This Will Encourage Folks to Join Their Local FD

[HM604OH]

Insurance Company Sues Ohio Fire Dept; Company Not Happy With Firefighters Performance

"The suit, filed Thursday, April 29, alleges that "defendants (JTFD and 12 firefighters individually named in the suit) failed to perform their services at subject property in a professional manner . . ."

Not making any judgements here on how the dept. handled the blaze, but it would appear to me that the insurance company is saying that they would prefer that no fire department would have responded. The insurance company knew they couldn't get anything from the department so they are going after the individual firefighters. Oh well, its only about $15,000 per firefighter.

[cellblock]

Here's the link to the whole article. Sure to make a few people worry.
http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/article.jsp?sectionId=46&id=31643

[CaptainGonzo]

:rolleyes: ....

How about putting blame for the blaze on the homeowner who was welding something on his car?

from the story.. The fire started in the attached garage, where George Staton was welding on a car about 4:30 p.m. The day after the fire, JTFD Chief Bill Houk said George Staton believed a spark flew from the welder onto a car seat.

George Staton attempted to use a fire extinguisher to douse the fire, then went outside to get a garden hose to continue the effort, but was unable to enter the garage again, Houk said.


Like, hello! :mad:

Why didn't he take precautions to insure that flammable and comustible materials were noit in the area where he was welding?

Why didn't he call the FD when the fire started?

Was he qualified as a welder? Did he have the necessary permits for the storage of welding gasses?

What a maroon!

[arhaney]

Boy, does this ever open a can of worms...........Maybe they should counter-sue for endangering firefighters lives.

[oldman21220]

If you follow the things that happen in court rooms then you realize that he has a good chance of winning. Stupid and reckless have become acceptable for some folks. Everyone will have to wait and see if the Dowe, Cheatems,and Hows of the world pick up on it. Keep in mind some types of doctors are in short supply because of this type of mentality.

[WTFD10]

The only thing that really suprises me about this lawsuit is that it doesn't happen more often.

There's slimy lawyers out there just waiting to pounce on any real or perceived mistake we make. It will be interesting to see the results of this case.

Good point Capt. Gonzo, how long was this fire burning while this guy tried to put it out with a garden hose? Where does his negligence fit into all of this?

I hope it works out okay for JTFD and our brothers and sisters.

I will definitely be posting a copy of this article at my station.

I will also be bringing this case and it's possible detrimental effect on volunteer recruitment and retention to the attention of my state representative and senator. I would urge my fellow Buckeyes to do the same.

[FFFRED]

Seeing how the firefighters were acting as agents for the dept. and since the dept is responsible for training and instruction I have a hard time understanding how these guys could be held individually responsible.

I'm sure there is some way the Lawyer could argue for just about anything, however to throw out the suit against the Dept but not the men I can only see conflicts that will prevent the plantiff from winning.

FTM-PTB

[Weruj1]

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOPS ! now that I actually reviewed what I posted ........I believe I owe the group an apology....:eek:

[HM604OH]

Originally posted by Weruj1
http://cms.firehouse.com/forums2/showthread.php?threadid=60499&goto=newpost
Pardon me sir.. .....but I believe we are all over here !

Actually, there are more of us discussing this incident over here than over there. I should have known to look for posts about Houston to discuss an incident in Ohio. I'll try not to let it happen again.

[FireH2O]

I don’t know what fire code the State of Ohio, or Jefferson Twp., or the County has adopted but someone should check to see if words similar to those in the Uniform Fire Code or NFPA 1 are there.

