On September 1 day, 2000, around 2 1: 40, a personalized shop named "Backstreet Boys" suddenly caught fire in Xidan Street, Xifeng District, Qingyang City, Gansu Province. Shopkeepers and passers-by quickly put out the fire and called the police at 1 19. 1 10 patrol will arrive at the scene in 3 minutes. They organized people to put out the fire with washbasins and buckets, but the fire was difficult to control. Unexpectedly, the most anticipated number 1 19 is always busy. 1 10 patrolmen and people at the scene called 1 19 over and over again. Ten minutes later, the line is still busy. In desperation, someone called the first captain of the fire brigade. Thirty minutes later, the fire truck rushed to the scene, but by this time the fire had been put out, and the 20-year-old shopkeeper Wu Liang had been burned to death, and the clothes and other items in the house were reduced to ashes.
The fire went out, but Wu Shenghua, the father of the deceased Wu Liang, could not put out the fire in his heart.
Since then, Wu Shenghua has been adding fuel to the fire one after another: the fire department did not make a letter of confirmation of the cause of the fire until September 6, 200 1 year, one year later, it was determined that the cause of the fire was caused by the deflagration of gasoline vapor when it met an open flame; Another year passed, and on September 1 1 day, 2002, the Notice of Verification of Fire Direct Property Loss was issued to verify the fire direct property loss of 50,725 yuan.
Shortly after receiving the Notice of Verification of Fire Direct Property Loss, Wu Shenghua, then 50 years old, filed an administrative lawsuit with Qingyang Intermediate People's Court on the grounds that Qingyang Fire Bureau delayed the performance of fire control duties, failed to put out the fire in time, was an illegal administrative act, delayed the identification of the cause of the fire, and the conclusion of damage identification was illegal. Request the court to order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff's son Wu Liang for death compensation124,240 yuan, the plaintiff's mental damage compensation of 50,000 yuan and property loss of 96,765,438 yuan.
After hearing the case, Qingyang Intermediate People's Court held that the fire branch, as a public security fire supervision institution, has the statutory duty of fire prevention and extinguishing, and should maintain the communication equipment and regularly check the communication lines with the telecommunications department to ensure smooth communication. Because the fire station 1 19 alarm line was not unblocked, the fire was not dispatched in time after the fire accident, and the fire was not effectively controlled and put out, resulting in the plaintiff Wu Liang's son being burned to death and all his property being burned, and the fire station has unshirkable responsibility for this; After the fire was put out, the fire sub-bureau failed to investigate the scene in time, which caused the plaintiff to fail to deliver the rented house in time, further expanding the plaintiff's losses. Accordingly, the court confirmed that the fire brigade's delay in performing its statutory duties was illegal, and held that it should bear the responsibility for delaying the performance of its statutory duties and compensate the plaintiff for the losses as appropriate. The court ordered the fire department to compensate Wu Liang for death compensation of 62 120 yuan, property loss of 152 17.5 yuan and rent loss of 13200 yuan, totaling more than 90,000 yuan. The court rejected Wu Shenghua's request for mental compensation.
Qingyang City Fire Branch refused to accept the appeal and appealed to Gansu Provincial High Court. In their view, the public security organs should be defined as an emergency rescue work, and it is inappropriate for the first-instance judgment to identify this kind of social welfare assistance as a specific administrative act and bring it into the scope of administrative litigation for judicial review. In addition, although Wu Shenghua suffered irreparable losses in the fire accident, it was not caused by the fault of the fire branch, but he was at fault in the following two aspects: first, he caused the fire artificially; Second, they lack common sense of fire fighting. After a fire, they only insist on calling the police, instead of going to the fire department to call the police immediately when the phone is disconnected, which leads to alarm delay. The fire department also pointed out that the department responsible for ensuring the smooth flow of fire communication lines is the telecommunications enterprise, not the public security fire department.
At the end of June 2003, the Gansu Provincial High Court made a final judgment: the grounds for appeal could not be established and the original judgment was upheld. Now, the case is in the implementation stage.
Six years ago, 1 19 became the defendant and won the case easily.
When did the sacred 1 19 begin to be put in the dock? Yes1March, 998. At that time, the case of "the first national complaint 1 19" in Fushun, Liaoning Province was also the headline news of many media. 1997165438+1October 20th 10, a fire broke out at the home of Zhang Yanfu, a citizen of Fushun. Zhang Yanfu and his neighbors called 1 19 to call the police. You can dial several phones, but I still can't get through. In desperation, we dialed 1 10, and with the help of 1 10, the fire truck arrived at the scene at 12: 03. However, as the fire lasted for nearly two hours, Zhang's property was completely reduced to ashes. The next day, the Zhang family continued to try to dial 1 19 with the company phone, which lasted for nearly five hours and never got through. Fushun Post Office made a public call to the mayor and found out that the reason was that the mechanical disk of 1 19 was out of order.
