Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

fire fighter suing

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I haven't seen the article so for me to comment wouldn't be right. But it isn't right for all the previous posters to blanket the reply that it is poor for anyone in the fire service to sue. There are definitely times that we all accept the risks associated with the profession. But what about the times that we are injured in properties that are neglected by the slum lords? Or how about being injured in an arson fire where the guilty party will walk on the arson charge but might not escape the liability of the law suit? While I am not advocating suing a home owner for an injury that is truly a risk we assumed I don't think that it is fair to condemn anyone who has a legitimate case for "true negligence". Not all fire fighters are covered by workers compensation and an injury may in fact greatly reduce a fire fighters earning ability.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    We all must remember... anyone can sue for anything. Not being familiar with the case, I think it is pretty weak that he is suing a homeowner .

    ------------------
    AAD
    Eng. Co. 9
    RFD

    "In all of us there are heroes... speak to them and they will come forth."

    "In order for us to achieve all that is demanded of us, we must regard ourselves as greater than we are."

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    On the accepting responsibility issue mentioned by FirefighterAnne, I have a question scenario....

    As a homeowner, you spend your Saturday doing some remodeling of your kitchen. It gets late in the day and your exhausted so you call it quits. You gather your tools into a neat pile in the middle of the floor, push the ladder to the side, etc since you will be starting bright and early the next morning to finish the project. At approx. 03:30 hours, you are awakened by your smoke detector and find your home filled with smoke so you evacuate(hopefully!). FF's arrive and enter your home. In the course of their investigating what turned out to be a furnace blowback, one of them trips on the tool box you left out from your project and gets injured. Who is negligent? The FF?? Because after all, people leave piles of tools in the middle of their kitchen all time? The homeowner?? Because you knew that in the 8 hours you were sleeping your furnace was going to act up and FF's were going to be in your house and they may trip on your tools??

    Again there are no real specifics in the article in question, but I think what I'm getting at here is accidents happen to the best of us -- that's why they are called accidents!! That's why our towns, cities, departments, etc have insurance that includes worker's comp. If a guy intentially 'rigged' his home to injure a FF, that's different, but to be sued because a guy tripped over something(which is what this sounds like) in your shed??? Come on, this is getting rediculous. Any FF entering a shed should know that sheds are generally the place filled with things the homeowner either doesn't want in his house or can't find a place for in his house and tend to be quite hazardous so an extra level of caution should be taken.

    Just another thought in this mess!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    well lets see i do agree on one thing "if you can't see your feet hit your knees" he should have known that ,he was careless and lazy let this be a lesson to all of those ff's out there who dont follow the rules it will come back and bit you in the ***..

    ..........fire fetish???..... damn right

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I guess I don't feel there is enough specific information in the article to form a strong opinion either way.

    I do find the lawsuit, and the ensuing arguments in this forum, interesting.

    What especially intrigues me is how some condemn the firefighter for not taking responsiblity for his own actions, yet, readily forgive the homeowner for not taking responsibility. Shouldn't the same standards be appied to both?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    The person (notice I do not use the terms- firefighter)involved in this legal situation makes me sick.
    The first thing I was ever taught as a firefighter was to be alert and looking for any possible obstructions in the fire scene.
    I am sure this is what all ff's are taught.
    I feel it was his negligence that caused this incident.
    I also feel that this person is seeking a free ride.
    If I am running and I trip over the curb because I did not respond to the obstacle properly. Am I going to sue the city saying they are the ones responsible? Of course Not.
    Get Over it.

    ------------------
    We go in when others are getting out!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    This is ridiculous and undermines our credibility.
    This could cause homeowners to hesitate calling us because they are afraid of getting sued.
    If he could'nt see his feet he should of been on the floor anyway and that would have prevented his injury from ever occuring, but I guess he was too lazy.
    This guy should have stuck to running his medical calls and stayed out of the firefighting business.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    First, this society is becoming entirely too litigious. A lawsuit should not be your first recourse.

