You would think that somebody would think.
well, not trying to stick up for the demo company... But another article explains that it was an area of recent tornado damage, hence the demo order. I don't see the tornado part of it anywhere in that story. I recall after hurricane Charley trying to find my way around without any street signs up was maddening.
That helps. Apparently they verified the house number but not the street name. The demolished house had damage, but it had been declared structurally sound.
I can see possible insurance problems for the homeowner. She might be caught between her homeowners' policy and the demolition company's liability policy, assuming they have one, with neither wanting to spring for full replacement cost.
Seems to me that a greater standard of care than simply following GPS coordinates from a free navigational system would be required. How difficult is it to check against a published street map, or to have the party who made the determination of the condemned house to have posted a notice of it on the front door that the demo company employees could have looked for as a means of verifying the correct address and structure before tearing it down?
I don't see any room for excusing the mistake by the demo company.
This area in Rowlett was hit by a tornado a few months back that completely devastated the area, I used to know a guy that lives about half a mile south of that address. I think the demo guys are blaming Google Maps for a lapse in common sense on their part by not taking a glance at the name of the street they're demolishing a home on. Seems pretty ignorant to me, and the fact that they're so casually dismissive of their colossal screwup makes me hope she sues them out of business.
It reminds me of when a crew came back and had surveyed the neighboring property or the one across the street.
Best read the whole paperwork before proceeding.
Somebody needs to change the way they operate.
Reminds me of a local surgeon and hospital that inadvertently amputated the wrong leg of a patient during surgery. The hospital and doctor fought tooth and nail in the trial to make it the other's mistake.
The judge was vocally appalled by the defendants' attempt to place the blame of "such an egregious and irreparable mistake" on the shoulders of others for the sake of avoiding monetary liability. The judge was quoted as saying the doctor and hospital should be fighting to see who gets to repay damages to the hapless victim instead of avoiding it.
There is just simply no way you can place the blame on anybody, or anything else.
When I had surgery on my knee the marked the correct knee and the doctor had to sign it (the knee) after I verbally confirmed which knee was to be operated on. Tried to just point, but that wasn't good enough.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
eapls2708, post: 363996, member: 589 wrote: Seems to me that a greater standard of care than simply following GPS coordinates from a free navigational system would be required. How difficult is it to check against a published street map, or to have the party who made the determination of the condemned house to have posted a notice of it on the front door that the demo company employees could have looked for as a means of verifying the correct address and structure before tearing it down?
I don't see any room for excusing the mistake by the demo company.
Big orange stickers should be required. They are for other condemnations.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Some things can't be fixed, I agree that more care should have been taken.
I had a burst appendix a few years ago. 3 or 4 docs. and several staff members all asked me if I understood the need for surgery, and that I did want it done, etc. Then at the last minute they held my gurney in the hall outside the cutting room. We waited, I was in pain but not so bad. Finally another guy came in. He was local Atty. and a court approved English/Spanish translator... kinda cool, my skin is pink, they wanted to be extra sure. Less would be negligent ...