Remember 9-16-06? Here is an interesting lawsuit.

[Danny Neal]

Ah, Well Danny I have no problems with you at all.

But in ANY event, to run from one house to another given the voracity of the storm was a stupid thing to do , and led to the death. For had they stayed put, they might not have been injured at all.

And given they were trying to go form one structure to another, who would they be suing had say a car been blown out of a collapsed garage and landed on the kid? Again fact is they should NOT have been running from one place to another. I know how cold and harsh that sounds, but its the facts. Had it been a 45 year old man--would there still be a lawsuit? Maybe the 19 year old babysitter should be sued for not maintaining control over the younger children?

No problem, Dennis. I didn't want to come off as condescending or anything. I am as confused with this whole situation as you are. I am not sure they were running from any house. I thought they did. After re-reading the article and the video in the article it seems that they were permanently at the neighbors house that night. May not have been aware of the severe weather approaching.......saw the weather getting horrible outside, got scared and tried to run to the basement or closet. At that moment, maybe the tornado hit and it was wrong place at the wrong time. I know NWS didn't issue a warning until afterwards, but the assessment posted above said the quickest time to issue the warning would have been a couple minutes AFTER the tornado developed.

I am still baffled on how the lawsuit is going to work. The mom of the daughter sues the contractors. If she wins.....does that open the door for the actual owner of the house to sue the contractor for sub-standard construction?

 

[rdale]

Next time I post, I will be certain to run it by you for your approval.

In any event, I feel no reason to defend my words.

I don't need to approve your messages, and you don't need to defend your words. A child was killed, possibly due to illegal construction methods, and you call the grieving mother a "jerk." That stands on its own merit.

Well I doubt the home builder should be sued-It is silly--a lawsuit against the national Weather service might be in order as they categorized it as a EF1-2, which is inconsistent with the level of damage caused.

You can't sue the NWS on the basis of their EF-scale rating.

This I am sure is in part to the weather service not wanting to issue a warning as far too many that are reports sound the sirens and when nothing happens people get complacent.

Not at all - if you read the report, you get an idea of why no warning was issued.

STILL, it says they were trying to get to a neighbors basement--that means they were outside-or on the way out.

Read it again - nowhere does it say they were outside or heading outside.

This was an interesting case with the GR2AE's implementation of the NSSL rotation algorithm -- it did a great job on picking up this storm well before touchdown.

 

[rdale]

From the Minneapolis Star:

At issue are anchor bolts embedded in concrete blocks -- bolts that might not have been spaced closely enough together or deep enough to firmly secure the base of the house's walls, said Sauter, of the Minneapolis law firm Bassford Remele.



"The property was not constructed ... in compliance with applicable building laws, codes, ordinances, regulations or in accordance with industry standards," the suit says.



[...]


Jaymi Wendt had accompanied her brother Jake, then 19, who was asked by neighbors Jeff and Beth Heibel to babysit the Heibels' two young children, according to the lawsuit. When the storm hit, Jake ushered the children to the basement, Sauter said.


Jaymi was leading the way when her world went black and the house began to collapse, Sauter said. The sheer weight of the upper floor caused it to collapse into the basement, he said.

"It was like a wedding cake, with the top floor, intact, falling," Sauter said. "Now the family wants accountability."

 

[STurner]

It is unfortunate that a 10 year-old was killed form this tornado. But from what I can tell the damage to the house looks like it was consistent with what it was rated. It looks like the enitre house was shifted off its foundation which is a DOD 5 for a single family home with a windspeed of around 121mph would put it in the EF2 category. The upper bound would put it into the lower end of EF3 and the lower bound would put it into the EF1 category. I know there are homes that are build very shoddy cleaning the house off its foundation and disintegrating the remains making it appear to be EF4-EF5 level damage when in reality it only amounted to about EF2 damage. The NWS was right on when they rated this house an F2 on the old fujita scale. I would think that this house would have had to have been of somewhat decent for them to even rate this an F2. Unless this house was supposed to be built of the most superior type of construction I dont know if there could be a lawsuit. I do feel bad for the mother who lost her 10 year-old daughter but the damage looks consistent with what the NWS rated it.

 

[rdale]

It looks like the enitre house was shifted off its foundation which is a DOD 5 for a single family home with a windspeed of around 121mph would put it in the EF2 category.

That DOD however represents a well-built home to industry standards... If the bolts holding it down weren't legal, then the DOD no longer applies as damage could occur with lesser winds. And that can't be determined from a picture.

 

[Dennis Dennison]

I retract any statements made on this as they were based on partial information. Now I read Anchor bolts in concrete block--At least where i live, its not done that way. Concrete blocks simply cannot hold anchor bolts even if filled with concrete. Additionally, you say the upper floor collapsed into the basement...so was it a two story house?

I will make no further comments as its obvious none of us have all the full details.

However I do not think a lawsuit will be won, UNLESS the anchor bolt issue was to blame.