The Zhang family asked the post office to compensate for certain losses, but it was rejected: this was a mechanical accident, and the failure of the 1 19 number plate could not be zero.
1In March, 1998, Zhang Yanfu sued Fushun Post and Telecommunications Bureau and Fire Bureau in Xinfu District Court, claiming a total of 75,000 yuan. The plaintiff's reason is that it is the defendant's legal obligation to ensure the smooth flow of fire alarm calls, but the defendant has not fulfilled this legal obligation; According to the relevant provisions of the General Principles of the Civil Law, citizens and legal persons who violate the contract or fail to perform other obligations, as well as infringe upon other people's property and person through fault, shall bear civil liability.
However, the judge adopted the views of the two defendants and held that the law did not stipulate that the post and telecommunications departments should be liable for compensation for line failures. The only provision in Article 38 of the Regulations on the Administration of Posts and Telecommunications in Liaoning Province is that the post and telecommunications department should repair the telephone fault within 72 hours after receiving the repair report, and Fushun Post and Telecommunications Bureau eliminated the line fault about 1 hour after receiving the repair report the day after the fire broke out, so it should not be liable to the plaintiff. Xinfu District Fire Brigade rushed to the scene to put out the fire after receiving the patrol report, and should not be responsible for the plaintiff's property losses. The judgment rejected Zhang Yanfu's claim.
This hot case, the first case of "prosecution 1 19" in China, ended in frustration for the plaintiff. Zhang Yanfu, the first person to eat crabs, got a case acceptance fee of 2,900 yuan for nothing. However, the influence of this case in the legal field is far-reaching, which was discussed in a special article in a legal magazine.
If we compare the Qingyang case in Gansu with this case, we will find two differences. First, Qingyang case is an administrative lawsuit, and this case is a civil lawsuit; Second, the courts in the two places have different understandings of the responsibilities of fire control institutions. The courts in Gansu all believe that the fire department has the responsibility to check the communication lines with the telecommunications department regularly to ensure smooth communication, but the Xinfu District Court has not assigned this responsibility to the fire brigade.
The road to prosecution 1 19
Maybe we should use the idiom "One wave is higher than another". Zhang Yanfu of Fushun, Liaoning lost the case, but his bold move still inspired and inspired other fire users who were full of resentment against 1 19. Since then, the hot cases of "suing 1 19" have gradually increased in the local media.
1999 February 12, a market in Jiaonan city, Shandong province exploded and caught fire. The fire soon sealed the door of a department store wholesale store. The owner, Zhang Yijia, and three other people who happened to be in the store failed to escape and were buried in the sea of fire on the spot. On July 5, 2000, the family of the deceased sued the Jiaonan Public Security Fire Brigade in court, claiming 850,000 yuan.
The original told me: "the fire brigade is only 3 kilometers away from the fire, but only 30 minutes after receiving the call for help from the fire, a fire truck drove to the fire." When the victim's younger brother, Zhang, cried for firefighters to save their relatives who were sealed indoors by the fire, they were indifferent, and the spray gun of the fire truck stayed on the ground for a few minutes. Later, someone picked up the spray gun and sprayed it for a few minutes, and there was no water in the car ... "The plaintiff also quoted a large number of witness testimonies to confirm that many people called 1 19 as soon as the fire broke out, but the plaintiff found that it was obviously because the fire brigade was unattended at the end of the year, or someone was on duty but left the post without authorization.
Four months later, Jiaonan City Court rejected the plaintiff's claim on the grounds of insufficient evidence. The court held that, first of all, the time of the fire in the evidence cited by the plaintiff was contradictory and could not be mutually confirmed. Some proofs are 15:00, and some are 15:30. These testimonies all prove that the time for the fire truck to arrive at the scene is "30 minutes later". By analogy, the fire truck arrived at the scene at 15: 30 or 16, but in fact, the fire truck only arrived at the scene once, so it is impossible to arrive at the same fire scene at two different time points. Secondly, Zhang claimed that he told one of the firefighters that "my brother was inside", but he did not remember the specific characteristics of the firefighters, so it was difficult for the court to confirm. In addition, the court also held that in order to obtain state compensation, the illegality of the act must be confirmed first, and this case cannot confirm that the defendant delayed performance and was lazy in performing his statutory duties.
Compared with the weeping of the families of the deceased in Jiaonan City, Shandong Province, the indictment 1 19 in Xianning City, Hubei Province is a bit "black humor".
