Cutty Sark Ballsup
So, it would seem that it was all an accident after all. Someone left an industrial vacuum cleaner on for two days and a couple of security guards sloped off to a cafe for a kip, missing the beginning of the fire.
You can read about it here. What I wonder, though, is what will happen to the insurance money, if it can be proved that the fire wasn't deliberately started. I guess they can sue the Italian makers of the vacuum - but it could be argued that leaving in on for an entire weekend wasn't the best of ideas. The security guards could be rounded up and sent before the beak - but it's unlikely that they'd have the sort of money that the insurance would be covering.
I hope I'm worrying unnecessarily. I do a lot of that.
You can read about it here. What I wonder, though, is what will happen to the insurance money, if it can be proved that the fire wasn't deliberately started. I guess they can sue the Italian makers of the vacuum - but it could be argued that leaving in on for an entire weekend wasn't the best of ideas. The security guards could be rounded up and sent before the beak - but it's unlikely that they'd have the sort of money that the insurance would be covering.
I hope I'm worrying unnecessarily. I do a lot of that.
Labels: News
posted by The Greenwich Phantom at
14:53
12 Comments:
Still not convinced myself. How can you not notice a vacuum cleaner sucking away for two days and an industrial one at that.I mean come on , is it normal to hear vacuums in the middle of the night on a building site? The Security guards must take some responsibility but I think there is still more to it. You might be a worrier Phantom but Im prone to a good "Funding account fraud conspiracy cockup" theory.
I took it to mean that it was just plugged in for 2 days.
As everyone over 70 knows, you should unplug your telly every night in case this kind of thing happens (but not your fridge or freezer).
If this bizarre explanation is true, I imagine that the contractor's insurance will have to cough up - I believe that legally builders have to maintain liability insurance, I imagine for exactly this type of thing.
True, how can you NOT hear a vacuum cleaner running.
I say make them walk the plank as a part of the opening ceremony.
Oooh arrh dave48, a bit o keel haulin I fancy for the scurvy ridden dogs.
IF true, what a bloody shambles!!!
There are several things wrong with the "Guard in the caff" story.
1 what caff is open late at night round here?
2 Wouldnt the caff gaffer get pissed off over some chap akip on his premises for hours?
Its a cover up for something I just cant decide who to slander first......
I'm mystified by its being adapted for "lower UK voltage". Since we're 230/240V to Europe's 220V and the USA's 110V, lower than where??
Fire on world famous tea caddy caused by dodgy Italian Hoover. At least it was more Dyson than arson!
(With apologies to the owners of the brand names).
Does "left switched on" mean that it was actually running, or does it mean it was switched on at the mains but not actually operational? I hate ambiguity!
Anyway, even though the whole thing smacks of "Windsor Castle burnt to the ground by light too near curtain", it is at least a relief to hear that the rumour I heard (that it was arson perpetrated by three idiots who thought that the Cutty Sark was a slave ship) isnt true.
Its unfair to blame the security guards who are paid peanuts. The ship is a national treasure and it appears that complancy was endemic amongst those responsible for its care. Surely CCTV cameras should have been in place on the site. The guards should have been required to swipe their entry cards at various points on the site to encourage them to inspect (the use of a log book is somewhat arcane). It also seems a bit ridiculous to leave the sprinkler system switched off. Responsibilty ought to lie with the building contractor and they should be fired immediately!
What's a "paid peanut"? I imagine they're better off than an unpaid one... (ho ho).
If a security guard can't do what they are paid to, then they are at fault - at least in part. How much (or little) they are paid is entirely irrelevant.
Considerably better off than a roasted one!! Seriously though, I doubt whether those who contributed millions to the conservation trust would be that happy about these funds going to the profits of the contractor responsible for burning down the Cutty Sark. The guards are only workaday, unskilled poorly paid immigrants with a jobsworth attitude. No responsible contactor would rely on them alone. they may be partly to blame but responsibilty must rest elsewhere. Anyway you think the fire was bad -wait til you see what these guys have lined up for that poor ship.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/04/05/sm_cuttysark05.xml
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home