back to article T-Mobile USA sued by parents after their baby dies amid 911 meltdown

A Texas mother is suing T‑Mobile USA, alleging technical issues with the carrier prevented her child from getting urgent medical care, which led to his death. Bridget Alex says that the telco's problems with "ghost calls" left the babysitter of her six-month-old son unable to reach the city's emergency services in time to save …

  1. EveryTime

    I usually take a dim view of lawsuits like this. Especially when distraught parents are looking for anyone to blame, and anyone to sue.

    But this looks like a reasonable and proper case. A large company that had resources to test properly released broken code that put public safety at risk. If nothing bad had happen they would have argued "no harm, no foul". But something bad did happen. A child died. The expensive system set up to prevent this tragedy was disabled. That failure should have a cost. A high cost. One that makes companies behave responsibly. Even if they wouldn't act morally of their own profit-driven volition, the bean-counters should point out the potential cost in dollars.

    1. martinusher Silver badge

      Read the fine print

      No US carrier is prepared to swear that their 911 capability is reliable and accurate. That's why its smart to retain a landline for the time being, especially in suburban or rural areas. Its also a good idea for at least one phone on that landline to be a legacy phone powered from the network rather than a cordless phone that will go out during a power cut.

      When you enable 911 dialing on your cellphone then you're forced to OK a waiver that makes the limitations of cellular 911 clear.

      1. Ole Juul

        Re: Read the fine print

        I use a VoIP service on which I pay $1.95 per month for 911 service. I would think they have some responsibility in return for that charge. However, that's like a landline in that they have my actual physical address in their system for just that purpose. Relying on just a single and usually fragile cell phone connection doesn't seem smart to me - especially if you have the responsibility of a baby. You have to feel sorry for those parents though.

        In any case, I've also got a traditional copper pair landline with one phone directly connected so as to work during power outs. But that's actually a luxury because the VoIP phones have a UPS. My point would be that I take some responsibility myself for ability to get 911 service.

      2. Antron Argaiv Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        Re: Read the fine print

        No US carrier is prepared to swear that their 911 capability is reliable and accurate.

        Well, there was ONE...The Bell System. But we decided to break them up and then baby Bells decided that fiber was more profitable than copper, and so, here we are. The wireline telecommunications system was designed to survive, and had 99.99...% reliability. They prided themselves on that. But it was expensive, and not suited to broadband, so it had to go. Sadly, this is the cost...

      3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Read the fine print

        "When you enable 911 dialing on your cellphone then you're forced to OK a waiver that makes the limitations of cellular 911 clear."

        I'll agree with that bit to a point. One of the most vital parts of making a call to the emergency services is to give your location as accurately as possible and not rely on others to work it out from the technology. Especially if calling from a mobile which might only pin point you to within a few 100 metres (or much more out in the sticks). I can also agree to point with the landline argument, but it's worth bearing in mind that less than half of US households still have a land line according a recent story here so mobile companies HAVE to up their game.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Attention

    Yanks pay for their emergency service number as a surcharge on their phone bill. Everyone point at them and laugh.

    They wish they had superior 999.

    1. collinsl Bronze badge

      Re: Attention

      We pay for 999 via council taxes, government taxes and line rental charges.

      We all pay, just in different ways. Nothing to laugh about, it's a crucial service.

      1. GrapeBunch

        Re: Attention

        In Canada, I'm required by law to pay a monthly 911 service charge on my landline, and also on my pay-as-you-go mobile phone. If I had further phones, I believe I would have to pay the charge on each one. By the same token, I should have every reason to expect that the 911 service work.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Attention

        "We all pay, just in different ways. Nothing to laugh about, it's a crucial service."

        The difference is that in the USA, it's an optional service that some will choose to forego to save a few pennies until it's too late.

