Hangzhou oaks 17-year-old boy accidentally fell! Whose responsibility is this?

This matter is a problem between property and developers, and they must be responsible for this matter.

First, developers cut corners.

The place where boys chase the building turns out to be a board with the same color as the floor, which has no bearing capacity at all. Under normal circumstances, developers must use cement to cap the top floor. Even if the interlayer is waterproof, the bearing capacity of the top cement has relevant standards. However, in order to save money, the developer didn't seal it with cement at all, just covered a board and got it. The developer of the boy falling from the building has an inseparable responsibility and must be responsible for the boy, but if the construction is carried out according to normal construction standards, such a tragedy will not happen.

Second, the property did not take corresponding protective measures.

The property is also responsible and must be responsible for this child. According to the property, the child entered the 48th floor by picking locks, but the monitoring showed that the child only took a mobile phone with half-sleeved shorts after coming up, and there was no tool for picking locks at all. Moreover, there is no condition for picking locks after reading the scene, that is, the property staff let the children in without locking the door.

Moreover, there is no sign of any safety hazard where the child fell. The color of the board is the same as that of the cement. The property says it can bear 80 kg, but it can actually bear the load for the time being. Let's discuss why we don't put the warning bar in an unsafe place. If the child is forced to go up with the warning bar, it is his own reason. It is the responsibility of the property to lock the warning bar or not. The property said that it paid 50,000 yuan for humanitarian compensation, which was confusing. It is the dereliction of duty of the property that will cause such harm to the children. The property completely failed to fulfill the corresponding prompt responsibility and safety protection responsibility. The property must bear the main responsibility for this matter and make corresponding compensation, instead of finding various reasons.