dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2513
share rss forum feed


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
reply to Gone

Re: Hydro poll installed in middle of highway

said by Gone:

said by hm :

#2 was clearly the best choice, in my opinion. I say good for them.

Bzzzt. Absolutely false. The correct answer is to wait for Hydro Quebec to remove the pole, and then bill for cost due to delay. That is, at least, what would happen anywhere else in the country. Not only is Quebec the only place where such a dangerous and bullshit result that has the potential to put lives in danger ever occur, but it's probably the only place where someone would ever think that this is the "best choice" !

The exact same thing happened in Barrie last year, during the relocation/reconstruction of a road...

Basically, the road sub was going to be penalized by the general contractor, for not hitting certain milestones (i.e. curbing, paving, etc) despite the fact that the utility hadn't relocated the poles yet... So the road crew did what they had to do, to NOT be penalized - it looked pretty much identical to the Quebec pic's, other then the lanes on either side of the pole were in the same direction (one straight, one right turn, IRC) - not opposing...

Happens all the time - artifical milestones are written into the contract, either attached to payment or penalty clauses. You can't expect one sub to take a hit because the GC or project manager can't get another sub to do their part in time, can you?

I agree it makes no sense, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen - and having been in similar positions (having to complete my portion of a larger project, before dependancies are completed, or facing fines/penalties) in the past - I totally understand why it was done. I'm not prepared to take money out of my own pocket, because someone else can't get their sh_t together...

PX Eliezer70
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms

1 recommendation

said by LazMan:

I agree it makes no sense, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen - and having been in similar positions (having to complete my portion of a larger project, before dependancies are completed, or facing fines/penalties) in the past - I totally understand why it was done. I'm not prepared to take money out of my own pocket, because someone else can't get their sh_t together...

OK, but if there was an accident, all parties would be hauled into court for civil damages, and there could also be charges of criminal negligence involved.

If a death occurred, maybe even manslaughter or whatever it is called in Canada.

Can you imagine defending this in a civil or criminal trial?

So even from a purely monetary POV, the solution of "just do it and leave the pole there" is not good.

And---

If I were the [insurance company] for these contractors, I would hit the roof. I would drop their insurance coverage ASAP.

Insurance companies can't make a profit insuring the Three Stooges.


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
reply to Dustyn
Also fully agree - but the problem would be for the project management and general contracting companies... They typically have oversight for the entire project; as well as the municipality - they (the city/county/village/etc) generally has to inspect a project, and declare it ready for traffic, before a road is opened to the public...

I've also been in situations that were handled correctly - the dates in my contract were amended, or the penalty clauses removed, when a dependancy wasn't in place in time ahead of me.

Like I said, it makes no sense to push ahead with a final parts of a job, when preparation and dependancies aren't in place first, but I totally get why stuff like this happens, too - tunnel-vision, and PM's that live to smack sub-trades with penaltys, even when the big picture view says otherwise...


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to PX Eliezer70
said by PX Eliezer70:

Insurance companies can't make a profit insuring the Three Stooges.

This is Quebec. The whole province drives like the Three Stooges. Quebec is also a No Fault system, insured by the government.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


Thane_Bitter
Inquire within
Premium
join:2005-01-20
reply to ArthurS
LOL, I was going to suggest something along those lines, if it had any English on it you can be sure it would have been ripped out much sooner.


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2
reply to PX Eliezer70
said by PX Eliezer70:

OK, but if there was an accident, all parties would be hauled into court for civil damages, and there could also be charges of criminal negligence involved.

Nope! Quebec's no fault insurance works both ways. Not only can you not sue other drivers for negligence, you can't sue the government either.

And in a province where shoddy mafia managed workmanship is the norm, the government isn't about to change that policy any time soon.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
reply to Dustyn
I don't see why they don't have some kind of barriers around that, so its more apparent that there's a pole in the middle of the road. Those orange plastic barriers or some cement slabs or something...


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to milnoc
said by milnoc:

you can't sue the government either.

Nah. You can. You can sue the municipality/city. Not sure about transport Quebec, but you likely could.

Think pot hole.

it's been a decade or maybe 2 decades since new laws came out preventing you from being able to sue the cities for pot hole damage. But that was taken to court back then. If a pot hole has been reg'd with the city for repair and you damage your car in it, then you win. Also, regardless if it's been reg'd or not, if the size meets a certain criteria (I forget the specifics dimensions) then again, you win. Basically there is no law that protects the municipality from negligence. This is negligence.

I'm just not sure who would be on the hook. Transport Quebec or the municipality. Or both.

If I had a crap car I would hit it on purpose and make a claim. Or I would borrow one of Peterboro's car's that sit on his front lawn


i LOLd

@videotron.ca
reply to urbanriot
said by urbanriot:

I don't see why they don't have some kind of barriers around that, so its more apparent that there's a pole in the middle of the road. Those orange plastic barriers or some cement slabs or something...

They did... But only just before they took the poles down. heh


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to urbanriot
said by urbanriot:

I don't see why they don't have some kind of barriers around that, so its more apparent that there's a pole in the middle of the road. Those orange plastic barriers or some cement slabs or something...

