Legal eagles rub hands together in anticipation of Philly prosecution.
It’s a story that is all too familiar in demolition circles. An accident happens; everyone involved is suddenly blessed with 20:20 hindsight; and, when the dust settles, it’s the contractor in the firing line and the lawyers who are circling vulture-like overhead.
So the situation playing out in Philadelphia in the aftermath of a building collapse that killed six people and injured more should come as no surprise to anyone. And even the rumours suggesting that the excavator operator could be charged with involuntary manslaughter follow a well-trodden path of blame and accusation.
But in this instance, the city should surely look closer to home for the root cause of a tragic problem. Almost all of the news coverage emanating from the region suggest that demolition is “lightly regulated” in Philadelphia. That, however, is like saying that the Pope is a bit religious.
According to local news reports, under-the-radar and unregulated demolition is rife in the city. Furthermore, while the city has 300 existing permits outstanding, inspectors had managed to visit just 30 of them.
Of course, the demolition contractor must shoulder some blame here. If the demolition contractor didn’t follow best practice; if the excavator operator didn’t follow procedure; or if the necessary risk assessments hadn’t been carried out, then the book should rightly be hurled in their direction.
But if the city has stood idly by while unlicensed, unregulated and uninspected demolition has taken place under its nose, then it is only right and proper that they too should face the music.
