For many over 40 years, residents in Bensalem, PA have relied on Fante's for heat pump repair services. GOLDEN BEAR HEATING & AIRI could not have ask for better service, timeliness, and courtesy than we receive from Golden Bear. Heating Repair Bensalem PA. Good Deals Heating & Cooling is a heating repair service company in Bensalem, PA. We service, repair, maintain, and install all makes and models of heating equipment in Bensalem, PA. We've spent many years serving this community, and we hope to continue the trend for years to come. There are two main types of radiant heat boilers—hot water and steam—and both can run on natural gas, propane, and electricity. Chalfont, Pennsylvania 18914. We are experienced problem solvers and arrive with the tools and expertise required to provide lower-cost heating and AC repairs day or night. If your heater emits noxious fumes like carbon monoxide, have the system replaced as soon as possible. Our customers understand the importance of working with an HVAC company they can rely on to complete the job correctly. If you are unsure whether this type of system would be beneficial to your home, please speak with one of our knowledgeable staff members about the numerous advantages.
Accurate Mechanical Heating & Cooling LLC 1889 Rte 9 91. Your ductless system takes care of your comfort needs all year long--schedule maintenance with our team to make sure that you are taking care of this system in return. Schedule your residential or commercial HVAC services in Bensalem today by contacting W. Smith online or calling (215) 624-1313! Their attention to detail in the work they do is like no other. Accurate Plumbing & Well Service, LLC PO Box 1376. We can replace your current unit or install a new heat pump system where you may have been using a furnace or other home heating source.
Wall Mount Air Conditioners. Air Experts Heating & Air Conditioning PO Box 33711. Ductless MINI-SPLIT Services. Quality work every time. Stan is awesome- called me back right away, was in my house diagnosing the problem the next morning. Hiring an experienced HVAC professional is the only way to make sure that repairs are being done correctly. Call us for heating services, including: When the summer heat hits, the last thing you want is for your cooling system to pack up on you. The unit short cycles, which means it turns on and off quickly. Professor Gatsbys Heating and CoolingYou're simply wasting your money by going anywhere else. This will allow your Bensalem, PA heating system to work at top performance all the time. Call Our Nearby Experts!
The US average cost of a heater repair is around $280, and most repairs range from $100-$400. Regardless of how cold it may be in Pennsylvania most of the time, it is always important to ensure that you have a functioning air conditioning system that can keep your home cool when it really gets hot out. Heat Pump Emergency Repair in Bensalem, PA. We understand that heat pump failures typically do not occur when it is convenient or on your schedule. The last thing you want to find yourself caught without is heat when winter rolls around in PA. A quick tune-up on your home heating system will ensure that you keep you and your family warm throughout the winter. We are proud to be part of this community, serving your heating and air conditioning needs. Annual HVAC Maintenance Agreement. Awesome service & workmanship. Often times, the cost or repairing a furnace or boiler exceeds half the price of a new system which is a telltale sign that you should start searching for a new heating system. Sabrina C. in November 2021. abc. BETTER AIR MANAGEMENT LLC PO BOX 341. Our NATE certified heater repair technicians fix and repair all brands, makes, and models of heater systems.
"The repair tech was professional and friendly. Financial companies. Heating Maintenance. Find HVAC contractors in. Low Price Guarantee. Get matched with top rated HVAC companies in Bensalem, PA. If we can heat or cool your property without time-consuming installations or overpriced replacements, we will. Sanks Mechanical also specializes in the maintenance and repair of heat pumps in addition to steam and hot water boilers. You can call us any time of day or night, and we will dispatch an expert HVAC repair technician to get your heating back on fast. United Home Services 4200 Bethlehem Pike. When you need help with your boiler maintenance in Bensalem, PA you can reach out to Dowd Mechanical Heating & Air Conditioning. We are thankful that families continue to choose us. When you're really used to the cold weather, any amount of heat can take you by surprise. Give us a call today to schedule a service!
Range of prices for HVAC repair. They can inspect and diagnose the problem and how to move forward with resolving the issues. Bella Brothers Construction Inc 1872 Hulmeville Road. Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08034. W. F. Smith is one of the oldest and most trusted HVAC contractors in Bensalem, PA. Our dedication to customer service and quality workmanship has earned us one of the finest reputations in the Delaware Valley. We are NATE and EPA-certified. From the initial estimate to the final A/C installation we are committed to offering the highest standards in the industry.
