Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
cartmn1210

Con Edison sues hapless Staten Island bus driver

Recommended Posts

Wow! Congratulations for reading the article!

...

Well, actually, no congratulations. Just read the article next time. It explains everything the driver was doing on that S76.

 

One problem, the S76 doesnt run through that part of the area.... so it was most likely either a depot deadhead or it was deadheading to St. George Ferry Terminal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I was pointing at Caith :) The article says:

 

"Maston was driving an Oakwood Beach-bound S76

bus apparently from the Castleton Depot to the start of its run at the St. George Ferry Terminal. It wasn’t carrying any passengers, police sources at the scene said."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone mentioned this please accept my apologies in advance but to the best recollection I have the TA is self insured. Meaning they have a fund set aside to pay damages in accidents where they (or their employees) are found at fault. I had accidents over the years and while I had to testify at depositions I was never sued personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If someone mentioned this please accept my apologies in advance but to the best recollection I have the TA is self insured. Meaning they have a fund set aside to pay damages in accidents where they (or their employees) are found at fault. I had accidents over the years and while I had to testify at depositions I was never sued personally.

 

I had posted this in response to someone elses comments. Dont worry the TA is self insured and probably paid out at least double than the amount Edison wants

 

"I was there as along side the union reps observing the happenings of an accident investigation!!!!! As I posted in previous post I DON'T SPECULATE!

So you can see why there is hostility and resentment on my behalf. I didn't think that for one minute that IGOR would turn this into a war of words! I just wanted to get the fact out that its stupid for con ed to take somoeone for court when theres something called insurance. Which by the way I believe the TA is self-insured and I wouldnt doubt that Edison didn't bill the TA for at least twice that amount and was already paid."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from the flaming, I find this actually interesting; usually people would go sue whoever has the bigger pockets (the MTA) and not some random bus driver..perhaps Con Ed is taking this personally?? Maybe one of their exec's houses lose power cause of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do bus drivers have their own liability insurance or are they covered by their employer? I would presume that Con Ed should only be going after the owner of the vehicle (in this case the MTA) just like they would do if a car hit their pole - after all the vehicle is the entity that is insured. This really does not make sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess by suing the B/O instead of the TA, Con Ed will get their money faster since the B/O won't have an army of lawyers to fight this. I know that when you crash into something on the highway (light poles, trees, guard rail) the DOT makes you pay for it so this isn't unusual, but woudn't insurance cover the cost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aside from the flaming, I find this actually interesting; usually people would go sue whoever has the bigger pockets (the MTA) and not some random bus driver..perhaps Con Ed is taking this personally?? Maybe one of their exec's houses lose power cause of this?

 

I highly doubt that a Con Ed executive would be living in Staten Island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok ok whatever, but I think that Con Ed has a completely good reason to sue for the damages caused. Of course the bus driver didn't mean to hit it, but he did. I was not bashing the bus driver at all, I was just saying how being an MTA employee should not protect you from being sued for when you crash into something.

 

And no, I do not work for the MTA and I have absolutely no desire to. I'm not working yet, but when I do I plan to get a job where you can make good money.

 

And Cait Sith, just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean that you should only tell me to stop. I'm trying to calmly say what I believe, but the post the OP made with the incredible amount of spelling/grammar mistakes, unnecessary and excessive capitalization, and unneeded angry emoticons set me off.

 

I dont really mind if you reply towards anyone, I only told you to stop with your smartass remarks, which you still didnt do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the bus operator crashed into the pole and should be held accountable for that but I'm sure as others have said those poles probably were dry rotted. A number of years ago, I was in Rockland County. It was the day before ConEd took control of Orange and Rockland Utilities and everywhere we went there were O&R crews working like mad men. I asked one of the crews what was going on and to paraphrase, they said that the next day ConEd was taking over and there would no longer be any preventative maintenance.

 

A few years ago shortly after Christmas we had a terrible ice and snow storm. A tree came down over a pole and knocked out our electric service. We had no electricity for 3 days and of course no heat. It took ConEd nearly3 months to actually replace the downed pole. They ginnied up some makeshift stuff in the mean time. So don't tell me about ConEd (emphasis on the Con).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess by suing the B/O instead of the TA, Con Ed will get their money faster since the B/O won't have an army of lawyers to fight this. I know that when you crash into something on the highway (light poles, trees, guard rail) the DOT makes you pay for it so this isn't unusual, but woudn't insurance cover the cost?

 

Wow Con Ed are a bunch of cowards, next thing you know it they will be suing mother nature for all the snow that was hit this year lol.

Edited by MTARegional Bus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets say that a non-MTA employee, such as a Wall Street executive, was for some reason driving in Staten Island and crashed into the same exact pole with his car, which caused the same amount of damages. Just out of curiosity, how many of you think that Con Ed should still be liable for his lack of judgement for this?

 

And don't even say that this is a smartass remark, this is a perfectly good question that I'd like to know the answer to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.