Another crane down

That is the question I hope to never have to answer. My guess is the answer is probably the owner of the crane, as technically they are most likely responsible for properly setting up the crane.

However, one could make an argument that the contractor, if they are different from the owner, is actually responsible since they decide where the crane goes.

Or one could argue that the homeowner is to blame because they did not disclose that there was an underground tank, but I see that scenario as unlikely because they would have to have been asked and needed to sign off that the ground was safe for them to be reliable.
 
Reach said:
.....

Or one could argue that the homeowner is to blame because they did not disclose that there was an underground tank, but I see that scenario as unlikely because they would have to have been asked and needed to sign off that the ground was safe for them to be reliable.
Click to expand...
Is that an unreasonable ask?

Even if they did sign it, if the tank abandon before they bought the property and it was never disclosed to them, they probably could get out of liability to the crane. If it was not a known hazard and a waiver is signed, and it made it to court, I'd bet that the crane owner pays for the crane and the homeowner pays for the damage to the house (via respective insurances). But who knows...courts can get unpredictable. This case may give that answer ("The outrigger supporting the crane went into an abandoned cesspool that had not shown up in any plans"). Fortunately there was no significant house damage, so maybe not???

No bad pun intended here, but that's gotta be a sinking feeling for the operator when it starts to go and there is nothing they can to do stop it
 
ATH said:
Is that an unreasonable ask?

Even if they did sign it, if the tank abandon before they bought the property and it was never disclosed to them, they probably could get out of liability to the crane. If it was not a known hazard and a waiver is signed, and it made it to court, I'd bet that the crane owner pays for the crane and the homeowner pays for the damage to the house (via respective insurances). But who knows...courts can get unpredictable. This case may give that answer ("The outrigger supporting the crane went into an abandoned cesspool that had not shown up in any plans"). Fortunately there was no significant house damage, so maybe not???

No bad pun intended here, but that's gotta be a sinking feeling for the operator when it starts to go and there is nothing they can to do stop it
Click to expand...
I would say it's not unreasonable to ask, we certainly ask our customers if there is anything under the ground in a given area. The contract we have our Customer sign also states that we are not liable for damage to anything under the ground, but if nobody knew about the cesspool on the property, and had no reasonable way to know about the cesspool, I can't see how it could be the fault of the property owner either.

I agree, it seems to me that the sensible answer would be that the owner of the crane pays for the damage to the crane, the homeowners insurance pays for the damage to the homeowner property, and everybody walks away as even as possible. This case seems to be as close to a no fault accident as there can be.

If the cesspool was truly unknown by everyone, the only practical way to find it would have been ground penetrating radar, and I would say it is unreasonable to expect anyone to do a ground scan before setting up a crane every single time. To me, that makes this a true accident where no one is at fault and no one could have reasonably prevented it.

And it has to be a terrible feeling to be the crane operator knowing you are going over, and probably not even knowing why in the first moments. As a crane operator, can you tell in that first instant that the issue is the crane sinking into the ground? Can you be certain you didn't try to pick up something too big, or you didn't have a hydraulic failure of some sort? That would be interesting to know.
 
Reach said:
I would say it's not unreasonable to ask, we certainly ask our customers if there is anything under the ground in a given area. The contract we have our Customer sign also states that we are not liable for damage to anything under the ground, but if nobody knew about the cesspool on the property, and had no reasonable way to know about the cesspool, I can't see how it could be the fault of the property owner either.

I agree, it seems to me that the sensible answer would be that the owner of the crane pays for the damage to the crane, the homeowners insurance pays for the damage to the homeowner property, and everybody walks away as even as possible. This case seems to be as close to a no fault accident as there can be.

If the cesspool was truly unknown by everyone, the only practical way to find it would have been ground penetrating radar, and I would say it is unreasonable to expect anyone to do a ground scan before setting up a crane every single time. To me, that makes this a true accident where no one is at fault and no one could have reasonably prevented it.

And it has to be a terrible feeling to be the crane operator knowing you are going over, and probably not even knowing why in the first moments. As a crane operator, can you tell in that first instant that the issue is the crane sinking into the ground? Can you be certain you didn't try to pick up something too big, or you didn't have a hydraulic failure of some sort? That would be interesting to know.
Click to expand...
100% this. I have been in a car crash where the insurance companies determined that nobody was at fault/both parties equally at fault, because either party could be argued to have been at fault. It just sucks for absolutely everyone involved..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom