiliations make a big issue out of "personal accountability". By that doctrine, nobody is to blame for Schur's death but Schur himself.

So what's different this time? Really, I'm curious.

Yep, pretty much. People just feel sorry for old people because they are perceived as especially vulnerable.
 
Actually what the deal is this time, is that nobody told Shur thaththe device was being put on his house. Not to mention that most of the people in bay City wit the limiter do not actually know they have it installed. Nobody came to the house to tell him there was no notice mailed. In fact it is likely Shur died of hypothermia becuase the limiter was triggered. the lethargy that comes witb the first stages of hypothermia was his downfall as he did not even have the energy to call in that he had the money for the bill.
 
So what's different this time? Really, I'm curious.

Well a number of places it is illegal to shut power off in the winter and there are programs to reduce the cost and help pay for the energy needs of at risk people.
 
Personal accountability, Nuremberg-lite, and muddied assertions of fact

TW Scott said:

Actually what the deal is this time, is that nobody told Shur thaththe device was being put on his house. Not to mention that most of the people in bay City wit the limiter do not actually know they have it installed. Nobody came to the house to tell him there was no notice mailed.

Well, obviously, we need more sources on this, because the topic article says that BCEL&P mailed a notice to the house "a few weeks ago". And that someone placed a shutoff notice on his door. Speaking from personal experience, that shutoff notice and the bills with "PAST DUE" stamped on the front of the envelope in big red letters is the only notice I've gotten.

And in that sense, we're still back to personal accountability.

This incident underscores systemic problems in our supply network, namely that the "right thing" is too often defined by the transfer of money from one party to another. Beyond that, if BCEL&P is telling different stories on different days, it suggests that they need to get their heads out of their asses and figure out what's going on. This is a second aspect of personal accountability.

Add to that the lack of regulation. I can't figure why the municipals are exempt from certain regulations the privates are subject to. That certainly needs to be changed.

But, as it is, while BCEL&P officials are certainly embarrassed and denigrated by this outcome, that seems to be about all they're going to suffer. Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional, especially when they prescribe punishment. So it's not like the Michigan legislature can pass a new law and then tack the power officials to the shed over this. So if it turns out BCEL&P followed its established protocols it will be tough to mount a successful lawsuit against them.

Nuremberg-lite (so-called because it doesn't involve mass exterminations) is recognized to a certain level in our society. The rules are set up so that people can take certain risks, and when they get bit in the ass, they can excuse themselves by saying, "This is the established policy", essentially claiming that they were only following orders.

Like my local utility provider. They charge poor people an estimated two months' consumption before they'll even hook up the power. Their explanation is that if they don't, they would have to raise rates. There must be a whole lot of people that fall below their threshold, though, because otherwise the rate increase to offset bills in default would be pretty small. And, as they don't apply that "deposit" to past-due bills, it seems that their whole purpose is for the Utility Directors to protect their elected positions against the wrath of rich people whose accountants might notice a couple extra dollars a month.

It's wrong. It's bullshit. It's what my mother's generation would call trying to get blood from a stone. But it's policy, and the people whose job it is to collect extra money from the people least able to pay it are just following orders.

So much for personal accountability.
 
What's the alternative? Make an exception because he's old? Because he served in World War II?

Don't get me wrong; I think the situation is abhorrent. And it's symptomatic of our American values that place money above everything else.

What I don't get, though, is what makes this different. Ironically, the bill was found on his counter with the money? He should have sent it in. At least, that's what we would normally hear from those whose political affiliations make a big issue out of "personal accountability". By that doctrine, nobody is to blame for Schur's death but Schur himself.

So what's different this time? Really, I'm curious.
The difference here is that you shouldn't allow someone to die for not paying a bill. It's analogous to not denying emergency care regardless of ability to pay. No one's power should be shut off in the winter when loss of such power could cause someone to die. Wait until spring, if they haven't settled up or arranged payment by then, cut them off. At that point, the loss of power would simply be annoying rather than deadly.

I might also add that it would be nice if someone would personally contact the customer, even if only by phone, before shutting off power. Like you, I have received final notices before when I know I never received any other notice.
 
The difference here is that you shouldn't allow someone to die for not paying a bill. It's analogous to not denying emergency care regardless of ability to pay. No one's power should be shut off in the winter when loss of such power could cause someone to die. Wait until spring, if they haven't settled up or arranged payment by then, cut them off. At that point, the loss of power would simply be annoying rather than deadly.

Yeah, I completely agree, what a terrible thing to happen to someone.:(
 
They used to have a rule up here (Upstate New York) that they couldn't shut the heat off during the winter. They should get back to that, because there's no telling why this man didn't pay his bill. He's 93, he might have been half-senile as it was. OR totally senile. Or maybe he just fucking forgot. Doesn't matter what the reason is. The companies could survive for a few months without shutting off the delinquents.
 
relatively speaking it is actually a pleasant way to go. perhaps being 93 he knew his number was up.
 
Back
Top