'Didn't happen' or 'haven't happened' before

[subhajit123]

Hi everyone, Should I use 'haven't happened' or 'didn't happen' in the context?

Yesterday a tragic incident happened near Delhi. At least 50 people died in the rail accident. The government and railway officials took the responsibility of the accident. It is not that incidents like that didn't happen/haven't happened before but the number of deaths never rose to that point.

 

[Raymott]

Yesterday a tragic incident happened near Delhi. At least 50 people died in [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] a rail accident. The government and railway officials took [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] responsibility [STRIKE]of[/STRIKE] for the accident. It is not that incidents like that haven't happened before but the number of deaths [STRIKE]never rose[/STRIKE] have never risen to that point.

That's how I would write it.

 

[Roman55]

I would say, "...but the number of deaths has never risen to that point."

 

[GoesStation]

The number of deaths has never risen to that point. "Number" is singular, and the verb has to agree.

 

[Tdol]

In BrE we tend to use the number has risen, but a plural after a number of. It keeps learners on their toes and gives them something to complain about. ;-)

 

[GoesStation]

In BrE we tend to use the number has risen, but a plural after a number of. It keeps learners on their toes and gives them something to complain about. ;-)

In the number has risen, "number" is the subject and requires a singular verb. In a number of them have risen, the subject is the plural "a number of them".

 

[Raymott]

PS: Thanks for the suggestions of "has never risen". I'll leave the original so the following posts are understandable. Indeed, if I was thinking about that part of the grammar, I would have used 'has'. I was focussed primarily on changing the tense, and overlooked this point.