Uniform Fire Code:
“101.5 Liability. The chief and other individuals charged by the chief with the control or extinguishment of any fire, the enforcement of this code or any other official duties, acting in good faith and without malice in the discharge of their duties, shall not thereby be rendered personally liable for any damage that may accrue to persons or property as a result of any act or by reason of any act or omission in the discharge of their duties. Any suit brought against the chief or such individuals because of such act or omission performed in the enforcement of any provision of such codes or other pertinent laws or ordinances implemented through the enforcement of this code or enforced by the code enforcement agency shall be defended by this jurisdiction until final termination of such proceedings, and any judgment resulting therefrom shall be assumed by this jurisdiction. This code shall not be construed to relieve from or lessen the responsibility of any person owning, operating or controlling any building or structure for any damages to persons or property caused by defects, nor shall the code enforcement agency or its parent jurisdiction be held as assuming any such liability by reason of the inspections authorized by this code or any permits or certificates issued under this code.

See also Section 103.3.2.1.”

Also, did any of the jurisdictions adopt NFPA 51B, Fire Prevention During Welding, Cutting, and Other Hot Work (2003 Edition)? Did the welder have the required permit? There are several Sections in NFPA 51B which clearly place the responsibility of safety on the operator and/or management. Since the welder obviously violated the Fire Code (assuming NFPA 51B was adopted), I think the fire fighters should sue the welder for damages (including lost income if so appropriate). He should also be find under the Fire Code (misdemeanor).

For everyone else, I suggest you check to see what Fire Code has been adopted in your jurisdiction. The International Fire Code protects only code enforcers - not fire suppression. Take the above code section to your governing body and get them to adopt it.

Don’t be surprised if you see other insurance companies suing FD’s and fire fighters. Their interest is economical. If they can recover losses, they will. Perhaps every fire fighter that uses Farmers Insurance should cancel and get another insurance company. They may soon find out that they are losing more than $185K.

Has anyone alerted the National Volunteer Fire Council?

[Adze39]

Originally posted by HM604OH
I should have known to look for posts about Houston to discuss an incident in Ohio. I'll try not to let it happen again.

I think he got you on that one Weruj1! 1 Point for HM604OH!

[Bones42]

Not to be judgemental, but if the FD responded to my house, put the fire out, had to come back later for a rekindle, and then come back a third time for another rekindle (remember - this is a house and garage) I might be a little worried about their performance also. When is the last time your department went to the same house 3 times for 1 fire?

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

[whflhff]

I kind of agree with Bones, we all are held accountable for our performance by the community (as it should be) and three re-kindles seems excessive.

But, as I was taught in FF1, it’s not our emergency. We didn’t create the problem, the man with the welder did, we’re there to help. Even if the entire structure burned to the ground the man is no worse off than if the FD hadn’t responded at all. I would think that the FD’s lawyer will be able to argue that there was no malice or neglect like the article says.

Is it possible that this is the first time a FD is sued for performance?

Bill

[Dalmatian90]

Is it possible that this is the first time a FD is sued for performance?

No. It happens from time to time.

FDs do tend to be granted a lot of leeway by judges & juries.

Random Thoughts:

1. I hope the Township's insurance policy and/or ordinances provide coverage legal representation for it's employees.

Sometimes you might want to retain your own attornies, but it is a good thing to have basic coverage through the employer, especially against "frivolous" lawsuits that you'd expect to be thrown out so you don't spend your $$$ defending yourself.

2. Do you have any idea how Farmer's Insurance Companies there are, and how many Jefferson Townships in Ohio there are? Googling that for background was like, well, less than useless.

3. Individual liability insurance is usually pretty inexpensive, so if you have significant assests, it's probably a good idea. Next go around on my homeowner's I'll probably be adding it as with property inflation and such I'm actually starting to have almost enough equity somebody might smell enough money to spend money to sue me.

4. I'm still more concerned about auto insurance than anything, as that's where were most likely to get our asses sued (totally unrelated to fire stuff...but worry about what's most likely). I'm finally up to $300,000/$300,000 -- back when I only carried 20/40 all it would take is me taking out one SUV, unoccupied, parked in a parking lot, and they could sue me for the rest of the loss above $40k, attach a lien on my house, etc. Now short of a really serious injuries accident or driving through a house, I'm in pretty good shape.