 

[Tim Marshall]

Bill Doms writes: Are there any precedent cases like this? Tim M??
Brad Nelson wrote: If you've ever heard Tim Marshall speak about what he's found after a tornado rips apart a neighborhood, this lawsuit is certainly viable.
REPLY: I am unable to comment on this matter at the present time until the case has been resolved. I have been retained by the Wendt's. TM

 

[Tim Marshall]

OK. The case just settled, so now I can talk about it. This house was the only one in the neighborhood that was pushed off its foundation and collapsed killing ten year old Jaymi Wendt during the Rogers, MN tornado. Close examination revealed anchor bolts were not imbedded deep enough into the concrete masonry foundation, so they were standing too tall to properly secure the nuts and washers. Other anchor bolts were missing nuts and washers needed to secure the sill plates. So, the house was not anchored well to its foundation IMO. The house was pushed to the north and collapsed on its walk out basement. The second story remained with vinyl siding, soffits, and roof shingles still intact. The garage doors were pushed inward and were lying on top of the vehicles that had been parked in the garage. The air conditioner and wood porch deck remained nearby. The roof of the garage flew off to the northeast and came to rest upright with shingles and roof vents still attached.

Defendants, which included the builder, argued that since a tornado struck the home, it was an act of God, and therefore no one but God should be held liable. Such cases involving acts of God are not rare and I have been involved in them, ever since my first case with Hurricane Allen back in 1980. Boy, am I getting old.

TIM M.

 

[Steve Miller TX]

The case was settled out of court confidentially. Details:

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=536365&catid=14

Thanks for sharing some of the specifics, Tim. It certainly sounds like some potent evidence against the defendents.

I'm still curious as to the initial article mentioning that the Wendts were trying to argue straight-line winds instead of a tornado. Aren't both "acts of God" and thereby a moot point? I'm trying to understand their argument.

In any event, I hope that this ripples through the industry to help promote/encourage better building standards. Sadly, I'm sure it will take several more lawsuits like this and needless deaths to make any impact.

 

[Tim Marshall]

Steve wrote: I'm still curious as to the initial article mentioning that the Wendts were trying to argue straight-line winds instead of a tornado. Aren't both "acts of God" and thereby a moot point? I'm trying to understand their argument.

REPLY: Yes, before I got involved, the plaintiff attorney thought that straight-line winds pushed the house off its foundation, since the home was pushed straight back and not twisted. However, I indicated that a house sees a straight wind at a given instant -even in a tornado. Since the home failed in an instant - the damage appeared straight-lined.

Also, my detailed damage survey of the neighborhood revealed there was a rotating wind field present. A few objects were pushed over to the west and south (i.e. wood fences, a light pole, etc). This case illustrated that fast moving, weak tornadoes can leave a damage swath that appears straight-line. Also, the path was only a few houses wide and extended about eight miles long. I suspect that the act of God defense is better if there is a tornado, rather than if its only a straight-lined wind.

Steve wrote: In any event, I hope that this ripples through the industry to help promote/encourage better building standards. Sadly, I'm sure it will take several more lawsuits like this and needless deaths to make any impact.

REPLY: I don't think this case will have any affect on promoting better building practices. So long as the goal is the building code, then such failures will continue to occur. The building code is a minimum design. If the goal is the minimum, then chances are most homes will not meet the minimum due, in part, to workmanship factors. I've asked the question in the past that if the minimum to pass an exam is 70 percent, and that is your goal, then what are the chances you will pass? So, I believe there will be similar cases in the future.

tm

tm

 

[STurner]

That is a shame a 10 year-old girl had to lose her life because some construction company was negligent for not putting lugs on the anchor bolts and not nailing them deep enough into the foundation. It makes me wonder how well-constructed my house is. Tim did this house sustain high-end EF1 or maybe low-end EF2 damage. Like you said the roof appears to have only sustained minimal damage, but parts of the house looks like it was shifted or moved off the foundation causing it to fail and killing this poor young girl.

 

[Bill Doms]

Interesting. The case settled out of trial today.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S744476.shtml?cat=1

I wonder if it is one of those private settlements where the builder and subcontractors don't admit guilt despite the evidence presented during discovery or if it was economically more feasible for the defendants to just settle the case than have a lengthy (and expensive) court battle?

Regardless, I do believe this case may very well open the door for other weather related death instances where the integrity of a structure could be in question. Evidently the big questions in this case involved the spacing of the plate anchors and how the blocks were core filled where the anchors were located.

 

[Tim Marshall]

Shane asked: "Tim did this house sustain high-end EF1 or maybe low-end EF2 damage?"

REPLY: IMO, the house sustained high-end EF0 or maybe low-end EF1 damage. I figured the three-second wind speeds needed to knock the home off its foundation were between 80 and 100 MPH. That's actually LESS than or equal to the building code value of a 100 MPH three-second gust. Check out some interesting news stories that WCCO-TV did regarding poorly anchored homes:

http://wcco.com/consumer/better.home.construction.2.765736.html

http://wcco.com/topstories/walk.out.basements.2.361860.html

http://wcco.com/goodquestion/homes.built.tough.2.734272.html

tm

 

[cdcollura]

Good day...

Originally Posted by JF Massicotte
Maybe a little off-topic, but someday someone will sue SUV owners after his house is destroyed by a Hurricane...

You'll need to translate that one again - how are SUV's are hurricanes related?

That's an easy one ... SUV's burn more gas = More C02 = Global Warming = More hurricanes (to chase)