On the afternoon of 200 1 April 181,the home appliance warehouse of private owner Xiong Laoban in Xianning City, Hubei Province caught fire. Three days later, Boss Xiong sued 1 19, demanding compensation of nearly 40,000 yuan. It turned out that when calling 1 19 to call the police, the voice prompt of "this machine owes money" actually came from the fire hotline. Later, I called 1 10 to contact the fire brigade. As a result, eight air conditioners were burned and damaged due to the delay of fire fighting for nearly half an hour. The leader of the fire brigade didn't believe this statement after learning it: 1 19 is a dedicated line, which only calls in and doesn't call out. How can it be overdue But it's true to try it with a mobile phone. It is even more unfair for the Municipal Telecommunications Bureau to hear the news: even if you eat leopard gall, you dare not stop at 1 19!
What's the problem? According to the later investigation, Xianning Fire Brigade has two fire telephones, the first one is modified from the original 8255430. At the beginning of 200 1, a policeman of the fire brigade used the telephone number "8255430" to ensure Internet access. From/kloc-0 to March, the Internet access fee was more than 300 yuan, so when the police dialed 119, the above-mentioned "arrears" prompt appeared on the first phone.
I don't know if the fire brigade knew that it was indefensible and compensated some privately, so that the lawsuit didn't go on. Anyway, Boss Xiong sued Xianning 1 19.
At noon on February 20, 20001year, a serious fire broke out in Yuhu Shopping Mall in Wenling City, Zhejiang Province. Afterwards, more than 30 affected business households also indicated that they would sue Wenling Fire Brigade. Please look at their complaint: "Yuhu Shopping Mall burned once, and the fire brigade was guilty!" 》
"At 0: 30 in the morning of February 20, a fast food restaurant on the first floor of Yuhu Shopping Mall caught fire. Many people immediately called 1 19, but no one answered the fire brigade. Seeing that more than ten minutes passed and the fire was still spreading, we quickly sent people to the fire brigade by motorcycle. After the emergency report, the motorcycle turned around, but the fire truck didn't arrive until 12: 17: 00. The first fire truck arrived at the scene, but at this time, 47 minutes passed in vain. Due to the delay of rescue time, the fire is getting fiercer and fiercer, and the scope of fire is getting bigger and bigger. However, after the first fire truck arrived, they forgot to bring a wrench. They went back to get the wrench, but they couldn't find the fire hydrant. When the property of shopkeepers and onlookers was swallowed up by the fire, they were as anxious as ants on hot bricks. Everyone helped find the faucet and found it. As soon as the faucet was turned on, there was no water, and because there were few firefighters, I was so scared that I couldn't connect the water pipes firmly. The water pipe is firmly connected, because there is no water power, even the second floor can't be photographed. This how to put out the fire ... "
However, the fire department does not admit that the fire fighting is invalid, but thinks that the fire scene is complex and it is too difficult to put out the fire.
These affected households claimed to sue the fire department, but they didn't sue and didn't see the following.
Two fires occurred in Lankao and Qinyang, Henan Province in the winter of 20001year and in the spring of 2002, which were similar to those in Wenling, Zhejiang Province: 1 19 was difficult to put out, the fire truck was late, and the fire hydrant was waterless. Although no casualties were caused, it caused huge property losses. The program "Legal Time" of Henan TV Station raised that sensitive question: Who should bear the legal responsibility for this? It can be mentioned that those fire users who complained angrily to the TV station still did not take action.
It cannot be said that those who use fire are timid. It's easy to say "sue 1 19". It's too hard to win. Take the lawsuit in Jiaonan City, Shandong Province as an example. The court demanded that the fire time provided by the plaintiff in multiple pieces of evidence must be consistent, and the plaintiff must clearly remember the specific appearance characteristics of firefighters, otherwise the evidence is insufficient and it is difficult to confirm. This is too harsh for those fire users who suddenly collapsed, panicked, cried and shouted.
Fire disputes have been similar to doctor-patient disputes.
This fire-fighting dispute may not be entirely the responsibility of the fire-fighting unit, but at least it shows that some fire-fighting households are dissatisfied with the fire-fighting unit, and the contradictions and conflicts caused by it have become more and more frequent and serious. This is a bit like the doctor-patient relationship now. On the one hand, you can't live without it. There is a problem, I can't find it. On the other hand, you are often dissatisfied and full of grievances. This is a sign worthy of attention. The reporter believes that the reason for this phenomenon is that some fire users have unrealistic expectations for the fire unit and are easy to vent their anger on the fire unit. It seems that the work style and fighting level of some fire fighting units also need to be improved.
Of course, the best way to solve fire disputes is law. The previous problem was the lack of effective legal supervision over fire fighting units, which damaged social equity to a certain extent and was not conducive to fire fighting. Now, this situation has finally encountered setbacks in front of two courts in Gansu. Although, the controversy surrounding this judgment will certainly last for a long time.