Kent & East Sussex Railway

Will anyone be at liberty at some future date to say what caused Poplar's failure?

 

Sounds like it's 'more than someone's job's worth...'

 

Probably not. I suggest that it's just viewed as "it happened", and we all move on.

 

If someone's agreed to pay money subject to certain conditions (whether they're an insurance company or anybody else) then it's highly likely the other people involved'll respect those conditions.

 

I'd say that given breach of the conditions may lead to withdrawal of the insurance sum, and potentially personal liability for same, I'd say it's very much more than someone's job/house/savings is worth...

 

Why would it be anyone’s personal liability?

 

OK, let's try another way;
Beyond the twisted connecting rods, pictures of which were in the public domain, what other damage did Poplar suffer? (Presuming that a full inspection has taken place in the interim)

 

One example might be - a subcontractor who was a sole trader could be personally liable for any debts or losses their business incurred.

Just to be clear I've no idea where any fault or liability might lie in this particular case.

 

If a person had signed a confidentiality agreement and breached it, and caused the offered sum to be withdrawn.

 

That concerns me - if the root cause can't be shared, it is very hard to share learning. That is a separate question from addressing commercial liability, where it is entirely reasonable that discussions underway remain confidential.

 

I would presume, though, that it'd be quite possible for certain details of the root cause to be shared amongst those who need to know (I.e. other railway workshops) without being made public?

 

Was the overhaul was done under contract? , So I would imagine there would be a need whilst talks take place to ascertain where the fault lies, for a black out on any details being released, it's very likely that there will never be any official statement, and those who do know what, and why it happened, will be keeping very quiet about it either to protect the guilty, or to collectively save face.

 

Whilst people are naturally curious and interested to learn about Poplar's fate, there is no legal or moral obligation for its owners to reveal private and commercial information, nor do they have a duty to reveal such information on social media such as this. Neither the Terrier Trust or KESR are public bodies, and are not bound by FoI.

 

This is a continuous tension between liability coverage and causation.

I suspect that in such circumstances as here, there is no clear individual causation, but a collection of potential causes, some/all of which lead to liability to some party, thus there isn't a simple narrative that can be given out without indicating fault and thus compromising negotiations.

Personally, I'd be more worried that insurers will walk away from covering this sort of thing if they think their requirements will be respected, and thus reducing cover available to the sector.

 

I wouldn’t employ a subcontractor who hadn’t got public liability insurance.

 

Possibly - and confirmation of that would be reassuring.

 

There may be good reasons for not revealing the sequence of events that led to damage, but has it even been revealed what damage occurred? Post 1087 mentions twisted rods. Was anything else damaged.

 

Me neither, though I doubt public liability was the issue here. And you never really know how good their insurance is (nor your own) until someone tries to claim.

 

4253 group posted the following picture last weekend, while moving the rods:

 

Hydraulic damage?