    2. Stevie

      Re: Attention

      Childish troll is childish,

  3. Your alien overlord - fear me

    Can't see how they're trying to pin the blame on the paramedics not finding the house on T-Mobile. Surely the caller should say where they are calling from? And if they are lost, don't the emergency services just use the radio to speak to to their HQ rather than phoning someone?

    1. Richard 12 Silver badge

      It's part of the carrier requirements that they be able to roughly locate any 911 caller.

      Same is true of 112 and 999.

      The reason is that many callers are not able to give a good location. Legitimate callers are mostly extremely stressed and many will be in a state of panic.

      Even if calm and collected, what if the assailant is in the room, they're a kidnap victim, a passer by who doesn't know the area, a child, visitor or someone recently moved who doesn't know their full address yet...

      Or simply that the call is cut off before they can give the information.

    2. Chloe Cresswell Silver badge

      They weren't lost. The argument is that the failures in the system didn't allow the emergancy system to locate where the call was coming from accuratly.

      The babysitter might not have been able to give the most accurate address - panic/etc can prevent this.

      It's not that the paramedics were out of contact/etc, it's that they didn't have the right information to start with to allow them to go directly to the scene

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        No cell phone can give accurate information (unless they have GPS information transmitted as well, provided this is also turned on). It can give rough location based on masts. In a city it may be down to a few hundred square metres, in the country it could be a few square KM.

        1. networkboy

          GPS no workie on 911

          The 911 system in the US ins *unable* to use the GPS data from phones. This is not a carrier issue, it is an infrastructure (of the 911 system) issue.

          The best the carriers can do as a result is give an appx location based on cell location.

          As to the ghost calls issue, IDK if that is a T-Mobile or Dallas infrastructure issue. 911 calls do not go over the normal cell routes, they have a priority circuit (of sorts) so that if you have a phone with no SIM, or expired SIM, or revoked IEMI the emergency call can still be placed. If the issue is with how T-mobile handles this priority circuit and that's what caused the ghost calls then yeah, they may have liability here, if it's the city's link that didn't act to spec then...

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's a bit of a shit world when the only way to make a company responsible for the death of a child and ensure they don't do it again is to take money off them.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The claim uses the legal weasel phrase "on Information and belief".

    This means they have no facts to support their claim.

    Of course given it is person vs giant corp, it is not unreasonable that they have no hard facts, and hope they they will be able to find some in discovery.

    But my bullshit sensor always goes off when I hear/see that phrase.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Terminator

    (next board meeting)

    On the minus side - we are being sued over a dead baby.

    On the plus side - it generated plenty of publicity for us.

    We have set aside a few $$ for the court case, but GREAT NEWS; after cost cuts to the 911 service, profits are up.

  7. Ole Juul

    not the first time for T-Mobile

    In 2014 T-Mobile's 911 service was out for some hours, and it happened more than once. I believe that one cost them a few pennies. See: FCC REACHES $17.5 MILLION SETTLEMENT WITH T-MOBILE FOR NATIONWIDE 911 OUTAGES

    1. M Mouse
      Thumb Down

      Re: not the first time for T-Mobile

      Although my landlines are generally reliable, I had 3 weeks when one was down for a week, then the other for a week, then the first (again for a whole week). Voice and data.

      I have several mobiles, some PAYG, so could probably have reached 999, but the point is that whether wired or wireless, few of these services are guaranteed for 100% uptime.

      I have most sympathy for the babysitter, who no doubt went into panic and may not have tried landline if she was by child's cot on her mobile... I suspect mother and lawyer are trying to milk T-Mobile "because they can" and few will speak out about it being the wrong attitude and action, because the tragic death weighs heavily, and any argument against compensation may have "heartless attitude" used to describe it.

      A landline may help, but in the past we have heard from Fire Service and Police that they could not reach our (urban Lx xXX) address as their satnav units don't show it (development was only finished in 1993!!!).

      Under 60% of homes have a landline in USA, I believe, so tragedies may become more common, unfortunately.