5. I'd love to know the details of what the insurance company saw they decided to sue ("The firefighters, after knocking down the fire, brought out a cooler of beer and a grille and started cooking hamburgs and hotdogs..." *I'm not saying that's what happened here* but I've heard of the beer thing -- and I've seen the grille thing!)

6. And I'd love to know the history of this company -- do they sue everyone at the drop of a hat? Do they have a history of suing fire departments?

[Steamer]

Since I'm kinda, sorta familiar with this area, I'll try to answer some questions. Jefferson Township (West Jefferson) is about 20 miles or so west of Columbus, Ohio. According to the Ohio Fire Marshal's office they are a combination department using full time, part time, and volunteer personnel. I've not a clue what the mix is, but they are a combo department.

from FireH2O: I don’t know what fire code the State of Ohio, or Jefferson Twp., or the County has adopted... I'm not sure about the township or county either, but currently, Ohio has it's own fire code, and references various NFPA documents frequently. In this case, NFPA 51 and 51B are referenced as applicable under OFC 1301:7-7-22 Welding or cutting, calcium carbide and acetylene generators. The glitch is that the fire code in this instance can't be applied to residential "facilities". If this were a commercial garage or similar setting, then it would be a no-brainer. With that being said, the general provisions for fire safety shows a basis for the argument that the idjit doing the welding was the problem in this scenario.

Ohio is planning to adopt the International Fire Code around January of 2005. It was supposed to have been done some time back, but there's a pissing contest involving the Ohio Petroleum Council about some issues applying to them under the IFC, but I digress...

from CollegeBuff: If anything they need to be denying the homeowner his claim for failure to promptly notify the FD of a fire in the home. There actually is a section under Ohio statutes that require the prompt report of a hostile fire. I'm not certain right now if it's in the ORC of the Administrative Code, but it's there somewhere.

quote from Dal: Do you have any idea how Farmer's Insurance Companiesthere are? Actually, only one, but they're a pretty large company. They're not based in Baltimore, Ohio either; at least as far as I know. I'm one of their policy holders for house and cars, but depending on how this whole things shakes out, I may have to reevaluate that.

Dal also makes a really good point about liability insurance. You may be as innocent as a new born baby, but you'll still have to pay an attorney to convince the court. These guys aren't cheap either, especially considering the deep pockets an insurance company has. This almost sounds like a a spaghetti case...throw it against a wall and see how much sticks.

from Bones: When is the last time your department went to the same house 3 times for 1 fire? I know of at least one case where the property owner was not pleased with the fact that the FD had put his fire out. It seems the original fire was an accident, which the FD did a really good stop on. Concerned that the insurance was going to repair the house, he then set it on fire, claiming it was a rekindle. Unfortunately for him, he was witnessed doing it. I'm not sure of the final outcome, but I know it wasn't the ending he had forseen.

Unless like Dal indicated, the guys in this case really screwed up, I'd describe this whole case as being pretty chicken-**** on Farmer's part. It seems that a similar issue occured in the Cincinnati area several years back when Johnny Bench's house burned, but I never heard the final outcome, nor who the insurance company was.

If I hear anything else about this, I'll post it.

[WTFD10]

I didn't catch this in the first posting of the article:

"Jefferson Township Fire Department knew or should have known that the individual firefighters dispatched to Mr. and Mrs. Station's home did not possess the necessary and/or requisite skills to extinguish the fire and minimize the amount of damages sustained to the Staton home," according to the suit.

Friday, Madison County Court of Common Pleas Judge Robert Nichols ruled to dismiss claims against the actual fire department, but did not dismiss claims against the firefighters, including Houk and Assistant Fire Chief Paul (Buck) Van Horn.

According to the Ohio Revised Code a political subdivision, such as a township, in most instances is immune from liability in civil cases. Individual employees of the political subdivision are not immune.

The suit alleges the firefighters handled the fire improperly and that their handling of the fire increased the amount of the claim the insurance company was forced to pay.

