Comments on: Skanska Loses Federal Lawsuit Over Hurricane Sally Barge Damage

By: Jlb

Jlb — Sat, 01 Jan 2022 20:28:10 +0000

Skanska was responsible. They didn’t follow their own guidelines. Many businesses lost thousands of dollars an some their businesses, due to the added time the bridge was closed. Not to mention the long commute many people had daily to get to work.

By: Denny

Denny — Sat, 01 Jan 2022 16:29:52 +0000

By nature (LOL), weather is unpredictable. NOAA weather forecasts are a service and is meant as a guide – note the words “possible,” “likely,” “expected,” etc. Some people blame the government for everything instead of believing in personal responsibility.

By: john

john — Fri, 31 Dec 2021 04:55:46 +0000

To place blame on NOAA is utterly ridiculous at best. Anyone who has lived on the gulf coast KNOWS that predictions are never 100% and NOAA probably gives a disclaimer to cover themselves.

Now what’s going to happen is Skanska is going to pay a heck of alot more money in damages than it would have taken the Project Manager to order his crews to move the barges in the first place.

The cost to move all of the barges and rigging would have been miniscule.

And if Skanska survives the flood of lawsuits headed their way they may want to consider putting more storm prep time when they bid on a job.

By: Jeff Stakley

Jeff Stakley — Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:17:33 +0000

I don’t blame Skanska. The blame should be with the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration for erroneous predictions. Once the advisory came out that it would turn more, it was already too dangerous to put crews in the bay to move the barges.

Once again a government agency is to blame. This is quite simple. Obviously the many people who have lost money will blame Skanska regardless of facts and fight for lost monies. It’s all about the dollar and you have “bad big business” vs small town business and private citizens, who do you think a jury would side with- regardless of facts?

What any reasonable jury should do is declare a mistrial and issue instructions to the judge to find the NOAA at fault for issuing late warnings.

Skanska could only reasonably act upon the NOAA issued information. Is it Sankas fault the NOAAs predictions were wrong? Is it Skankas fault the NOAA failed to issue proper weather advisories? By NOAA being the government and the agency soley in charge of issuing advisories, watches and warnings, they are culpable in this.

By: Denny

Denny — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:28:07 +0000

DP, actually it’s People 1, Bad Business 0. You talk of periodic delays but what the huge delay caused when Skanska failed to prepare? People lost their businesses, and tens of thousands lost time in the extra commute, and money in extra gas and wear and tear on their cars – every day for a LONG time.
Skanska had a hurricane plan for this very situation and failed to follow it, so they should pay for the damage caused by their inaction. We’re all asked to prepare for bad weather, and businesses should, too.

By: RRR

RRR — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 16:32:50 +0000

I do agree with the negligence verdict. But saying businesses lost millions is not totally correct. It was already the end of the busy season. So all those businesses were already on the way after labor day to the winter low cash flow season. I don’t blame skanska if they argue the dollar amounts of each claim and weed thru the excess the lawyers will say the businesses lost when they really didn’t lose as much as they say they did because it was going into the low cash flow months. I’m all about what is fair just don’t inflate your numbers looking for free money.

By: Travis Keeton

Travis Keeton — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:49:07 +0000

Skanska is reliable for all damages occurred. The year before when I worked for them we pulled everything in the bay to the cove for a tropical storm that never hit. We were down for a week while everything was set back up but DOT gave Skanska extra time on the project. They didn’t meet the deadline anyways due to concrete being mixed wrong and cracking. So there was no reason not to secure the barges as was part of their plan to begin with. Good for the judge.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 14:47:17 +0000

Skanska’s own hurricane plan called for the barges to be moved when sustained winds were expected to be above a certain threshold. They had plenty of notice of the winds and elected not to do the right thing. Pensacola was under Tropical Storm and Hurricane watch and warning well in advance of the the storm actually making landfall. Why submit a plan if you are not going to follow it?

By: Josh Jones

Josh Jones — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 14:25:25 +0000

“At what point are the weather guessers (forecasters) held responsible as well?”

Why and how would they be “held liable”? For not predicting that there is going to be a shift in the direction of the storm? No one can predict that with positive accuracy, and courts have, reasonably, not ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

By: DP

DP — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 12:19:28 +0000

Lawyers 1. People 0
This is liability paranoia. This will cause tremendous delays now in the way these projects are completed. Serious delays in the progress because of a storm threat. Completely stopping work to secure every vessel a week ahead and then setting up again. This is very similar to the insurance industry rules of not writing a policy for a person if a named storm is anywhere in the Gulf of Mexico. They win again.