Welcome Companies Consumer Survey
Claim Experiences Press Releases Speakers' Corner Related Links
R.P.Insurance Adjusters Inc.
a division of Lindsey Morden Claim Services
Limited
T G A and Son General Contracting Ltd.
The Alex Taylor General Contracting Co. Ltd.
Below is a letter detailing problems with the fire restoration and handling of contents following a fire at 25 Salem Ave. on the 13/11/95.
Commercial Unions response
Commercial Unions response to this letter was to pay these companies for their services.
Response from R.P.Insurance Adjusters Inc.
The response from R.P.Insurance Adjusters Inc.was to authorize payment for these services as well as services which were not performed.
Response from The Alex Taylor General Contracting Co. Ltd
When we refused to authorize payment for these services as well as work which was not performed the response from The Alex Taylor General Contracting Co. Ltd was to place a lien on our home.
Response from T G A and Son General Contracting Ltd.
The response from T G A and Son General Contracting Ltd. was to seize our contents which they had in storage and put our property up for public auction.
Text of letter outlining our concerns
Without Prejudice
B.Shuttleworth
183 Montclair Ave
TorontoMay 22nd, 1996
Mr. Pilkington
R.P.Insurance Adjusters Inc.
200 Consumers Rd.
Suite 608
Toronto, Ontario
M6J 4R4Dear Mr. Pilkington,
I understand that you have had a number of discussions with my wife, Selwyn Owen and Al Gardner regarding our grave concerns at the pace and quality of the work being performed by Alex Taylor Contracting.
Mr. Gardner wrote to you at the beginning of April regarding the roof repair. His words address our concerns more eloquently than I could.
"...This repair has been done in what is a generally accepted manner using wire and shims. This is not the manufacture's accepted way of actual installation but is a make shift way of repairing. We cannot do same in a proper manner and we recommend total stripping of the south slope and repairing the north..."
We have repeatedly told anyone who would listen that a make shift repair is not an acceptable replacement of the loss of our contents or our home.
In your letter to us in February you assured us that the repairs to our home would take two months and that you were budgeting an additional month as a contingency. Three months later I understand that you have told my wife that the repairs will take an additional two months or more. As you know this delay necessitated moving our family to new accommodation at not only a financial but also an emotional cost to all of us.
In an effort to help contain the cost of repairs, Selwyn Owen suggested using the old slate from the north roof slope for the repair of the south slope and a mix of new and old slate for the repair of the north slope. Rather than removing the slate from the top rows on the north slope in order to properly replace this slate, ATC removed the slate from the middle of the roof and replaced it in the manner described - a make shift repair using wire and shims. The result is that not only the south slope but also the north slope must be stripped in order to properly replace the slates in the manner specified by the manufacturer.
My wife and I have brought to your attention both verbally and in writing, the damage inflicted on our contents through the indifference of TGA in the careless handling and inappropriate and unauthorized cleaning of our contents. The same appears to be true of ATC.
Following my return from overseas I went to our home with Selwyn Owen to find no one working on the site and the possibility that no one had been working on the site for some time. Our home was not being properly maintained and secured.
There was evidence that rain was entering through the open front window on the first floor and had started to buckle the newly laid subfloor.
The opening for this living room window had no support with the result that the brick archway and wall above had started to shift. The proper repair of this neglect will affect the whole front facade of our home.
The basement to the rear of our home had been badly flooded. This is not the first time that water has mysteriously penetrated the basement possibly promoting rot in the stud wall plates. This is a situation that could have been avoided by insuring that the floor drain in the south stair well was not blocked.
The bath tubs on the second and third floors had been chipped.
The wood work, doors, windows, frames, and floors showed innumerable signs of damage.
As you know the Solarium which continues to be subjected to what Al Gardner chooses to characterize as alleged leaks had still not been covered or repaired.Water continues to penetrate the glass panels, wood work and walls. Even more pronounced was the water penetration from the broken sliding door. I am advised that the sill plate area will almost certainly have to be replaced when the door is removed. I can only wonder at how far this deterioration of our home must continue before it is acknowledged and rectified.
The cedar frames in the back basement bedroom and the back first floor bedroom had still not been treated for smoke damage.
None of the broken windows had been repaired.
Water had stained the hardwood floor in the first floor dinning area possibly from a leak in the plumbing.
Many areas of tongue and groove flooring on the third floor were moving as though unattached to, and unsupported by the joists below. Other areas had been top nailed and the flooring unprofessionally cut and installed.
As you have seen for yourself the red pine flooring that was removed had been patched in a make shift manner with yellow pine. I understand that the intention is to finish the floor in a forlorn experiment to determine if new yellow pine will match old red pine. Then presumably the floor will be replaced as it should have been in the first place?
As you have also seen, the same is true of the red pine floor on the 2nd floor north west front room in spite of the fact that the complete replacement of this floor was authorized by you before ATC started work on our home.