Because of the varying tests and the myriad factual permutations, synthesizing or summarizing the opinions of other courts appears futile. The court defined "actual physical control" as " 'existing' or 'present bodily restraint, directing influence, domination or regulation, ' " and held that "the defendant at the time of his arrest was not controlling the vehicle, nor was he exercising any dominion over it. " We believe no such crime exists in Maryland. NCR Corp. Mr. robinson was quite ill recently wrote. Comptroller, 313 Md. In Zavala, an officer discovered the defendant sitting unconscious in the driver's seat of his truck, with the key in the ignition, but off. The Supreme Court of Ohio, for example, defined "actual physical control" as requiring that "a person be in the driver's seat of a vehicle, behind the steering wheel, in possession of the ignition key, and in such condition that he is physically capable of starting the engine and causing the vehicle to move. " The court said: "An intoxicated person seated behind the steering wheel of an automobile is a threat to the safety and welfare of the public.
Rather, each must be considered with an eye towards whether there is in fact present or imminent exercise of control over the vehicle or, instead, whether the vehicle is merely being used as a stationary shelter. The inquiry must always take into account a number of factors, however, including the following: 1) whether or not the vehicle's engine is running, or the ignition on; 2) where and in what position the person is found in the vehicle; 3) whether the person is awake or asleep; 4) where the vehicle's ignition key is located; 5) whether the vehicle's headlights are on; 6) whether the vehicle is located in the roadway or is legally parked. Mr. robinson was quite ill recently reported. Key v. Town of Kinsey, 424 So. Thus, rather than assume that a hazard exists based solely upon the defendant's presence in the vehicle, we believe courts must assess potential danger based upon the circumstances of each case. Indeed, once an individual has started the vehicle, he or she has come as close as possible to actually driving without doing so and will generally be in "actual physical control" of the vehicle.
The Arizona Court of Appeals has since clarified Zavala by establishing a two-part test for relinquishing "actual physical control"--a driver must "place his vehicle away from the road pavement, outside regular traffic lanes, and... turn off the ignition so that the vehicle's engine is not running. As we have already said with respect to the legislature's 1969 addition of "actual physical control" to the statute, we will not read a statute to render any word superfluous or meaningless. This view appears to stem from the belief that " '[a]n intoxicated person in a motor vehicle poses a threat to public safety because he "might set out on an inebriated journey at any moment. " Denied, 429 U. Mr robinson was quite ill recently. S. 1104, 97 1131, 51 554 (1977). Neither the statute's purpose nor its plain language supports the result that intoxicated persons sitting in their vehicles while in possession of their ignition keys would, regardless of other circumstances, always be subject to criminal penalty. 2d 701, 703 () (citing State v. Purcell, 336 A. 3] We disagree with this construction of "actual physical control, " which we consider overly broad and excessively rigid.
The court reached this conclusion based on its belief that "it is reasonable to allow a driver, when he believes his driving is impaired, to pull completely off the highway, turn the key off and sleep until he is sober, without fear of being arrested for being in control. " Courts pursuing this deterrence-based policy generally adopt an extremely broad view of "actual physical control. " As long as such individuals do not act to endanger themselves or others, they do not present the hazard to which the drunk driving statute is directed. We believe that the General Assembly, particularly by including the word "actual" in the term "actual physical control, " meant something more than merely sleeping in a legally parked vehicle with the ignition off. Webster's Third New International Dictionary 1706 (1986) defines "physical" as "relating to the body... often opposed to mental. " 2d 407, 409 (D. C. 1991) (stating in dictum that "[e]ven a drunk with the ignition keys in his pocket would be deemed sufficiently in control of the vehicle to warrant conviction. For example, on facts much akin to those of the instant case, the Supreme Court of Wyoming held that a defendant who was found unconscious in his vehicle parked some twenty feet off the highway with the engine off, the lights off, and the key in the ignition but off, was in "actual physical control" of the vehicle. While the preferred response would be for such people either to find alternate means of getting home or to remain at the tavern or party without getting behind the wheel until sober, this is not always done. And while we can say that such people should have stayed sober or planned better, that does not realistically resolve this all-too-frequent predicament. 2d 483, 485-86 (1992). Thus, our construction of "actual physical control" as permitting motorists to "sleep it off" should not be misconstrued as encouraging motorists to try their luck on the roadways, knowing they can escape arrest by subsequently placing their vehicles "away from the road pavement, outside regular traffic lanes, and... turn[ing] off the ignition so that the vehicle's engine is not running. " Adams v. State, 697 P. 2d 622, 625 (Wyo. More recently, the Alabama Supreme Court abandoned this strict, three-pronged test, adopting instead a "totality of the circumstances test" and reducing the test's three prongs to "factors to be considered. " For the intoxicated person caught between using his vehicle for shelter until he is sober or using it to drive home, [prior precedent] encourages him to attempt to quickly drive home, rather than to sleep it off in the car, where he will be a beacon to police.
