Front Page  »  

Cal Fire sues In-N-Out for fire in rural Arroyo Grande

November 24, 2019

By CCT STAFF

Cal Fire filed a lawsuit last week against the In-N-Out burger chain seeking approximately $1.2 million, the cost of fighting a 2017 fire in rural Arroyo Grande which the chain was responsible for starting.

On Sept. 20,  a worker was mowing dry grasses and brush, on a hot and windy day, at a property the chain owns at 9815 Huasna Road. Chaff built up on the deck of the tractor, which was ignited by a hot clutch, and then blown off setting fire to the dry grasses, according to the lawsuit.

The fire scorched 245 acres in the four days it took firefighters to put it out.

Cal Fire accuses the owners of the property of neglect. According to the suit, the tractor was not properly maintained and the driver permitted the fire to spread.

Twice this year, on March 13 and Aug. 30, Cal Fire sent a letter demanding payment for the cost of the fire, but In-N-Out management did not comply.


Loading...
Related:


15 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

so if the state takes over PG&E, can they sue themselves if they start a fire?


11

Guess I’m going to buy a few more lunches at In-N-Out to help pay for the mistake of their farm hand. Is this a wealthy sacrificial lamb being use to set an example for all of us? Having to sell your property to pay for a mistake will likely raise the future property taxes collected too. Hmmm?


7

Gubment funded services sue to provide gubment funded services. ?


12

So let me get this straight, In n Out hired a weed abatement contractor to mow the weeds on a lot they owned, as prescribed by the Fire Dept, a small brush fire ensued and now wants $1,200,000 for doing their jobs?

So many things wrong with that:(

So anyone mowing their yards or fields should be required to carry a liability policy of at least $5,000,000.00?

Should the bill that was sent to In n Out only reflect the extra cost of services, we are already paying them for sleeping and polishing their Fire Engines etc.

Cal Fire heavily promotes defensive fire prevention distances and weed abatement around structures, should now add another layer of bureaucracy, all mowers should be licensed and inspected by them, including farmers, home owners and weed abatement contractors!!!

New way to collect taxes hidden as fee’s, i’m surprised they haven’t thought of it already:(


11

They are suing to recoup your tax dollars spent to put the fire out. Putting out vegetation fires is extremely expensive. Costs include fire retardant and fuel for the tankers, food and logistical support for the firefighters, hired private firefighting equipment (bulldozers, water tenders, etc), assistance by hire to local government firefighting agencies, and many other costs. This is the same thing CAL FIRE is doing to PGE. They always attempt to recover costs when the fire is a result of an illegal or negligent act. This is always done to protect the taxpayer and replenish the tax dollars from the California Emergency Fund spent fighting the fire. Fighting these large fires is not part of the regular operating budget and recouping these costs does nothing to enrich CAL FIRE or put money in any fire department budget or in any firefighters pocket.


-7

What a load of CR*P. The fire service is funded by tax dollars. If they cannot handle their responsibilities without bankrupting a small business owner, new leadership is required in CalFire. Just the idea that there is a notion that business owner was negligent should have some pencil pusher out of a job. If my home catches fire will CalFire look for a reason that I was negligent?


-2

Your comments make it obvious you don’t have all the facts…not your fault.


CAL FIRE (and every other fire department) is funded for initial attack (basically fires that can be contained/controlled within 2 hours). All fires that extend beyond initial attack are paid for out of an emergency fund—this is a fund the legislature puts money into every year. Think of it as self insurance. When a person or a company sets a fire that escapes their control they have committed a crime per the CA Public Resources code and the law requires CAL FIRE to attempt to recoup the public’s tax dollars that were spent due to the negligence/crime of another. This is the same thing that happens in court for other negligent acts (restitution and damages). The money that is recouped by CAL FIRE goes back into the emergency fund to fight the next large fire…it does not go into the departments budget.


1

Usually down-votes mean you brought up a salient point or expressed compassion.


0

Don’t these guys include “firefighting” as a recurring cost in budgets?


20

Cal Fire is being paid by taxpayers whether they work or not. Charging for services rendered amounts to double dipping. I’m all for cutting them off the taxpayers’ payroll and let them be self-funded by billing for services rendered.


18

Does the fire service get funded on a per incident basis or through our taxes – they cannot have it both ways. If they think they are due $1.2 million for the Arroyo Grande Fire they need to return all tax monies to those who thought that when you call 911 you don’t expect an outrageous bill.


25

Now is Amtrak going to have to pay for putting out fires their sparking brakes cause? What do we pay our taxes for? Pretty sad statement about poor old Cali.


27

If California or one of the county and or city agencies responsible for putting out those fires did sue Amtrak, a federal agency, you’d be payin’ the bill for both the plaintiff(s) and the defendant’s representation, and, any possible judgment or settlement. All I’m sayin’ is be careful what you wish for…


-4

That’s called deep pockets syndrome.


19
1 2