Re: barn fire protection
- From: Dave Smith <adavid.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 15:22:26 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Dave Smith writes:
> > It may be a liability issue. They may be afraid that if their product is
> > installed improperly and fails to go off when there is a fire, or goes
> > off with no fire and causes damage, they will find themselves in a
> > lawsuit.
>
> That may be their excuse, but the real reason is probably ordinary
> restraint of trade.
I doubt it. I mean, I really doubt it. These guys are in the business of
manufacturing and selling safety equipment that is specifically engineered for
the job. They have to have a reliable source of water, a guaranteed pressure,
protection from the elements. If the system fails there is going to be a law
suit and their product is going to be considered in the suit. If it is gets set
off prematurely things are going to be damaged and they may be sued. They may
not be responsible for the failure, but they are still going to face the cost
of fighting the suit.
> If I was installing a non-code sprinkler system I'd design it with ordinary
> plumbing parts with possibly some used sprinkler parts from a scrapyard.
And pray that it works?
Speaking of law suits. I just heard about one the other day that makes me
wonder. The mother of a mutual friend of ours has been named in a law suit. She
was one of a number of people visiting a friend at his cottage. The host had a
Honda ATV and told a younger man to take it for a ride if he wanted. The friend
was thrilled to give it a shot and told his girlfriend to get on. She didn't
want to, so our friend's mother said...."Oh, go ahead. Get on". She got one.
The guy went about 100 feet, hit a tree, bounced off the tree and went over a
10 foot cliff. The girl ended up quadriplegic. She is suing the host because it
is his property, Honda, because they made it, and our friend's mother because
she told her to go ahead and get on it. There was no mention of her suing her
boyfriend, but she may be.
Our friends mother is seriously demented, suffering from Alzheimer's. She has
been in a home for at least two years, but this accident happened more than 10
years ago. She just got served recently, though the action had been filed
within the two year limit. Our friend went to their lawyer, who didn't feel
qualified for that kind of case, so he arranged a competent lawyer, and the
retainer is $20,000.
I have to wonder. If this old lady, who was likely in the early onset of
dementia at the time she told someone to go ahead and get on her friend's ATV
to go for a ride with her boyfriend, what would happen to a manufacturer or
installer of a fire protection system that failed and led to the loss of a barn
livestock and maybe a human life?
I can understand why the fire protection company insists on dealing only with
qualified installers.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: barn fire protection
- From: John Hasler
- Re: barn fire protection
- References:
- Re: barn fire protection
- From: John Hasler
- Re: barn fire protection
- Prev by Date: Re: Celebrity riders...
- Next by Date: Re: barn fire protection
- Previous by thread: Re: barn fire protection
- Next by thread: Re: barn fire protection
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
