Water damage to PET scanner at Dumont hospital results in $1.2M lawsuit

The New Brunswick government is suing three ​companies for $1.2 million over the water damage caused to a multi-million PET/CT scan at Moncton's Georges-L.-Dumont Regional Hospital when the overhead plumbing system failed.

Meanwhile, the companies involved have filed cross-claims against each other. There are also allegations the province, at the request of hospital officials, pushed to install the expensive machine in the hospital's $73-million addition before the addition was completed.

"While there are numerous allegations in the pleadings, the narrative of this matter suggests that the Province, at the request of the hospital staff, wanted to install the PET/CT machine before the work on the addition was complete," states Court of Queen's Bench Justice George Rideout in a ruling on a preliminary motion in the lawsuit.

Peerless Consulting Ltd. was to inspect the system to ensure it conformed with the design and the system met specifications.

"Not making any judgments with respect to the allegations made by the parties, the PET/CT was installed and the valve … leaked which caused damage to the PET/CT," states Rideout.

"Fingers are now pointing in all directions as to who bears responsibility," states Rideout.

In a statement of claim filed in the Court of Queen's Bench on Sept. 6, 2013, the province seeks damages from Foulem Construction Ltée of Caraquet, Architecture 2000 Inc. of Moncton and Peerless Consulting Ltd. of Riverview. Foulem Construction and Architecture 2000 Inc. have each filed cross-claims against the other defendants in the case. MCW Consultants Ltd. is named as a third party in the lawsuit.

Province's claim

In January 2009, the province announced a $73-million, two-storey expansion of the Dumont hospital.

The 10,800-square-metre expansion was to include spaces for a PET/CT scan, a new power-generating facility and additional space for psychology, respiratory therapy, social work and an enlargement of services to deal with kidney ailments and problems.

The province and Foulem Construction signed a standard construction contract on June 24, 2010, to build the addition. Architecture 2000 was hired by the province on April 2, 2009, to design the addition while Peerless Consulting was hired on July 25, 2011, to provide site reviews and tests of all equipment installed.

In its statement of claim, the province says Foulem, or a subcontractor it hired, installed a half-inch trap primer water pipe with a motorized control valve to automatically control the discharge of water from the pipe in the space between floors that was directly above where the PET/CT machine was located.

The job specifications under the construction contract called for a control value with a rating of 125 pounds per square inch to be installed. However, the province says in its claim that the valve that was installed had a rating of only 30 pounds per square inch and "was therefore insufficient to meet the requirements of the job specifications under the construction contract."

On March 22, 2012, Peerless Consulting conducted a test on the valve and it failed, resulting in flooding occurring between the floors, alleges the province.

'The water flooding the interstitial space leaked through a ventilation duct in the ceiling of the room below the interstitial space, onto the PET/CT scan machine located in that room," says the province's statement of claim.

"The leaking of water onto the PET/CT scan machine caused irreparable damage to various parts of the machine. As a result of this damage, the parts required replacement at a total cost to the Plaintiff of $1,201,350.68."

The province contends the defendants failed to take reasonable precautions to avoid the risk of water damage to the diagnostic medical machine during the installation, inspection, commissioning and operation of the value.

The allegations contained in the statement of claim and the cross-claims have not been proven in court.

Foulem counter-claim

In its statement of defence, Foulem Construction contends the flooding incident and the resulting water damages were caused "solely by the negligence" of the province at and prior to the commissioning of the system.

Foulem says the province's negligence includes:

- Carrying out the commissioning test in which the valve broke in a negligent or improper manner.

- Locating the PET/CT scan directly below a P-trap, drain, source of water, or any other hazard.

- Failing to take any measures to protect the PET/CT scan during the commissioning test.

- Failing to take measures to avoid flooding or leaking from the valves, trap or drain in question.

- Failing to heed advice or recognize the dangers of locating a drain directly over the PET/CT scan unit.

- Providing specifications calling for a "ball valve" to be supplied when a "gate valve" or other type of equipment or control was required.

The lawsuit that was initiated in June 2013 has yet to go to trial.