Our clients sometimes whine about building code requirements, but they’re there for a reason. This isn’t a “tragedy,” it’s a crime.
I meant “tragedy” as in “disastrous event,” not “accident.” I agree this was a crime.
The person in charge of the building (not the owner) appears to be a complete idiot.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Building-of-fatal-fire-was-known-as-The-10689319.php
“Parents also tipped off the Fire Department about the lack of sprinklers, exits and signs, she said. “The police and Fire Department were there on more than one occasion,” Boudreaux said. “Multiple people warned Derick that it was a death trap. He would laugh it off. This tragedy could have been avoided if it were not for his arrogance.””
There was a lengthy article in the LA Times (Sunday). It is clear that there is plenty of blame to go around from the leaseholder who allowed people to live in a non-residential building, to the landowner who was not monitoring the leasee, to the city who knew there were people living in a non-livable space but were slow to investigate.
I would imagine criminal charges will be brought also.
They’re asking family members who are looking for family members to donate DNA samples so the bodies can be identified.
I cannot even imagine.
I hope the owner is charged with murder or whatever the highest count is that he can possibly be charged with. If it’s something that can only carry a ~5 year sentence or whatever, he should have to serve that amount of years for each and every victim.
^^^The same for the guy who was in charge of the firetrap and laughed at people’s concerns.
I think that the guy who leased and ran the place is the one primarily at fault. The building was not leased as living space.
I think that may be who romani is referring to as “the owner.”
Sorry, I did misspeak in my last post. The “owner” that I was referring to was the one who primarily occupied the space and tweeted out about his possessions being lost. (Just looked up his name: Derick Ion)
I keep forgetting that it was legally owned by someone else who hasn’t seemed to enter the picture yet. I do wonder how much legal responsibility the actual owner has though (a purely legal question, not moral).
There will definitely be criminal charges filed and I wouid imagine the owner of the building, at the very least, will have wrongful death civil suits brought against him.
The warehouse was owned by someone named Ng. Ion was the leasee.
The city bears some responsibility here also. Apparently, these issues were known to Oakland and an investigation was ‘in progress’.
From reports I’ve read, different departments of the city - police, inspectors - have been on the site in recent months, so, yes, some responsibility there.
And definitely the owner. I don’t buy that the owner was unaware of what was going on and how the building was being used.
From what I read, inspectors couldn’t get into the building for inspection. I am a bit tired of taxpayers footing the bill for people who knowingly ignored safety issues. I hope main monetary responsibility falls onto the leasee and the owner. Why do I have to pay for their reckless behavior? “I” am already picking up the bill for firefighters, emergency crew and anyone else called to the site. And I paid for measures I took for my house to meet the fire code and other city ordinance.
Sure, let’s make this about YOU and YOUR money, @iglooo. 8-|
You bet the city will have some liability.
@doschicos, if you try to misread other people’s post, there’s no end to it. It’s not about my money. I don’t live anywhere close to Oakland. Not even on the same coast. My point was that we need to start holding people accountable, whoever benefitted from violating city ordinance should be held accountable first and foremost. To you, I probably have to spell it out;it’s not about the money, either. It’s about being responsible and money makes it easy and equitable. Hopefully, that is.
There will be a major lawsuit over this one. Everyone who had anything to do with this fire and their grandmother will be sued. And they haven’t even determined the cause of the fire yet. If the fire was due to some malfunction in a generator, a light fixture, a circuit board, then there are more deep pockets to go after. I wonder if the leasee who was so careless would have liability insurance. Somehow I doubt it. The landlord may have fire insurance but there could be exclusions since the property was not being used as a warehouse.
Just reading what you posted, @iglooo. Don’t blame me for your lack of clarity. Reread your own post.
That is assuming the cause was electrical and they were installed following the electric codes. It could also have been something simple like someone lighting a lighter.
Another article:
http://m.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Investigators-search-debris-deadly-warehouse-fire-10690431.php
I suspect this won’t be a popular statement, but…certainly at least some of the people who died also bear responsibility. At least some of those who died were living in the building and knew that the building wasn’t zoned for housing and wasn’t up to code. While it’s a horrible way to die for all concerned, I feel more compassion for the 17 year old who went to a rave there and died than for the people in their 30s who voluntarily chose to live in a space they knew wasn’t up to code. One article says that the building had 18 residents. Another says it had 22-23. One young woman who survived said she had been living in the building for 2 years.
There are a lot of articles with statements from “artists” living in other warehouses who are worried that this tragedy will mean they will lose their illegal living spaces.
Now, it’s easy to say that’s because there’s so little affordable housing and there’s more than a grain of truth in that. However, there are people who could afford to live in a legal space who choose not to for a variety of reasons–sometimes to save $ but often to have space to create things that just shouldn’t be built in a residential area or because they like flaunting the law. Time and time again, NYC will condemn a building, saying it’s unsafe and might collapse any minute…and squatters still move in.
I’m struggling to articulate the idea that–while I am not defending the guy who ran the “collective”–I don’t think the people who chose to live in it are entirely free from blame.
Child Protective services knew people were living in the building
http://sfist.com/2016/12/04/friends_and_former_friends_of_oakla.php