The sign on it isn't even the kind of proper signage that is used for a middle-of-the-road obstacle Do you expect anything less?


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to LazMan
said by LazMan:

Happens all the time - artifical milestones are written into the contract, either attached to payment or penalty clauses. You can't expect one sub to take a hit because the GC or project manager can't get another sub to do their part in time, can you?

No, it doesn't happen all the time. The civil engineers who I know - and there's a few from different jurisdictions and at different levels - are utterly shocked that this would be allowed to happen. A properly-worded performance clause in a contract wouldn't penalize a contractor for delays for something like this. The problem is both negligence on the part of the contractor, and their own bad lawyers who would allow a clause that didn't protect them from the bureaucracy of a utility company. The MTO and Niagara Region will not start construction until utility relocation has been completed. I assumed the same sanity existed elsewhere.

Either way, improperly constructing a road with a utility pole in the middle of it is going to get you into more hot water as far as performance clauses go than a delay. The difference is that while you can attempt to sue for damages due to a delay from a utility company, you can't do anything over your own negligence when you pave a pole into a road, and the utility could just as easily end up billing you for the extra work involved to remove it, too.

telco_mtl

join:2012-01-06
reply to milnoc
said by milnoc:

said by PX Eliezer70:

OK, but if there was an accident, all parties would be hauled into court for civil damages, and there could also be charges of criminal negligence involved.

Nope! Quebec's no fault insurance works both ways. Not only can you not sue other drivers for negligence, you can't sue the government either.

And in a province where shoddy mafia managed workmanship is the norm, the government isn't about to change that policy any time soon.

and if somthing falls on your head, pray you arent in a car, a man was sitting in a parked car in westmount when a tree fell on him, he was killed but no one could be sued as it involved a vehicle had he been walking his family could sue...


Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
kudos:5
reply to PX Eliezer70
said by PX Eliezer70:

said by LazMan:

I agree it makes no sense, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen - and having been in similar positions (having to complete my portion of a larger project, before dependancies are completed, or facing fines/penalties) in the past - I totally understand why it was done. I'm not prepared to take money out of my own pocket, because someone else can't get their sh_t together...

OK, but if there was an accident, all parties would be hauled into court for civil damages, and there could also be charges of criminal negligence involved.

If a death occurred, maybe even manslaughter or whatever it is called in Canada.

Can you imagine defending this in a civil or criminal trial?

So even from a purely monetary POV, the solution of "just do it and leave the pole there" is not good.

And---

If I were the [insurance company] for these contractors, I would hit the roof. I would drop their insurance coverage ASAP.

Insurance companies can't make a profit insuring the Three Stooges.

I'm shocked, an american brings up litigation.
--
Ain't nuthin but the blues! "Albert Collins".
Leave your troubles at the door! "Pepe Peregil" De Sevilla. Just Don't Wifi without WPA, "Yul Brenner"

LlamaWorks Equipment

telco_mtl

join:2012-01-06
reply to Gone
said by Gone:

said by LazMan:

Happens all the time - artifical milestones are written into the contract, either attached to payment or penalty clauses. You can't expect one sub to take a hit because the GC or project manager can't get another sub to do their part in time, can you?

No, it doesn't happen all the time. The civil engineers who I know - and there's a few from different jurisdictions and at different levels - are utterly shocked that this would be allowed to happen. A properly-worded performance clause in a contract wouldn't penalize a contractor for delays for something like this. The problem is both negligence on the part of the contractor, and their own bad lawyers who would allow a clause that didn't protect them from the bureaucracy of a utility company. The MTO and Niagara Region will not start construction until utility relocation has been completed. I assumed the same sanity existed elsewhere.

Either way, improperly constructing a road with a utility pole in the middle of it is going to get you into more hot water as far as performance clauses go than a delay. The difference is that while you can attempt to sue for damages due to a delay from a utility company, you can't do anything over your own negligence when you pave a pole into a road, and the utility could just as easily end up billing you for the extra work involved to remove it, too.

i agree this is ridicoulous but i can also see the contractors side of things, the asphalt plants shut down at the end of october, october always has a huge rush on asphalt so you want to get in and out. Waiting on hydro quebec is like waiting in the ER, you never know when they will fix things. In my town they were replacing the water lines on the main street and widening it, once the road was widened 5 poles were now in the right of way, took hydro nearly 2 years to remove them. (sad thing is often this work isnt even done by hydro but by the sub Thirro)


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
It's one thing to widen a road and have the poles in the right-of-way but not in travel lanes that are open. That's not entirely unusual, same thing happened with the Glendale Ave widening in St. Cats and the Regional Road 20 widening going into Fonthill, they ended up being part what were to be cycle lanes and were eventually removed later. It's an entirely other issue when a pole is left in the middle of an open travel lane. That's nothing short of insanity, and as I said a reconstruction or full realignment sees utilities moved first before any of the road gets constructed.

PX Eliezer70
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
reply to Anav
said by Anav:

I'm shocked, an american brings up litigation.

You guys are catching up.