Quoting Hughes v. State, 535 P. 2d 1023, 1024 ()) (both cases involved defendant seated behind the steering wheel of vehicle parked partially in the roadway with the key in the ignition). While we wish to discourage intoxicated individuals from first testing their drunk driving skills before deciding to pull over, this should not prevent us from allowing people too drunk to drive, and prudent enough not to try, to seek shelter in their cars within the parameters we have described above. Courts must in each case examine what the evidence showed the defendant was doing or had done, and whether these actions posed an imminent threat to the public. The danger is less than that involved when the vehicle is actually moving; however, the danger does exist and the degree of danger is only slightly less than when the vehicle is moving. Statutory language, whether plain or not, must be read in its context. Accordingly, the words "actual physical control, " particularly when added by the legislature in the disjunctive, indicate an intent to encompass activity different than, and presumably broader than, driving, operating, or moving the vehicle. Superior Court for Greenlee County, 153 Ariz. 119, 735 P. 2d 149, 152 ().
Id., 25 Utah 2d 404, 483 P. 2d at 443 (citations omitted and emphasis in original). For example, a person asleep on the back seat, under a blanket, might not be found in "actual physical control, " even if the engine is running. Idaho Code § 18- 8002(7) (1987 & 1991); Matter of Clayton, 113 Idaho 817, 748 P. 2d 401, 403 (1988). At least one state, Idaho, has a statutory definition of "actual physical control. " See Jackson, 443 U. at 319, 99 at 2789, 61 at 573; Tichnell, 287 Md. See, e. g., State v. Woolf, 120 Idaho 21, 813 P. 2d 360, 362 () (court upheld magistrate's determination that defendant was in driver's position when lower half of defendant's body was on the driver's side of the front seat, his upper half resting across the passenger side). Management Personnel Servs. Accordingly, a person is in "actual physical control" if the person is presently exercising or is imminently likely to exercise "restraining or directing influence" over a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition. Webster's also defines "control" as "to exercise restraining or directing influence over. " 2d 1144, 1147 (Ala. 1986). We do not believe the legislature meant to forbid those intoxicated individuals who emerge from a tavern at closing time on a cold winter night from merely entering their vehicles to seek shelter while they sleep off the effects of alcohol. By using the word "actual, " the legislature implied a current or imminent restraining or directing influence over a vehicle. Id., 136 Ariz. 2d at 459.
What may be an unduly broad extension of this "sleep it off" policy can be found in the Arizona Supreme Court's Zavala v. State, 136 Ariz. 356, 666 P. 2d 456 (1983), which not only encouraged a driver to "sleep it off" before attempting to drive, but also could be read as encouraging drivers already driving to pull over and sleep. Other factors may militate against a court's determination on this point, however. When the occupant is totally passive, has not in any way attempted to actively control the vehicle, and there is no reason to believe that the inebriated person is imminently going to control the vehicle in his or her condition, we do not believe that the legislature intended for criminal sanctions to apply. We believe that, by using the term "actual physical control, " the legislature intended to differentiate between those inebriated people who represent no threat to the public because they are only using their vehicles as shelters until they are sober enough to drive and those people who represent an imminent threat to the public by reason of their control of a vehicle. What constitutes "actual physical control" will inevitably depend on the facts of the individual case.
No one factor alone will necessarily be dispositive of whether the defendant was in "actual physical control" of the vehicle. It is important to bear in mind that a defendant who is not in "actual physical control" of the vehicle at the time of apprehension will not necessarily escape arrest and prosecution for a drunk driving offense. ' " State v. Schwalk, 430 N. 2d 317, 319 (N. 1988) (quoting Buck v. North Dakota State Hgwy. 2d 735 (1988), discussed supra, where the court concluded that evidence of the ignition key in the "on" position, the glowing alternator/battery light, the gear selector in "drive, " and the warm engine, sufficiently supported a finding that the defendant had actually driven his car shortly before the officer's arrival. Emphasis in original). As long as a person is physically or bodily able to assert dominion in the sense of movement by starting the car and driving away, then he has substantially as much control over the vehicle as he would if he were actually driving it.