"Defendant firefighters... individually and/or as employees of the Jefferson Township Fire Department, performed their professional firefighting duties/services in a reckless, willful and or wanton manner through their actions or omissions," according to the suit.

"As a direct and proximate result of the reckless, willful and/or wanton actions and/or omissions of the defendant firefighters, individually and/or as employees of the Jefferson Township Fire Department, Plaintiff's insured sustained substantial damages."

W. Charles Curley, attorney for the fire department, also represents the individual firefighters. He declined to comment about the specifics of the fire, but said he is confident the court will find his clients did not act with malice, recklessness or wanton neglect.

He filed a letter with the court, seeking sanctions against the insurance company for having sought damages against the township.

"We believe that it (the township's immunity) is so clear in the law, that we believe the suit against the township was a frivolous lawsuit and the insurance company and their attorneys ought to have to reimburse the township for attorney's fees and costs," Curley said.

Curley said he is not seeking a specific dollar amount.

No court date has been set for the suit.

Repeated calls to the homeowner and the insurance company's attorney, Andrew Malone, were not returned.


I'm glad to see the township is providing a lawyer for the firefighters.

Also, good points Dal & Steamer on liability insurance. Anybody know if VFIS offers something like this?

[EastKyFF]

Maybe the insurance company would like it better if the FD didn't show up at all, which may end up happening if they keep suing volunteers.

What a bunch of rectal openings.

[Dalmatian90]

Also, good points Dal & Steamer on liability insurance. Anybody know if VFIS offers something like this?

VFIS does, not sure on the details how it works.

Your auto/home insurer probably offers this coverage, certainly any of the big ones do.

They'll call it something like Personal Liability or Umbrella or some combination of those. I know my insurer (GEICO) requires you already carry $300k on both home & auto -- basically those pay first as applicable, then the Umbrella would kick in for things either a) above those limits or b) beyond those policies -- like libel.

Part of that is they want to make sure you're not "saving" money by skimping on home/auto coverage knowing you have an umbrella; and I think part of that is until you have enough assests to be worthwhile to sue you're not a big target. A guy whose sole asset is a pickup with a big loan against it and a trailer home with a mortgage is not an inviting target...A guy who has the same pickup, trailer home, *and* a million dollar liability policy is.

[firefighter1962]

Fortunately our municipality provides “legal representation” for our department and it's members in the event that something like this happens. What I am uncomfortable about is whether that means Johnny Cochrane or Homer Simpson’s lawyer?????

[Steamer]

It appears the lawsuit against the FD has been settled, but not because the insurance company realized they were wrong in suing the firefighters. By reading the article, it seems they were more concerned about being sanctioned for filing against the Township even though it was immune from any filings under Ohio law.from the MadisonPress: W. Charles Curley, attorney for the fire department, also represented the individual firefighters. He filed a letter with the court, seeking sanctions against the insurance company. He claimed the suit was "frivolous" because the law granting immunity "is so clear."

The insurance company, in an effort to avoid a ruling that would force it to pay those sanctions (which included attorney's fees and costs but no specific dollar amount) agreed to drop the suit against the firefighters if Curley would drop the request for sanctions.


This is the link to the Madison Press story (http://www.madison-press.com/NF/omf/madison/news_story.html?[rkey=0016518+[cr=gdn)

[Weruj1]

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/article.jsp?sectionId=46&id=32051

Jefferson Township Fire Department: Lawsuit Settled


MAC CORDELL
Courtesy of The Madison Press

The heat is off for 12 local firefighters.

Jefferson Township Fire Depar-tment (JTFD) personnel learned yesterday that a deal has been struck to dismiss a lawsuit against 12 firefighters.

"It was a very good phone call," said Assistant Fire Chief Paul "Buck" Van Horn, who also was named in the suit. "We were really happy."

Van Horn said he is in the process of notifying the other firefighters named in the lawsuit.

"They were all very happy and relieved of the result," Van Horn said this morning. "They all feel they give it their best every time they go out the door and to be hit with a lawsuit really set them back."

