Owners Of Burned California Diving Boat Say They Owe Nothing To Victims' Families

[Frannie]

This is something you see more in lesser nations.

Indeed. Unfortunately it was allowed to happen here, the sad thing is the people defending the boat owners without knowing what happened other than they let 34 people burn

 

[okfine]

Vigil

Vigil For Victims Of The Conception Tragedy » KVTA

 

[okfine]

Possible Cause of Death

Conception Victims Died Of Smoke Inhalation » KVTA

 

[Frannie]

Vigil

Vigil For Victims Of The Conception Tragedy » KVTA

Will the owner go and tell everyone there he is not at fault?

Experts say the boat was a firetrap despite passing inspections

Boat where 34 died was a 'fire trap' despite passing inspections, experts say. It's far from alone

John McDevitt, a former assistant fire chief from Pennsylvania who is an accredited marine surveyor and the chair of a National Fire Protection Assn. committee on commercial and pleasure boat fire protection, called the Conception “a compliant fire trap.”

 

[Frannie]

Possible Cause of Death

Conception Victims Died Of Smoke Inhalation » KVTA

Actually they were killed by greed

 

[whitehall]

It's a little premature but why wouldn't the owners try to avoid paying compensation for the deaths of 34 people if it is determined that it wasn't their fault? What if the fire was started by careless smoking or some item related to scuba diving?

 

[Frannie]

It's a little premature but why wouldn't the owners try to avoid paying compensation for the deaths of 34 people if it is determined that it wasn't their fault?

There is no judge to appeal too, this case will take a long time as the NTSB works that way. Screaming it's not my fault is the action of a man afraid of death, even if they escape prison who would hire them

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

This is why people create corporations. To avoid person responsibility.

If negligence is found people are going to prison.

If the boat was compliant with the law it'll be a tough row to hoe.
But there should have been an escape hatch from the passenger quarters no doubt.
From looking at the layout of the boat it seems to me it would have been easy enough to put a hatch in the ceiling with a ladder.

The boat was no compliant, as a crew member is required to be awake at all times. This is even more important on an anchored boat that can not move out of the way of an impending collision quickly. There also were smoke detectors that the crew maintains did not go off, furthermore the crew is responsible for the passengers, at night and in the water

There were plenty of crew awake from what I understand.
They were making breakfast in the galley,which was the only way out and where the fire started.
They may be able to sue for negligence since it appears none of the crew members tried to awake the passengers.
I'd bet the insurance company will settle.

They were all sleeping, if they were awake they would have fought the fire instead of letting it engulf the boat then just jump off. So you understand wrong. They were not in the galley they were on the top deck, read the reports. No galley is ever on the top deck

Link?

 

[Frannie]

If negligence is found people are going to prison.

If the boat was compliant with the law it'll be a tough row to hoe.
But there should have been an escape hatch from the passenger quarters no doubt.
From looking at the layout of the boat it seems to me it would have been easy enough to put a hatch in the ceiling with a ladder.

The boat was no compliant, as a crew member is required to be awake at all times. This is even more important on an anchored boat that can not move out of the way of an impending collision quickly. There also were smoke detectors that the crew maintains did not go off, furthermore the crew is responsible for the passengers, at night and in the water

There were plenty of crew awake from what I understand.
They were making breakfast in the galley,which was the only way out and where the fire started.
They may be able to sue for negligence since it appears none of the crew members tried to awake the passengers.
I'd bet the insurance company will settle.

They were all sleeping, if they were awake they would have fought the fire instead of letting it engulf the boat then just jump off. So you understand wrong. They were not in the galley they were on the top deck, read the reports. No galley is ever on the top deck

Link?

You are saying that I need a link to prove that the crew was awake and chose not to fight the fire, because that is what you are saying happened.

You have just entered retardville.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If the boat was compliant with the law it'll be a tough row to hoe.
But there should have been an escape hatch from the passenger quarters no doubt.
From looking at the layout of the boat it seems to me it would have been easy enough to put a hatch in the ceiling with a ladder.

The boat was no compliant, as a crew member is required to be awake at all times. This is even more important on an anchored boat that can not move out of the way of an impending collision quickly. There also were smoke detectors that the crew maintains did not go off, furthermore the crew is responsible for the passengers, at night and in the water

There were plenty of crew awake from what I understand.
They were making breakfast in the galley,which was the only way out and where the fire started.
They may be able to sue for negligence since it appears none of the crew members tried to awake the passengers.
I'd bet the insurance company will settle.

