Trucking Company Sueing Amtrak & UP over Reno,NV Collision

[wilh]

The trucking company that owned the truck that slammed into the side of an Amtrak train in Reno, is sueing UP and Amtrak for, as they claim, a unproperly guarded grade crossing that failed to have a proper gate, timing and circuitry for the gate. Reps. from UP and Amtrak have nothing to say about this (which is because they are probably laughing).

Now for some cold hard facts. There were properly working gates and flashers installed at that crossing and the train was already at the crossing at the time of the collision.

So, what the trucking company is basically doing is trying to get claims for their minor losses (one truck).

Seriously, though, it is the truck drivers fault (who is known to have a bad driving record) in this accident, not the railroads. If you somehow do not see the gate, flashers, or hear a loud, blaring train horn and not see the train already at the crossing, then you are absolutely ignorant and stupid or deaf and blind. But in this case it is ignorance and stupidity.

 

[aardvark1]

~~~~snip~~~

1.....Now for some cold hard facts. There were properly working gates and flashers installed at that crossing and the train was already at the crossing at the time of the collision.

2.....So, what the trucking company is basically doing is trying to get claims for their minor losses (one truck).

3.....Seriously, though, it is the truck drivers fault (who is known to have a bad driving record) in this accident, not the railroads. If you somehow do not see the gate, flashers, or hear a loud, blaring train horn and not see the train already at the crossing, then you are absolutely ignorant and stupid or deaf and blind. But in this case it is ignorance and stupidity.

Item 1..... can you post the official links to support your comment?

Item 2..... can you post the official links to support your comment?

Item 3..... can you post the official links to support your comment?

Looking forward to reading the official documents .

Regards,

 

[fran1]

then you are absolutely ignorant and stupid or deaf and blind.
I'll vote for all 4.

 

[tbob]

Item 1..... can you post the official links to support your comment?

Item 2..... can you post the official links to support your comment?

Item 3..... can you post the official links to support your comment?

Looking forward to reading the official documents .

Regards,

Actually he's right about the gates and the driving record of the driver, I can't remember if it's the current issue of Trains or last month's, but those facts are in there...

Here's a link from ABC, I can post others if you wish but I'm sure they'll all be about the same... http://abcnews.go.com/US/amtrak-train-truck-collision-reno-nevada-kills/story?id=13926108

"The preliminary investigation and witness statements indicate the truck driver was going northbound on U.S. 95 and the gates were operational and flashing before the collision."

The Trains article mentioned the driving record, I'll have to find it on the break table at work.

 

[aardvark1]

tbob,

Thanks for posting the link.

Even with the drivers record, it is not proper to say he is guilty without having all the facts first.

Thanks again,

 

[007007]

The FRA report will show all. When it gets posted I will put a link here but I'm sure it will be some time. I don't believe anything that the media has to say.

 

[slabay]

Reps. from UP and Amtrak have nothing to say about this (which is because they are probably laughing).

.....or because they possibly have a policy of not commenting on an open investigation and current litigation.

 

[Red_Rattler]

Don't speculate

Wilh, I'm not sure how old you are, but please don't speculate. Don't assume for one minute that the truck driver may be at fault. You were not there, were you? Only those that were involved or saw know you may be at fault.

Of course Amtrak aren't commenting, not because "they are probably laughing"

Interestly the title is "Truck hits trains". Usually the title is "Train hits trucks" or similar.

Seems as though transport enthusiasts (on the train, tram &/or bus side) seem to think that EVERY level crossing accident is the road vehicles fault.

EDIT: Wilh, you titled this "Trucking company sues", but the article linked to doesn't mention anything about sueing Amtrak and/or the track operator. Have you got proof of this, and where does it say that the driver had a bad driving record?

Also, the last part of your paragraph in the first post could be considered on a bit off.

 

[Euphod]

Now for some cold hard facts. There were properly working gates and flashers installed at that crossing and the train was already at the crossing at the time of the collision.

Be that as it may, there may be some other facts that could produce a win for the trucking company. We aren't privy to the timing and mechanics of the system, and even if the system was fully operational, a flawed setting could technically be exploited in the legal system.

 

[ex-railwayman]

It might be that the Trucking Company's lawyers have found a loophole in the law that they are going to try and exploit in a litigation battle, they obviously think they have a fair chance of winning, otherwise, they wouldn't spend so much cash in taking the Railroad companies to court, it would be financially silly of them to just sue the pants off UP and Amtrak without any viable cause. And, not knowing much about American law, but, would the driver's past driving record be admissable in this legal wrangle, who knows??

I think I've been watching too much Law & Order......:hehe:

Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

 

[hauntedclipp]

very backwards

As I recall , the coaches that the truck hit were near the middle of the train, or at least somewhere behind the baggage cars. So the train was probably already at the crossing when the truck approached.