While Van Horn is pleased that the suit has been settled, he felt it had no merit and would have been dismissed in court.

"Given all the facts of the case, we didn't think it had a chance to go anywhere anyway," Van Horn said.

The settlement came as a result of a request for sanctions against Baltimore, Md.-based Farmers In-surance (with the local office in Columbus), the insurance company which brought the lawsuit against not only the firefighters, but also against the Jefferson Township Fire Department.

Farmers Insurance sued about the handling of a Thursday, Dec. 4, fire at the home of George and Beth Staton, 6118 North Road, West Jefferson.

The suit, filed Thursday, April 29, alleges the firefighters handled the fire improperly, leading to a large claim the insurance company was forced to pay. The insurance company's lawsuit sought a minimum of $185,000, from the fire department and the individual firefighters.

"Defendant firefighters... individually and/or as employees of the Jefferson Township Fire Department, performed their professional firefighting duties/services in a reckless, willful and or wanton manner through their actions or omissions," according to the suit.

"As a direct and proximate result of the reckless, willful and/or wanton actions and/or omissions of the defendant firefighters, individually and/or as employees of the Jefferson Township Fire Department, Plaintiff's insured sustained substantial damages."

Madison County Court of Common Pleas Judge Robert Nichols ruled to dismiss claims against the fire department, but did not dismiss claims against the firefighters. According to the Ohio Revised Code a political subdivision, such as a township, in most instances is immune from liability in civil cases.

Individual employees of the political subdivision are not immune.

W. Charles Curley, attorney for the fire department, also represented the individual firefighters. He filed a letter with the court, seeking sanctions against the insurance company. He claimed the suit was "frivolous" because the law granting immunity "is so clear."

The insurance company, in an effort to avoid a ruling that would force it to pay those sanctions (which included attorney's fees and costs but no specific dollar amount) agreed to drop the suit against the firefighters if Curley would drop the request for sanctions.

"The township trustees, Chief Houk, the individual firefighters who were sued and I continue to believe that this lawsuit was a frivolous one that should never have been filed," Curley said. "While I am confident that our motion for sanctions would have been granted by Judge Nichols and that Farmers would eventually have been ordered to pay the township's attorney fees and costs, we felt that it was better to have the lawsuit dismissed and to put this behind us rather than to continue litigating it.

"The dismissal of the case by Farmers certainly vindicates our position that neither the township nor the firefighters who responded to this fire did anything wrong."

Beth Staton did not agree with that assessment.

"They did handle it improperly," she said.

Staton said she was pleased that the insurance company sued, but was unaware the suit had been filed until she read about it in the newspaper.

The suit claimed, "defendants (JTFD and 12 firefighters individually named in the suit) failed to perform their services at subject property in professional manner including, but not limited to, failing to take adequate steps to ensure that damages were minimized, running out of water to extinguish the blaze and failing to utilize close resources as an alternative water supply."

The fire started in the attached garage, where George Staton was welding on a car about 4:30 p.m. The day after the fire, JTFD Chief Bill Houk said Staton believed a spark flew from the welder onto a car seat.

Staton attempted to use a fire extinguisher on the fire, then went outside to get a garden hose to further try to extinguish the blaze, but was unable to enter the garage again, Houk said.

The garage was fully engulfed in flames and the fire was spreading to the house when firefighters from JTFD arrived at the scene. The car in the garage was destroyed. A car in the driveway also was destroyed. A third vehicle, also in the driveway, was heavily damaged.

The house and its attached garage were heavily damaged. Firefighters remained on the scene three hours and returned an hour later in response to a report that the fire had rekindled. They returned to the scene shortly after 7 a.m. the following day, to deal with another rekindle.

Personnel from eight area fire departments assisted units from Jefferson Township Fire Department.

[Parrothead]

I think everyone ,if they're in this business long enough,has a rekindle.I've been to one or two.You can bet your ass that the Chief made us tear open everything to make sure that fire was out.

A third rekindle? Someone is not doing their job.