Truemors
Two people were killed in the Sesnon fire. It turns out the a private utility company not subject to State regulations regarding powerline safety, did not have a proper fire birm, or other safety measures that allowed the downed powerlines to start the fires. But that does not mean they weren't negligent and the cause of the wrongful deaths. Read here and see why!
October 26, 2008 (by Otto Smyth)
According to reports by California fire damage attorneys, officials have stated that a downed electrical wire is what sparked the Sesnon fire when heavy winds knocked down an electrical distribution line. The wire fell into a ditch where the sparks fell on dry brush.
It has been reported that the downed electrical distribution line was owned by the Southern California Gas Co. and the property it fell on was private land owned by a private utility company not governed by the statutes regarding powerline safety regulations.
The California Public Utilities Commission rules require government owned utility companies to inspect regularly the lines, as well as brush under and near the lines is to be kept cleaned up when the lines are owned by electric utility companies according to Tom Hall a spokesman for the commission. Hall also stated that these rules do not apply when it is a non-electric company. This means the private land owner was negligent in the Seson fire, even though it was not required to abide by the various statutes in California.
The Los Angeles Fire Department has stated that they tracked the fire to where it began and found it to be in the vicinity west of Limekiln Canyon Road, which is also an unincorporated area.
The Sesnon fire and the fire in San Fernando Valley caused two wrongful deaths and destroyed 49 structures. The two fires also burned over 18,000 acres prior to being contained. If you or someone you love was injured or lost your home due to the Sesnon fire, you are encouraged to contact California personal injury fire attorneys. Even if you had fire insurance, it may not be enough and you may not be barred under the collateral source rule.
Comments (0)