They were all sleeping, if they were awake they would have fought the fire instead of letting it engulf the boat then just jump off. So you understand wrong. They were not in the galley they were on the top deck, read the reports. No galley is ever on the top deck

Link?

You are saying that I need a link to prove that the crew was awake and chose not to fight the fire, because that is what you are saying happened.

You have just entered retardville.

Have you not read any of the incident reports?

 

[Flash]

You are always responsible for your own safety.

Looking at the pictures of the sleeping quarters it looked to be very crowded with limited access. They took that risk.

A smoke detector is a good safety device but sometimes they fail. All technology is liable to fail. No guarantees on anything in life like that.

Getting into a confined boat with a lot of other people is by itself is risky. They chose to do it.

We all make decisions in our lives. We can't always blame our bad decisions on somebody else.

The families will get money out of the settlement with the insurance company to the limit of the liability and maybe the owner has some other wealth they can tap. I am sure a jury will find him negligent.

However, I bet I wouldn't ever make it to the jury because I believe in personal responsibility.

Face the facts kid. No person will ever sail with these but hers again, they are done and over. The crew was negligent as no watch was awake and the smoke detector that would have awoken everyone never went off.

No body is buried and these clowns might all be headed to prison

Thanks for calling me a kid. Nobody has done that for decades. Many decades.

A slick ambulance chasing lawyer will get a nice settlement out of the insurance company and whatever assets the boat owner has that are not protected . You don't have to worry your little head over that. We have a filthy entitlement mentality in this country and the legal system exploits that to the hilt.

However, that doesn't negate the fact that every person is responsible for their own personal safety and those people took a risk by going on the boat. They took a risk they were going to be crammed into crowded sleeping quarters, that the smoke alarm may not work and the crew may not man a watch like they should. They paid for that cheaper ticket with their lives, didn't they?

Like I said, the families of the victims would not like for me to be on the jury. They would love to have you on the jury.

I call everyone a kid who has the mentality of a child like you do.

34 people are dead, you do not know that there was neither gross negligence of foul play that said defending the deaths of 34 people makes you Satan

You obviously don't understand the concept of personal responsibility. Kind of like my six year old granddaughter.

34 people burned to death, you obviously have no respect for the lives and safety of others...…………...

You obviously have trouble with comprehension.

I have great sympathy for the families of those that were killed in this tragedy. I never said I didn't.

Whenever 34 people are burned to death that is a great tragedy. However, if the people hadn't gone on the boat they wouldn't have got killed. It was their choice.

If you are going to go out on a boat like that you are putting your life in someone's hands. The people that died didn't know they were getting in trouble but they were. Shit happens.

There are no guarantees in life. Many of us never make it to a ripe old age. Sometimes an early death is the result of bad decisions that we make. Sometimes it is because of the bad decisions made by other people and sometimes it is just plain bad luck.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I agree, so why has the owner ask a judge who is likely not yet even appointed to render a verdict of innocent? BIZZARO and it makes them look GUILTY

Because this is commonly done in situations similar to this and they have competent attorneys?

Actually 34 people burning to death has no precedent so it can not be considered common.

In California??????????

 

[Rambunctious]

The fire started in the galley where they had a charging station set up for laptops and such...If it was an over heated battery that caused the fire I know a company to buy stock in...

 

[B. Kidd]

Some people have never heard the term 'flash fire' before. IMO something was leaking in the air that made the spark/flame flash below deck.

 

[Bush92]

Owners Of Burned California Diving Boat Say They Owe Nothing To Victims' Families

Ah, actually this is going to be determined in court, furthermore if you read on you will see that the Titanic is being referenced

The owners of the commercial diving boat that erupted into flames during a Labor Day weekend accident off the coast of Southern California are now seeking to avoid payouts to the families of the 34 people who died onboard.

On Thursday, Glen and Dana Fritzler of Truth Aquatics, which owned the now-destroyed Conception, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, arguing they shouldn’t owe a single cent for the tragedy, the Associated Press reported.

The Fritzlers are attempting to make their case by using the Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act of 1851, a statute frequently used in waterway accidents. The couple has requested that the judge either waive their financial liability or adjust it to the boat’s post-fire value ― in this case, $0.