As well other gutting in other areas that are already in the scope had yet to be finished, the sauna door and window, the hardwood floor in the 2nd floor south west front room, the whirl pool tub.
The basement shower/tub had been installed incorrectly. It had many areas of flex and had not been set into plaster in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. In addition the rim had been chipped.
Many areas of newly replaced insulation were incomplete and did not offer any clues as to how the vapour barrier could be properly replaced. In the basement the exterior moisture barrier was incorrectly installed creating the potential to trap moisture in the insulation and promote rotting in the stud wall and plates.It appears that much of the newly replaced insulation will have to be removed to install new electrical service.
The floor boards at the 2nd floor front stair landing were moving indicating that the floor boards had become separated from the joists in the process of supporting the second and third floors while replacing the beam, joists and bearing wall below.
The stud wall separating the front room on the first floor from the room at its eastern end was not fastened to the joists above but held in place instead by the insulation on the north wall.
As you know the scope makes allowance for the complete rewiring of the house yet three months after starting the extent of rewiring has not been determined and will likely require further disruption, cost and delay.
Our garden had many piles of loosely located garbage, some located in our flower beds, others in our garbage cans.
The roof still had leaks in a number of places. Again I can only speculate as to how far the resulting deterioration must continue before it is acknowledged and rectified
As you know, in spite of the fact that the scope stipulates the removal of the duct work in the basement from the stairwell to the front of the house and the repair, cleaning and deodorizing of the old ducts, ATC had taken it upon themselves to remove all of the duct work throughout the basement as well as portions of the duct work on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd floors.
In place of the existing duct work they removed, they had substituted a radically altered system which requires intrusive and unsightly bulkheads in various rooms and turns what was a finished basement into a crawl or more accurately crouch space. This radically altered system creates a series of problems which radiates throughout the entire house at the cost of further disruption, expense and delay.
The old remaining duct work did not appear to have been professionally cleaned or deodorized
The scope also specifies the penetration and treatment of undisturbed wall cavities for smoke odour control. The level of smoke odour continues and to date we have received no explanation of how and when these areas are to be professionally treated. Perhaps the intention is to continue to remove various portions of the plaster in various stages as has been the case until now, instead of all at one time, with a corresponding increase in costs and delays rewarded by an increase in profit.
It was our understanding when we purchased insurance from Commercial Union that the Guaranteed Replacement Cost coverage of our home assured us that the full cost of repairs or replacement without exclusion and without limit would be born by Commercial Union should we ever have a claim. I understand that this was discussed in a meeting at John Conway's office in January which you attended and that "code ups" as they appear to be called were identified as a cost of repairs and replacement particularly of older buildings.
As you are aware, following the fire in our home my wife and I received an order from the Department of Buildings and Inspections ordering us to submit application and obtain a building permit to repair the load bearing structures of our home, such as the floor joists, supporting pillars, and wall studs that had been damaged by the fire. During my visit to my home I noted that repairs and replacement of the supporting pillars ordered and approved by the Department of Buildings and Inspections had still not been completed. The next day I received a letter from Al Gardiner in which he informs us that Commercial Union has refused to honour their guarantee to pay the cost of these repairs and replacement.
This apparently accepted industry practice of minimizing the estimate of damage under the guise of containing the cost of our claim seems to provide readily accepted justification and wide opportunities for amplifying the initial damage which our home sustained in the fire as well as opportunities to bill 2, 3 and 4 times for work which if properly assessed should be done once. The added costs in time, money and emotional turmoil are being born by both Commercial Union and my family with no added benefit to either.
The inequities of such a way of doing things serves to drive families such as mine into the necessity of utilizing the services of companies such as National Fire in the desperate hope of protecting their interests.
It is enough that my family has been subjected to one catastrophe. It makes me extremely angry to see us subjected to yet another, as a result of an accepted way of doing things that rewards indifference,incompetence and deceit. What is Commercial Union prepared to do to honour their obligation to my family, protect their own interests and put things right?
Yours truly,
Brefni Shuttleworth
c.c. John Conway
Selwyn Owen
Help others to make an informed decision
.....If you are interested in sharing your claims experience with others take the time to add your story concerning an insurance company, adjuster or contractor to our Speakers' Corner or Consumer Survey. In the past this individual experience has been unavailable with a few exceptions, other than as part of a statistic on consumer satisfaction. Become more than a statistic by sharing your experience with others.
Welcome Companies Consumer Survey
Claim Experiences Press Releases Speakers' Corner Related Links
Commercial Union ( CGNU Group ) Consumers'
Forum
c/o B.Shuttleworth
P.O.Box 235
Postal Station E
772 Dovercourt Rd.
Toronto, Ontario
Canada, M6H 2V0
brefni@cuconsumers.org
copyright © 1997-1999 by Brefni Shuttleworth