Kitchen fumes – false alarm, who is liable?
Hello,
There was a false alarm in my room in our dorm, and the fire department was automatically called. I've now received a bill from the fire department. According to the fire department, the cause was the kitchen fumes. The contract states that I'm liable if I smoked or used an open flame, but I was only cooking, and there's a video of that.
The room doesn't have its own kitchen, but it does have a stovetop, so I'm allowed to cook here. The fire department and the landlord agree that I have to pay because I triggered it and the detector works, so a defect is ruled out. In my opinion, I'm liable, as stated in the contract. Can anyone comment on this? Thank you.
(1 votes)
Loading...
Smoke detectors should actually be so attached that they are not triggered by “normal dunes” from the kitchen or from the bathroom.
In the immediate vicinity or directly in the kitchen and bathroom, other devices, namely smoke-heat-melders, would be necessary.
Now the question is why the smoke detector triggered. As I said, he shouldn’t do that in normal dunes. And if the detector were incorrect, it would have triggered false alarms regularly or more frequently in the past.
In this respect, the possibility that the fault is rather close to the boiling person is obvious. Is there anything burned in the pan, so that a corresponding smoke development has occurred? Was the extractor hood defective or have open doors/windows etc. ensure that the dunes could not be sucked off by the trigger?
In the end, it is so that the city has issued a corresponding fee rate, in which the fees for the failure of the fire brigade are regulated.
So the best way would be if you contact the city administration with a corresponding letter, explain your view of things and therefore ask to waive the fees. Because the specialists there often have some room for manoeuvre.
Do you have a fixed stove? If so, in the field of action of the stove, no fire alarm can be, who automatically calls the fire department, seek a lawyer. A stove that calls the fire department when used…
Unless you have a door in between and this was open, then it’s problematic.
The hurricane is responsible for this. And he’s stuck. The fact that certain other reasons of liability are listed in the contract is unimportant.
But if the smoke detector is 2 meters away from the stove can be triggered so easily, why do I have to stick? I can cook and I didn’t place it there.
You can, of course, try to argue with the argument: “Coke Allows”. As I said, the odds are not special.
Yes, it’s not clear. But as I said, I see it rather skeptical. The risk of losing here would be too big for me.
If cooking is explicitly allowed in the room, no classic smoke detectors can be installed there – here false alarms are pre-programmed. The problem to solve (enhancement BMA) is about the landlord. If he doesn’t, he’s liable for the consequences.