The government would be required to examine a number of auto safety problems such as backovers and other deadly accidents involving children under a bill approved by a House committee on Tuesday.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee, on a voice vote, passed a bill that would require federal regulators to consider ways of diminishing blind zones in large sport utility vehicles and pickups, preventing vehicles from rolling away, and making power windows safer.

Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., the committee’s chairman, said it would “help protect these young victims by instituting common-sense safety provisions in the design of cars.”

A Senate committee approved similar legislation in May following reports of children being backed over in their driveways.

Safety advocates estimate that about four children die each week in backovers, strangulation from power windows or from being left behind in hot vehicles.

Automakers objected to earlier versions of the bill, arguing that it would require them to install expensive backup cameras in their vehicles to meet new standards to help drivers detect children or objects behind the vehicle.

Under the compromise, the enhanced visibility could be accomplished through additional mirrors, sensors, cameras or other technologies.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration would have to issue a final rule within three years of the bill’s enactment.

“Nobody should have to back out of the driveway without seeing what’s behind them,” said Jacqueline Gillan, vice president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety.

On power windows, NHTSA would need to develop new rules to require the windows to automatically reverse direction if there’s an obstruction in the way. If the agency decided not to issue final requirements, it would need to explain its decision to Congress.

The bill also puts into law a voluntary agreement approved last year by 19 automakers, who vowed to have brake interlock systems in all new vehicles by September 2010. Such systems allow the vehicle to shift out of park only when the brake pedal is depressed.

Cheap farmers, auto, life, health, dental insurance website listings and reviews, all of this on cheap farmers insurance dot com

Los Angeles, July 11, 2001, (A. M. Best via COMTEX) — a slapped exchange of fortune of insurance of farmers of California with a judgement $90 million in a lawsuit of class-action which pleads the insurer during years cheated its rulers of complaints out of the allowance of overtime. The judgement, by a higher jury of court of the county of Alameda, could reach not less $130 million after the fees of lawyers and interest is added, beared times of Los Angeles. The farmers said that it would call some with the decision. The farmers said that it “was disappointed and worried” by the verdict in the lawsuit, Bell against the exchange of insurance of farmers. “throughout the 73 years of its existence, farm uniformly believed that it correctly followed all the applicable state and laws of work federal, including those related to the classification of its force of adjustment professional as free of overtime, rather as that of hour in hour the not-free workmen,” the company said in a report/ratio. Rulers of complaints of field were historically treated as employees free as a whole of the United States, discussed farmers. California by company places rulers in this state “independently of their pars in other states” if it makes it possible the verdict to be held. “the question of suitable classification such employees like free or not-free is one that hopes of farmers will be clarified in this case by the supreme court of California,” the company known as. The farmers said that the advantages of the free statute for rulers include independence, the capacity to place their own hours and treatment like professionals. Steven Zieff, of Rudy, Exelrod and Zieff, legal consultant for the plaintiffs, indicated the covers of verdict the rulers affected for their unpaid overtime to leave Oct. 1, June 1993 with 26, date of 2001 tests. “all the members of class were in this case the personal lines representatives of complaints,” said Zieff in a report/ratio. “they treated declarations of disaster of car and owners of a house. The 2.402 members of class comprise approximately a third of the labour of California of the farmers.” Zieff also claimed that the farmers did not change its practices and always does not pay its rulers of complaints of overtime. “the rulers of complaints also seek to have the farmers of order of court to immediately start to pay overtime and to immediately keep the discs necessary of time to make thus,” said Zieff. “one expects that the court reigns on this question in several following weeks.” In a similar case, Amerco (Nasdaq: UHAL), the company holding for Western insurance Co of Republic and the life insurance of Oxford Co, agree to pay million dollars to solve a lawsuit of class-action in California about compensation of overtime to the sound U-Transport the subsidiary company of International Inc (BestWire, May 31, 2001). Amerco will identify expenditure of approximately $10.3 million during the financial year 2001 related to the payment. That the lawsuit of class-action, classified in the name of the directors for U-Transports to the higher court of the county of Los Angeles, with the directors pled with truck-and with the company of bottom of page-hiring were requested to work not less than 60 hours per week without additional compensation, though they passed much from this time making the same kind of work as of hour in hour of the employees. The financial force of the group of insurance of farmers is A+ evaluated (higher) by A.M. Best Co.