We have no such contrary indications here, so we examine the ordinary meaning of "actual physical control. " In this instance, the context is the legislature's desire to prevent intoxicated individuals from posing a serious public risk with their vehicles. As for the General Assembly's addition of the term "actual physical control" in 1969, we note that it is a generally accepted principle of statutory construction that a statute is to be read so that no word or phrase is "rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless, or nugatory. " Further, when interpreting a statute, we assume that the words of the statute have their ordinary and natural meaning, absent some indication to the contrary. In sum, the primary focus of the inquiry is whether the person is merely using the vehicle as a stationary shelter or whether it is reasonable to assume that the person will, while under the influence, jeopardize the public by exercising some measure of control over the vehicle. While the Idaho statute is quite clear that the vehicle's engine must be running to establish "actual physical control, " that state's courts have nonetheless found it necessary to address the meaning of "being in the driver's position. " In State v. Bugger, 25 Utah 2d 404, 483 P. 2d 442 (1971), the defendant was discovered asleep in his automobile which was parked on the shoulder of the road, completely off the travel portion of the highway. The court set out a three-part test for obtaining a conviction: "1. This view, at least insofar as it excuses a drunk driver who was already driving but who subsequently relinquishes control, might be subject to criticism as encouraging drunk drivers to test their skills by attempting first to drive before concluding that they had better not. V. Sandefur, 300 Md. A person may also be convicted under § 21-902 if it can be determined beyond a reasonable doubt that before being apprehended he or she has actually driven, operated, or moved the vehicle while under the influence. In the words of a dissenting South Dakota judge, this construction effectively creates a new crime, "Parked While Intoxicated. "
We believe it would be preferable, and in line with legislative intent and social policy, to read more flexibility into [prior precedent]. The same court later explained that "actual physical control" was "intending to prevent intoxicated drivers from entering their vehicles except as passengers or passive occupants as in Bugger.... " Garcia v. Schwendiman, 645 P. 2d 651, 654 (Utah 1982) (emphasis added). Comm'r, 425 N. 2d 370 (N. 1988), in turn quoting Martin v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 358 N. 2d 734, 737 ()); see also Berger v. District of Columbia, 597 A. In the instant case, stipulations that Atkinson was in the driver's seat and the keys were in the ignition were strong factors indicating he was in "actual physical control. " The question, of course, is "How much broader? One can discern a clear view among a few states, for example, that "the purpose of the 'actual physical control' offense is [as] a preventive measure, " State v. Schuler, 243 N. W. 2d 367, 370 (N. D. 1976), and that " 'an intoxicated person seated behind the steering wheel of a motor vehicle is a threat to the safety and welfare of the public. ' The court said: "We can expect that most people realize, as they leave a tavern or party intoxicated, that they face serious sanctions if they drive. FN6] Still, some generalizations are valid. Most importantly, "actual" is defined as "present, " "current, " "existing in fact or reality, " and "in existence or taking place at the time. " In these states, the "actual physical control" language is construed as intending "to deter individuals who have been drinking intoxicating liquor from getting into their vehicles, except as passengers. "
See generally Annotation, What Constitutes Driving, Operating, or Being in Control of Motor Vehicle for Purposes of Driving While Intoxicated Statute or Ordinance, 93 A. L. R. 3d 7 (1979 & 1992 Supp. We therefore join other courts which have rejected an inflexible test that would make criminals of all people who sit intoxicated in a vehicle while in possession of the vehicle's ignition keys, without regard to the surrounding circumstances. As a practical matter, we recognize that any definition of "actual physical control, " no matter how carefully considered, cannot aspire to cover every one of the many factual variations that one may envision. Cagle v. City of Gadsden, 495 So. Perhaps the strongest factor informing this inquiry is whether there is evidence that the defendant started or attempted to start the vehicle's engine. The engine was off, although there was no indication as to whether the keys were in the ignition or not. Active or constructive possession of the vehicle's ignition key by the person charged or, in the alternative, proof that such a key is not required for the vehicle's operation; 2. Those were the facts in the Court of Special Appeals' decision in Gore v. State, 74 143, 536 A.
Many of our sister courts have struggled with determining the exact breadth of conduct described by "actual physical control" of a motor vehicle, reaching varied results. A vehicle that is operable to some extent. Even the presence of such a statutory definition has failed to settle the matter, however. City of Cincinnati v. Kelley, 47 Ohio St. 2d 94, 351 N. E. 2d 85, 87- 88 (1976) (footnote omitted), cert. In Alabama, "actual physical control" was initially defined as "exclusive physical power, and present ability, to operate, move, park, or direct whatever use or non-use is to be made of the motor vehicle at the moment. "