    Now, why has it become that way?

    Now for my story. A homeowner has a fire. FD on scene tries to enter home and finds it a "maze" inside. Most rooms are stacked, floor to ceiling, with old newspapers. Rooms, hallways, everywhere. We're talking HUGE fireload, excess weight load on floor joists, precarious stacks in danger of falling over, you name it.

    Once we were certain the homeowner was out, we went defensive (chief deemed it too dangerous to operate inside). This guy was going to sue us for letting "his house burn down". The county counter-sued - for reckless endangerment, plus code violations (something about running an illegal storage facility, I think ).

    We won, but he never had to pay anything. It seems he was "mentally disturbed". Like we couldn't tell you that when we opened his front door!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I'm not posting on this case, but in general.....
    If a firefighter is killed or seriously injured (career ending),they or their survives should have the RIGHT too sue. Just because we are firefighters we shouldn't except that we get killed or maimed for life and not have the right.

    ------------------
    "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog." STAY SAFE,STAY LOW

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I think it really sucks when you have to look for a way out of a job... Keep in mind that as a firefighter you represent half a million people who sacrifice thier time and effort for thier neighbor. What if that neighbor wasnt carless in thier actions, we would be out of a job. Suck it up its your job is what he should be told.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Oookaay... This one has touched an exposed nerve!

    I think that this is just another symptom of the sad path that this country as a whole is headed down. There is a huge majority of people who are not willing to accept responsibility for their own actions(stupidity?)any more. The "I'm a victim and someone is going to pay!" mentality really p***es me off! When someone can't recognize the possible hazards of their surroundings and act accordingly, they should NOT be engaged in that particular type of employment or activity to begin with!

    I don't care who you are, there is an inherent risk to just getting out of bed every day. Who are you gonna sue if you trip and fall over your pants that you left on the floor last night?

    I don't know how heavily involved in fire the shed this guy was injured in (the news story doesn't make it clear), but when was the last time any of us entered a burning/burnt stucture and found everything neat and tidy?

    I just think this guy should have excercised a little more care when he was poking around in there thinking what could possibly be in his way. Regardless of what he injured himself on, he should have known that those conditions can exist anywhere and taken precautions.

    I don't think this will reflect positively on the fire service as a whole, just as I think this blackens the eye of any entity that has one of it's members take this course. Yes, if it is an outright case of negligence, he may have a beef, but this instance doesn't sound as if it makes the grade.


    These comments and opinions are my own and in no way reflect the views and policies of my department.

    [This message has been edited by MFD52 (edited 02-17-2001).]

    [This message has been edited by MFD52 (edited 02-17-2001).]

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Just Thinking,

    Why do we assume that all hazards are simply "part of the job"? A policeman, the milkman, the mailman, the FedEx guy delivering a package, or your next door neighbor can hold you liable for an injury resulting from falling down a flight of stairs due to a broken hand rail. A firefighter investigating an alarm malfunction, however, is expected to accept this as simply part of the job with no legal recourse. While I understand that the hazards and risks of actual firefighting are inherent to the job, I don't think that the property owner should get a pass on the normal responsibility to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition.

    Just my opinion,

    Jim

    [This message has been edited by AVF&R452 (edited 02-17-2001).]

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Here's a twist on the subject at hand. A deputy is called to a burglary. The owner of the business is standing there as the deputy goes into the building to check out inside. He neglects to tell the deputy that in the backroom is a bad dog. The dog bites the deputy requiring several stitches and time off work.

    Who should pay for his bills, and loss of wages?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Halligan,
    One of our firefighters was recently injured on a call. Workmans Comp took care of his hospital/doctor bills, and his regular job took care of his time off. They didn't have to, but felt because he was fighting a fire when it transpired, they would do it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I am a volunteer firefighter in a town which still gives no compensation for us, we to this job out of a desire to help ALL the people of our community. We accept the risks and do our job. I think this lawsuit is a disgrace to the fire service

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X