The only actual video I've seen of the aftermath was shown numerous times on different news channels. The coaches the truck hit were burning, and there were fatalities (around six or so).

This seems very backwards. Amtrak's losses in equipment (possibly 2 Superliner coaches) and the money that may or may not be heading to family members of those who died adds up. The trucking company could have prevented this if they had fired the truck driver, considering his driving record.

If anything, Amtrak should be sueing the trucking company.

 

[H222]

Look at The photo on the ABC, the truckie should be sued, not the company, and not Amtrak, or UP,
The truck hit a coach car, not the loco or anything,

All Of my preliminary investigation points to it wasn't the train, company or anyone's fault, but the truckie

BTW, what loco was hauling?? Just for personal knowledge


Jamie

 

[pfx]

Apply some common sense to the accident purely based on the pictures.

I can't see the front of the train but I'm guessing there's a loco or 2 then guard van? It would appear the truck hit the 3rd carriage in the consist (unfortunately I can't say definitely) or maybe even later. That provides proof that the train was already crossing the road by the time the truck got there.

Second point is that the crossing is completely exposed on flat ground so the train would be visible from a good distance so it can't be said that the train appeared from nowhere.

I'm not saying who's fault it was as I wasn't there but even if there were no barriers, it seems hard to pin this on the railway company surely?

 

[wholbr]

Hi Everybody.
As someone involved in workplace accident investigation, I feel there should be an end to all the speculation on this thread as to where the fault may lay and how the incident could have occurred.people involved in the incident including the family and other associates of the truck driver and train crew have enough on their hands without unfounded guesswork coming from forums like these.

The one thing that everyone has overlooked here is the fact that this may not have been an accident. With the above in mind, an incident at a level crossing in Britain here a few years ago was reported as a car had stalled on the level crossing and then was hit by a train. Eighteen months later a health and safety executive investigation concluded that a mechanical failure within the vehicle was unlikely to have been the cause

The above conclusion came after an in-depth accident investigation which interviewed relatives of the deceased driver as well as work colleagues etc. The findings concluded that other factors including the mental state of the driver may well have been the cause of the incident and death. it should be borne in mind that a significant number of in depth vehicle accident investigations conclude with similar findings.

Therefore can we have an end to this thread and unfounded conjecture? As stated in the above circumstances many people involved and affected by this incident have much to come to grips with and recover from.

H222 I am glad that your investigation is going so well, as I am sure you have access to all the relevant documents such as vehicle maintenance report, drivers hours records, statements from the truck driver and train crew Associates, railway track maintenance record's just to name a few.

Bill

 

[H222]

H222 I am glad that your investigation is going so well, as I am sure you have access to all the relevant documents such as vehicle maintenance report, drivers hours records, [FONT=&quot]confidential[/FONT] statements from the truck driver and train crew Associates, railway track maintenance record's just to name a few.
Bill

It sure is:hehe:

The FBI was happy to lend the confidential reports to a 13 year old from a bogan country

Jamie

 

[wholbr]

It sure is:hehe:

The FBI was happy to lend the confidential reports to a 13 year old from a bogan country

Jamie

Then at 13 years old you should be old enough to understand the misery of people involved in such incidents and not speculate and joke about about their grief

Bill

 

[gfisher]

Amtrak should be sueing the trucking company.

Amtrak is suing the trucking company (Trains magazine).

And why should we put an end to speculation? If you don't like reading it, then don't read it.

 

[pommie]

Without getting into the blame debate, it was a semi with two trailers, so no stopping on a dime there, the train was doing 80mph, thats 120ft per second, locos and passenger cars are about 85ft long, that means a loco/car every ⅔ of a second, if he hit as many as four lengths back thats only 2⅔ seconds from the front.
As I said I am not commenting on who or what is to blame, that is for the people who have the facts, just putting out the math for those that are saying that because he hit the train so far back he must be at fault.

Cheers David

 

[Red_Rattler]

Wholbr is right, STOP THE SPECULATION

Wholbr is right.

And why should we put an end to speculation? If you don't like reading it, then don't read it.

Because how do you know that speculation won't damage the outcome of an official investigation, or hurt the outcome of a litigation case?

H222, that is nothing to joke about.

To stop the speculation, it may be best if this thread is locked, or at least wait until an OFFICIAL investigation is over and done with, then maybe comment.

As mentioned before, the title of this thread is that the trucking company is going to sue Amtrak. I have yet to find proof of any company involved going to sue, expect according to others, the Trains Magazine. But how do you know that that magazine got the details about suing company X correct?

 

[masterowner]

Interestly the title is "Truck hits trains". Usually the title is "Train hits trucks" or similar.

Amtrak, UP, and the families of the victims should sue that trucking company for every penny the have.

I laugh like a hyena every time I see this video,but it proves how stupid people can be: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enkh9A5jdUI