Go to navigation Go to content

Apartment Building Fire Results In Significant Property Damage-Tenant Settles for $150,000


Blog Category:
10/3/2009
Gerry Oginski
Comments (0)
My clients owned a condominium in Queens. Their condo was in a large development which was undergoing repairs to the roof. The roofers were using hot tar to put down the new commercial-grade roof. Because of high winds, the tar overflowed causing a massive fire. My clients' condo suffered extensive water damage, and during the course of repair it was learned that their apartment, along with everybody else on the floor had its best those articles throughout the apartment. This required asbestos abatement, and force them to discard all of their remaining possessions that survived the massive water damage from the original fire.

 The management company and the condo association refused to compensate my clients for the damage to their condo. They were willing to make only minor and modest repairs to get their unit functioning again. They would not consider replacing any of the items or contents in their unit. that prompted them to seek my legal services.

Approximately 9 different people and companies filed lawsuits against the management company, the condo association and the roofers who caused the fire. These lawsuits were brought in different counties here in the state of New York. Because all of these cases arose out of the same incident, all nine cases were consolidated into one case that was being handled by one judge in Queens County.

After 4 1/2 years of litigating this case I'm pleased to say that we were able to successfully resolve this case to my client's satisfaction for the sum of $150,000.

Category: General


3 Comments to "Apartment Building Fire Results In Significant Property Damage-Tenant Settles for $150,000"

had a fire and the plug in company determined that it was a cause of the fire, have all paper work
I want to claim my damages, loss of income and distress
Posted by Almetra Murdock on July 21, 2010 at 02:15 AM
An alarm would not have mattered here. From the time the fire started, the fire department was called immediately. There was no issue about notification or the timeliness of getting the fire department to the building.

Here the issues were only who caused the fire, who was responsible for paying the damages from the fire, and how much they would have to pay.

The failure to have a fire alarm is significant when there is a delay in notifying the homeowner of a fire that results in injury, death or property damage.

In those cases, the argument is that if the homeowner or guest had sufficient warning from an alarm, they could have escaped the building in time before being consumed by the smoke or fire.

Also, we often claim that if an alarm was working, then the fire department would have arrived earlier and any damage, injury or death would have either been preventable or limited.

I hope this answers your question.

Gerry

Posted by Gerry Oginski on January 7, 2010 at 09:39 AM
Was there an alarm system installed to help protect against this type of event? Would that matter from a liability standpoint?
Posted by apartment alarm on January 7, 2010 at 02:00 AM

Post a comment

Post a Comment to "Apartment Building Fire Results In Significant Property Damage-Tenant Settles for $150,000"

To reply to this message, enter your reply in the box labeled "Message", hit "Post Message."

Name:*

Email:* (will not be published)

Message:*

Notify me of follow-up comments via email.