An incident around a fire pit at a Burnaby home is headed to court.
According to a statement of claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court, Souma Shokrollah is suing the renters of a property at 6541 12th Ave. and the owners of the property, which is listed as the City of Burnaby.
The renters, Paul Bottomley and Roberta Bottomley, are also both named in the suit.
Shokrollah claims she suffered injuries as a result of fire in a fire pit at the home back on May 14, 2014.
In the claim filed in late July, she said she was invited to the residence by the couple and was sitting around a fire pit when Paul Bottomley, without warning, poured an accelerant on the fire.
The suit claims Shokrollah, who is described as a sales consultant, sustained injuries as a result of the fire including burns to her body, scarring, psychological injuries, and pain and suffering.
She’s seeking general damages for having suffered and continuing to suffer pain, loss of earnings, future wage loss and health-care costs, among others.
The suit claims the alleged fire incident and resulting injuries were caused by the negligence of the defendants; the city specifically because it was the landlord.
The Bottomleys are accused of being negligent for constructing an unsafe fire pit, failing to obey City of Burnaby bylaws and failing to obtain a permit for open burning, while Paul Bottomley is accused for pouring an accelerant onto an open fire.
Both the city and couple have filed responses to the suit denying the claims.
The city said it entered into a tenancy agreement with the Bottomleys for the unit back in 2005.
Court documents state the Bottomleys asked and received permission to remove raised garden beds to build a swing set, but the city claims the couple built a gravel area without its knowledge.
The response denies the city permitted the Bottomleys to use or operate an outdoor fireplace or to build an open fire on the property.
The city’s response claims negligence on the part of Bottomleys for failing to comply with the terms of the tenancy agreement and bylaws and for using an accelerant on an open fire and for failing to take proper steps to avoid an accident.
The response also claims negligence on Shokrollah’s part for failing to take reasonable care of her own safety, sitting near the fire when she should have known an accelerant would be used on an open fire and failing to avoid the alleged hazardous condition on the property.
The Bottomleys were last to file a response on Oct. 2, also denying the claims in the lawsuit.
The couple said the plaintiff, who was a friend of their son, had on at least two other occasions prior to the incident sat around the fire where an accelerant had been used.
The couple’s response claims the incident occurred solely as a result of negligence by Shokrollah for failing to take care of her safety, for wanting to start a fire, and positioning herself in way she should have known was unsafe.