  8. Andy The Hat Silver badge

    A modern trend

    The last time I had anything to do with the emergency services they confirmed the location they had on their screens as that of the incident (the phone may not be the location of the incident). In the case of panic or whatever you then have two possible location data streams. What happened to that most basic of questions?

    Perhaps this is simply a case of over-reliance on technology?

  9. patrickstar

    Just a small tip that's unfortunately not widely known: If your cell phone operator is broken and you need to dial the emergency service, take out the SIM card. Then it will let you dial it using whatever network is available.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It takes a special kind of person to say to themselves, "Hey, I lost my kid. I'll bet there's money in that!"

    1. Andrew Moore

      No, that person is saying "I lost my kid and I want to make sure that this does not happen to anyone else using the only legal means available to me"

      1. Andy The Hat Silver badge

        You're obviously not as cynical about the US legal system as some of us here ...

      2. DropBear

        No, that person is saying "I lost my kid and I will hold _someone_ (other than me - obviously...) responsible for it, for that is The American Way: nothing bad can ever happen without someone being legally liable for it!"

  11. JJKing
    Facepalm

    Remove the SIM card, oh yeah sure.

    take out the SIM card

    Oh right, in a panic over a sick child:

    shut down the phone,

    open the back cover,

    remove the battery,

    [or with the iPhone or Nexus, find a tool to eject the SIM card. Good luck with that when you are in a panic]

    remove the fiddley SIM card

    replace battery,

    replace back cover (panic causes you to not think that this step could be disregarded)

    boot the phone............................................................................

    make emergency call.

    Now that didn't take to long now did it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Remove the SIM card, oh yeah sure.

      You could do that or why not just dial 999/112 (not sure if this works left pond) the handset will find any operators signal and use it. No need to fiddle with SIM cards.

      1. Sandtitz Silver badge

        Re: Remove the SIM card, oh yeah sure.

        Your phone won't just use *any* operator available when calling emergency services, it only uses the operator the phone is connected to since all operators must be able to route those calls. If the network is congested the operator will disconnect regular phone calls in order to prioritise emergency calls.

        If your operator has a problem with routing the emergency calls then the only way to place an emergency call is to remove the SIM and then dial again.

    2. M Mouse

      Re: Remove the SIM card, oh yeah sure.

      It was only a comment, for general information, and I read it as being unrelated to this case, but a valid observation (and as someone points out below your comment, if there's a problem with your 'home' network which the SIM is tied to, then it makes perfect sense, in my view, to do this).

      Was there anything to imply the poster expected the babysitter to do this, in his post?

  12. shrouded

    Not just cell

    Note & clarification from a Texas resident:

    The primary issue here was that T-Mobile phones were effectively DDoSing the 911 service. Given that _all_ callers, from all carriers, cellular or landline, experiences hold times or complete failures accessing emergency services.

    That's the critical failure, and it impacted far more than this single case, for days on end. The claim about poor location data is secondary.

  13. Mike 16

    Dunno about Texas

    But in CA, it is not unusual to call 911 and get no answer. Last time I did this (after being struck by a hit-run driver), I was in a dense urban area, with clear line of sight to many buildings sporting cell towers, so maybe the cellular network is not the only issue?

    1. fidodogbreath

      Re: Dunno about Texas

      In CA, it's because the city / county / state gov't is spending so much on lavish law enforcement retirement benefits that they can't afford people to answer the phone or respond to calls.

      1. kain preacher

        Re: Dunno about Texas

        That's bull shit. In most Cities in California the CHP answers cell 911. I've never once had an issue with calling 911 on a cell.

  14. Number6

    My landline service was broken on Wednesday from about 10am to 9pm along with TV and internet, so I assume a squirrel chewed through an important cable somewhere, given that I wasn't the only one affected.

    In the UK I remember instances where telecoms failure to an area would result in local radio hams volunteering services with the local authority to set up emergency posts in obvious public places so that people could at least run down the street screaming for help and find someone who had a link to the emergency services.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like