Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How can they be held liable for an "act of God"? They can't.
True, but as poster mentioned above, they built the mall knowing it was in a flood plain. They could have done something more back then, and now. I don't see any other malls in this area with that issue. You can't always blame God.
True, but as poster mentioned above, they built the mall knowing it was in a flood plain. They could have done something more back then, and now. I don't see any other malls in this area with that issue. You can't always blame God.
God didn't park her car on the lower level, either.
How can they be held liable for an "act of God"? They can't.
Well, when it happens frequently and the mall itself is built in a floodway, you could make a case that it's not an unforeseeable event and they could be ruled negligent in not addressing the issue in the design of their parking ramps. Would probably need to take them to court.
I don't know the full history behind it, but I have no idea how they were ever allowed to build there.
It's not just in a floodplain (pink/purple)...it's actually within the no-encroachment floodway (blue):
My friend's car got flooded while she was eating at Kankis. Has Crabtree Mall done anything more to alleviate the flooding issues? It seems to flood easily and fairly often. Does the Mall have any liability/responsibility?
There is nothing they can do about it. Just park on the top.
We were at Crabtree on Saturday evening. For at least an hour prior to the flooding of the lower level, they continually broadcast over the PA system "Flooding Alert, If you are parked in the lower level, please move your vehicle to a higher level." We eventually checked it out and didn't see any rising water at that time.
God didn't park her car on the lower level, either.
The mall created a lower level prone to flooding. You expect patrons to anticipate flooding well ahead of time and not to park in the lower level? Then why not just shut down the lower level. My friend was in the midst of celebrating her birthday. She didn't know and couldn't hear any flooding outside. Came out after dinner and found the disaster. It's happened one too many times, I think it is a bit negligent.
Maybe they should post flooding warning signs on the lower level if they don't have any already. Anything to warn patrons will help.
It's not like the mall floods once a month - this was a crazy rain storm that happens once a year at most. They shouldn't have to put up flood warning signs on the lower level for an occurance that would happen once every year or two at most. (Besides most people would probably ignore it anyways if anything less than a hurricane was coming - we've had torrential downpours this summer but nothing like Saturday)
True, but as poster mentioned above, they built the mall knowing it was in a flood plain. They could have done something more back then, and now. I don't see any other malls in this area with that issue. You can't always blame God.
I'm not blaming God (and questioned using that idiom for fear of a post like that) - it's just an expression. I agree it was a stupid placement for a mall and that no one could have seen that coming on Saturday. Sucks for your friend. But trying to collect for a flood is like suing your neighbor when a tornado picks up their truck and it comes through your house. There's plenty of case law for the mall to fall back on.
Go ahead and sue them. I wish your friend lots of luck with that.
Well, when it happens frequently and the mall itself is built in a floodway, you could make a case that it's not an unforeseeable event and they could be ruled negligent in not addressing the issue in the design of their parking ramps. Would probably need to take them to court.
NC is a contributory negligence state. You can make the argument that they contributed to their own negligence by ignoring the warnings that another poster heard. All you need to prove is 1% negligence on the plaintiff. Easy in this case, apparently. If the person lives in the area, it's even dumber to ignore the warning when you know darn well that it should be taken seriously.
I wish I could trade places with this person - I'd love to get the insurance payout on a car we don't need anymore!
I just heard on the NWS that this kind of flash flooding is considered once every 50-100 years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
