Crane Collapse Could Have Been Prevented
By now most of you have heard about the devastating March 15th crane collapse in New York City. The incident left 7 people dead and injured 10 others. On March 4th a complaint was filed about the crane and inspector Edward Marquette filled a report saying he found nothing wrong. Problem is that Marquette found nothing wrong because he never actually inspected the crane. He filed a false report and went about his merry way.
Forget that the report was fraudulent, a real one wouldn’t have helped
If the false report weren’t bad enough, buildings Commissioner Patricia Lancaster was idiotic enough to say that it is very unlikely that a March 4 inspection would have prevented the accident because parts of the crane that failed 11 days later were not on site then. So, are we to conclude that these mystery parts were the reason for the collapse? Does that mean that the safety complaints received on January 10, January 22 (responded to by Marquette — again) and February 11 were just a coincidence and don’t indicate a pattern of safety problems?
Get out your check book New York, the lawsuits are coming
I’m no construction expert but I don’t think it takes an expert to conclude that the city has a bit of a problem dealing with construction site safety and the inspection process. My heart goes out to the families that lost loved ones in this accident that OBVIOUSLY could have been prevented. I smell several lawsuits coming.
on March 24th, 2008 at 8:25 am
You failed to mention that the initial complaint about the crane not being adequately braced came from a retired building inspector who lived in plain view of the work site. It’s going to be hard to dismiss his observation as coming from an untrained eye.
on March 31st, 2008 at 11:43 pm
I think necessary actions should be done accordingly. The authority should investigate the said accident. And I think there should be a strict building regulations and it should be check by proper authorities to avoid accidents to happen again.