The law was most famously used by the shipping company White Star Lines after the 1912 Titanic disaster during which more than 1,500 passengers were killed on the ship’s maiden voyage. In that instance, the company’s liability was evaluated at $92,000, which equaled the worth of the surviving lifeboats.

I don’t know the particulars of the contract the guest signed.

 

[Frannie]

Owners Of Burned California Diving Boat Say They Owe Nothing To Victims' Families

Ah, actually this is going to be determined in court, furthermore if you read on you will see that the Titanic is being referenced

The owners of the commercial diving boat that erupted into flames during a Labor Day weekend accident off the coast of Southern California are now seeking to avoid payouts to the families of the 34 people who died onboard.

On Thursday, Glen and Dana Fritzler of Truth Aquatics, which owned the now-destroyed Conception, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, arguing they shouldn’t owe a single cent for the tragedy, the Associated Press reported.

The Fritzlers are attempting to make their case by using the Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act of 1851, a statute frequently used in waterway accidents. The couple has requested that the judge either waive their financial liability or adjust it to the boat’s post-fire value ― in this case, $0.

The law was most famously used by the shipping company White Star Lines after the 1912 Titanic disaster during which more than 1,500 passengers were killed on the ship’s maiden voyage. In that instance, the company’s liability was evaluated at $92,000, which equaled the worth of the surviving lifeboats.

I don’t know the particulars of the contract the guest signed.

As if anyone would sign a contract absolving the boat owners from burning them alive, though there would likely be language surrounding drowning which would be billions of times more likely

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Owners Of Burned California Diving Boat Say They Owe Nothing To Victims' Families

Ah, actually this is going to be determined in court, furthermore if you read on you will see that the Titanic is being referenced

The owners of the commercial diving boat that erupted into flames during a Labor Day weekend accident off the coast of Southern California are now seeking to avoid payouts to the families of the 34 people who died onboard.

On Thursday, Glen and Dana Fritzler of Truth Aquatics, which owned the now-destroyed Conception, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, arguing they shouldn’t owe a single cent for the tragedy, the Associated Press reported.

The Fritzlers are attempting to make their case by using the Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act of 1851, a statute frequently used in waterway accidents. The couple has requested that the judge either waive their financial liability or adjust it to the boat’s post-fire value ― in this case, $0.

The law was most famously used by the shipping company White Star Lines after the 1912 Titanic disaster during which more than 1,500 passengers were killed on the ship’s maiden voyage. In that instance, the company’s liability was evaluated at $92,000, which equaled the worth of the surviving lifeboats.

I don’t know the particulars of the contract the guest signed.

As if anyone would sign a contract absolving the boat owners from burning them alive, though there would likely be language surrounding drowning which would be billions of times more likely

...an you know this how?

My God, you are the most ignorant king of speculation I have ever seen!

 

[Frannie]

Owners Of Burned California Diving Boat Say They Owe Nothing To Victims' Families

Ah, actually this is going to be determined in court, furthermore if you read on you will see that the Titanic is being referenced

The owners of the commercial diving boat that erupted into flames during a Labor Day weekend accident off the coast of Southern California are now seeking to avoid payouts to the families of the 34 people who died onboard.

On Thursday, Glen and Dana Fritzler of Truth Aquatics, which owned the now-destroyed Conception, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, arguing they shouldn’t owe a single cent for the tragedy, the Associated Press reported.

The Fritzlers are attempting to make their case by using the Shipowner’s Limitation of Liability Act of 1851, a statute frequently used in waterway accidents. The couple has requested that the judge either waive their financial liability or adjust it to the boat’s post-fire value ― in this case, $0.

The law was most famously used by the shipping company White Star Lines after the 1912 Titanic disaster during which more than 1,500 passengers were killed on the ship’s maiden voyage. In that instance, the company’s liability was evaluated at $92,000, which equaled the worth of the surviving lifeboats.

I don’t know the particulars of the contract the guest signed.

As if anyone would sign a contract absolving the boat owners from burning them alive, though there would likely be language surrounding drowning which would be billions of times more likely

...an you know this how?

My God, you are the most ignorant king of speculation I have ever seen!

Says the acting captain of the USS Enterprise that never knew that Oxygen does not burn...……………….

 

[B. Kidd]

The NTSB will figure this out.....in 2 years.
Not worth arguing about.

 

[Frannie]

The NTSB will figure this out.....in 2 years.
Not worth arguing about.

Just hours after this atrocity the US Govt put a 15 million dollar bounty on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Just sayin