- Users have right to expect rides are reasonably safe or warned otherwise.
That warning is responsibility of the above parties. Unlikely parties (designer,
manufacturer, owner, concession operator: Miami-Dade County Fair and
Exposition Inc., would post or otherwise provide such a warning, hence they
responsible for using safe equipment. I am assuming there was no unusual behavior on the
part of the users (riders).
I think that the age of the ride should be posted on the ride, as far as
warnings go, I think that any recall info and info about the rides should also be
posted. I think the manufacturer should send info to the owner. Just like the
gov sends workmen's comp info to employers.
The owner is ultimately responsible, but there are other culpable parties.
The details determine how the culpability percentages are determined.
Owner responsibilities: purchasing acceptable quality equipment; training
personnel or contracting with trained personnel; appropriately inspecting
equipment; implementing a preventive maintenance program, appropriately maintaining
equipment; reporting problems to manufacturer; eliciting information from
manufacturer regarding potential problems.
Manufacturer: design of equipment; design and provision of inspection
procedures; design and provision of maintenance procedures; training of purchaser;
design of technical means to warn owner of impending problems; design of
warnings directed to owner regarding inspection and maintenance; tracking of
equipment performance in use and notifying owners of potential problems; recall
procedures, if appropriate.
I wonder if these rides are considered inherently dangerous. also how can a
manufacturer be responsible for a 19 year old ride?
Concession operators: responsible for contracting with parties having
appropriately designed, inspected, and maintained equipment: contractual requirement;
Private inspectors: Yes, but depends on State, County and/or City
requirements regarding amusement ride inspector qualifications and depends on the
contractual agreement between contracting parties and inspectors;
State (Department of Agriculture's fair ride inspection division), County,
City Inspectors: their responsibility depends on laws exempting them from
responsibility; the nature of their charge, for example, are they responsible for
inspecting inspection paperwork or for actually inspecting the equipment?; if
they are responsible for inspecting the equipment, to what extent are they to
inspect the equipment?' is the subject failure one that could have been noted
visually or was special equipment and/or knowledge required? were the inspectors
expected to have such equipment and/or knowledge.
The owner for not making sure the ride was safe and the inspector for not
making sure it was safe.
They are fortunate the women weren't killed.
Totally the inspector's fault. that is their job. If the owner screws up the
inspector is supposed to point it out.
If the inspectors found the ride unsafe they should have shut it
down until it reached required standards (you didn't say they had
found it unsafe) but they can't force an owner to repair... just
tell them to shut it down. I'd say the owners if the inspectors
had given an unsafe report... both if they had not.
you have left me with a heck of a lot more questions than any thought
of giving an ignorant opinion.
Whether or not one can blame the inspectors has a lot to do with what
exactly went wrong. There are many things they are not obligated to
age is irrelevant but the maintenance is very important. You stated that it
is "supposedly" not properly maintained. Have their been citations for
negligence? If not, on what do you base that statement? Was it a Gravitron
with seats or the one where you just stand?
Gravitron with seats..
Not sure.. but if not properly maintained, wouldn't the inspector be at
fault. If it is not something visible to the inspector, then these rides are too
dangerous for anyone to go on, IMHO.
I am very familiar with the Gravitron as it was always one of my favorite
rides The parts are minimal compared to most amusement rides so upkeep and
maintenance should be relatively simple. You have the floor, the panels,
handrails/straps and in some newer models, a seat. You have metal brackets and
of nuts and bolts. What exactly went wrong? Inspectors, for instance, are
responsible for the obvious such as the floor, the brackets and the panels
but not for the nuts and bolts.
However, since you have stated that the attorney represents two young women
who were "thrown" my mind can envision only one thing; a panel blew. If so,
did it crack and blow? Did the under-bracket give way? Did someone forget
to put the nuts and bolts back in following maintenance?
You cannot expect to get intelligent opinions without providing more
details. Just my dumb opinion.
Will ask.. alll I know is:
1. girl was thrown about 30 feet and in a coma for several weeks
2. 1 girl ejected as a result of a sheared bolt failed to hole one of the
panels in place
3. the Food and Ag. Dept of the State found poor maintenance as a result of a
cracked ride seat frame
The owner HAS to make sure his ride is perfectly safe- Yes I know things
happen. But IMO it still makes them liable and the inspector has to make sure he
has inspected and cleared the ride. They should just pay whatever it is they
get(and the civil suits from the victims) and be darn thankful no one died..
Maybe these rides should be "retired" after a certain amount of time. It
seems as though the ride itself goes through lots of stress.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]