For example:

June 2012 W. Brad Hanna, FCIArb., Laura Stefan

The Quebec Superior Court has just dramatically expanded the scope of liability for franchisors in Canada. In Bertico Inc. et al. v. Dunkin' Brands Canada Ltd. ("Dunkin'") the Court held that a franchisor is required to promote its brand, fight off competitors and protect its market share for the benefit of the franchisees.

The Dunkin' decision has the potential to become a landmark decision that imposes additional obligations on franchisors and that develops new law in the area of franchisor-franchisee relations....

....The Court expressed its ultimate conclusion in strong language:

But the greatest failing of all was [franchisor's] failure to protect its brand in the Quebec market. No doubt the host of failings chronicled by the Franchisees contributed to the collapse of the Dunkin Donuts' brand in Quebec. A successful brand is crucial to the maintenance of healthy franchises. However, when the brand falls out of bed, collapses, so too do those who rely upon it. And this is precisely what has happened in this case.

»www.mcmillan.ca/dramatic-expansi···ur-brand


J E F F
Whatta Ya Think About Dat?
Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Rogers Portable ..
reply to Gone
How about
3. No correct way to do it.

If he chosen #1, though, the contractor would have had his legs broken and his kids head dismembered at per Quebec corruption mafia rules.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein

highwire2007

join:2008-05-17
Nepean, ON
reply to Dustyn
What I think is preposterous is the term "hydro pole". "Telephone pole" or "utility pole", sure. But a water pole?


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
said by highwire2007:

What I think is preposterous is the term "hydro pole". "Telephone pole" or "utility pole", sure. But a water pole?

HydroQuebec? Ontario Hydro? Hydro One? Hydro Ottawa? Get it now?


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to J E F F
said by J E F F:

If he chosen #1, though, the contractor would have had his legs broken and his kids head dismembered at per Quebec corruption mafia rules.

Exactly, and it's that which makes this situation all the worse.

PX Eliezer70
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
reply to highwire2007
said by highwire2007:

What I think is preposterous is the term "hydro pole". "Telephone pole" or "utility pole", sure. But a water pole?

It looks especially silly to us Americans that you call all electricity "hydro".

AFAIK about half of Ontario's electricity is from nuclear plants....

And even Quebec has at least some electricity from nuclear and from fossil fuel, not even counting what they generate from hot air.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
said by PX Eliezer70:

It looks especially silly to us Americans that you call all electricity "hydro".

And it looks silly to us Canadians that you somehow manage to throw the name Edison into every power company in the Northeastern US, but whatever.

Oxidd

join:2010-02-24
Pierrefonds, QC
reply to J E F F
said by J E F F:

How about
3. No correct way to do it.

If he chosen #1, though, the contractor would have had his legs broken and his kids head dismembered at per Quebec corruption mafia rules.

Nah, he would've been fine, it's not in Montreal/Laval.


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to telco_mtl
said by telco_mtl:

i agree this is ridicoulous but i can also see the contractors side of things, the asphalt plants shut down at the end of october, october always has a huge rush on asphalt so you want to get in and out.

Our asphalt plants shut the end of November.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to PX Eliezer70
said by PX Eliezer70:

And even Quebec has at least some electricity from nuclear and from fossil fuel, not even counting what they generate from hot air.

Quebec is almost all hydro. Gentilly nuclear plant is shutting down. 3.6 % is thermal. See more here.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.

PX Eliezer70
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
reply to Gone
said by Gone:

said by PX Eliezer70:

It looks especially silly to us Americans that you call all electricity "hydro".

And it looks silly to us Canadians that you somehow manage to throw the name Edison into every power company in the Northeastern US, but whatever.

But Thomas Edison truly had a hand (or at least an investment) in every company that has his name---Consolidated Edison, Commonwealth Edison, Detroit Edison, and the rest.

telco_mtl

join:2012-01-06
reply to PX Eliezer70
said by PX Eliezer70:

said by highwire2007:

What I think is preposterous is the term "hydro pole". "Telephone pole" or "utility pole", sure. But a water pole?

It looks especially silly to us Americans that you call all electricity "hydro".

AFAIK about half of Ontario's electricity is from nuclear plants....

And even Quebec has at least some electricity from nuclear and from fossil fuel, not even counting what they generate from hot air.

the one nuke is being shut down and the fossil fuel plants are only in the magdelaine islands/north because the grid doesnt reach. the typical consumer in quebec 99% gets its power from hydro


HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable
Ok, so its Hydroelectric generated, but it's still freakin electricity that's on the poles or in your houses...

I've always wondered about the use of Hydro to call an electric utility company or the infrastructure on city streets, Hydro Pole, Hydro Vault, etc...

Is this terminology exclusively Canadian?
--


PX Eliezer70
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
said by HiVolt:

I've always wondered about the use of Hydro to call an electric utility company or the infrastructure on city streets, Hydro Pole, Hydro Vault, etc...

Is this terminology exclusively Canadian?

Totally.
»schoolsincanada.com/Canadian-Sla···ases.cfm

It's one of the cute things about you guys.


HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
I guess i have to start calling them "Nuke Poles", cuz certainly the electricity in Toronto is Nuclear generated.