Painting “Work In Progress” – Roe Islet Arbutus #2

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

I thought I would ignore the inconveniences of “real life” and spend the evening painting. For a change I am going with a  slide show of the “work in progress” . It is definitely not stellar photography, just some quick iphone shots, but they give a good idea on the progress of the painting.

This is another painting based on Roe Islet, “just” off Pender Island…….technically…..maybe 30 feet off Pender Island…..but still “off”  Pender Island. It is a little islet with a lovely little walk and an endless amount of interesting shaped trees.

This is an 11″ by 14″ painting, and is acrylic on panel. It is close to being finished with just needing highlights, shadows and details. perhaps one more evening of painting.

Today’s W.I.P.’s

painting detail

The start of a new arbutus painting. This time on a panel 11×14 in size.

coffee sweater in progress knit with wool dyed in chamomile, brazilwood and indigo

More knitting. I have sold almost all of my stock. It is a little scary to have no extra pieces made so it is time to knit.

dyeing yarn in lac

More dyeing. This morning it was with lac, later it will be madder.

start of a new fibre art piece on a smaller scale

A natural dye lino cut, printed on a eco print, being stitched. The lino cut dye acted differently. I have to figure out if it is the dye, the fabric or the eco print causing the change.

Today’s weather. Not fun to drive in.

On top of all this a 6 to 7 hour shoot this afternoon and evening. Luckily everything should quiet down photography-wise after this weekend allowing the “works in progress” to become finished pieces.

November 23, 2014 – Trip to the cabin.

Our Trip To The Cabin

reason: Wawanesa REFUSED to do ANY exploration on our insurance claim. Wawanesa even used a reason NOT in the report (a report produced by their associates for the purpose of assessing the claim)  to deny it as did the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds Service……so WE, the ill equipped and uneducated insured, had to do this dangerous work completely ourselves. A cause was manufactured between the report being written and the denial letter being written. Manufactured out of thin air.

————-

time: we left home at 9 am, worked solid at the cabin, ate dinner at 9:50 pm (no lunch) and returned home at 12:17 AM (a 15 hour work day….with our children)

———

temperature: below zero, freezing temperatures in an unheated building

———

cast: my husband, myself, and our 5 children. One child had no feeling in their feet. One child was so cold they curled up into a ball and fell asleep. One child was panicked that the cabin would collapse on them. Wawanesa expects their insured to carry out their own exploration with their children in unsafe buildings.

—————

safety: four different people fell through the floor including one very bad fall and our 10 year old daughter FALLING THROUGH THE FLOOR. We were expected to deal with slicing open  walls concealing electrical and water, deal with mold, debris, falls, rusty nails, insulation, ice, water, and there was also some very old tile (that may or may not contain asbestos…it would be from “that” era). This is with 5 children roaming around in a freezing cold building. Clearly safety isn’t one of Wawanesa’s top concerns, denying claims on items NOT EVEN IN THE REPORT is their main focus.

————-

just for fun: Wawanesa delayed dealing with this claim until it was so late in the year that we wouldn’t have water to prove the claim because our water is seasonal (manipulative?) . They also delayed it so long that we are unable to fix the situation, claim or not, jeopardizing and compromising our investment through their petty manipulative ways. By the way, we were forced to do this NOW as the report Wawanesa accepted had LIES about when we discovered the problem. We discovered the problem on September 7, 2014….the report said “approximately 2 years ago”. I even have a blog post up showing discovery. Perhaps not “fun” but very dishonest business.

————-

Stay tuned…………..if Wawanesa continues to ignore us there WILL be video…..a lot of video…..

(it shows exactly what they are putting us through as they REFUSED to do exploration even though they sent out a restoration crew who on site REFUSED to look further…….I sense a lot of YouTube in my future…….if a picture is worth 1000 words, a video also adds 1000 emotions and a whole lot of context and reality)

PROBLEMS WITH WAWANESA INSURANCE?

————

PS. By the way we have been told TWICE that we HAD to do our OWN EXPLORATION. The first time was by the Townsend & Leedham adjuster,hired out by Wawanesa, on September 29, 2014. The second is indicated in the letter from the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds Service that states “”If YOU are able to determine that the loss is not……” etc. ….after all the construction professionals supplied by the insurance industry refused to LOOK.

One more PS. …..two interesting things, first the letter from the Ombuds Service isn’t SIGNED by anyone, no one would take responsibility. Second, the independent adjuster didn’t forward all the clauses in our insurance policy to us, only items 7-12, concealing the rest. The independent adjuster went through our policy, tried to find a clause to get them out of the claim, even though it WAS NOT in the report, and then consciously conceals the rest of our policy from us so that we can not see what is actually covered. MANIPULATION or CORRUPT…you choose (I’m easy going).

If you want to read more about this situation click HERE (the discovery)

and HERE (the October 5th post)

and HERE ( lies on the insurance report……..we found even more today!!!)

and HERE (and the Ombuds Service collaborates without ever seeing the property…and a real person doesn’t even sign the letter!)

Oh, and one more little thing…….if our suspicions are right, we “followed the water”, we now suspect why we only had one septic pump out this year (compared to three or four in previous years)…….just a hunch…..but then we can’t “prove” it as WAWANESA manipulated the situation so that we would have no water to prove the claim.

Can you think of any other reason it takes 3 weeks to get an adjuster out to look at an interior water claim?….and that has happened TWICE with this claim….they consciously delayed the process knowing that the water would do more and more damage ……just saying…….the calendar doesn’t lie….6 weeks of delays……for interior lying water. We couldn’t “secure” the situation because they had to “see” the water. We were forced by Wawanesa to let our property deteriorate.

Celebrate!

Celebrate! It is birthday time!

(Please click on the images to view full size.)

 

Water Pumps, Frogs and Memories of May 2013

At the cabin October 2014.

 

So I have been watching the stats for my blog over the last 12 hours and noticed significant interest in our water situation. I even noticed a few people looking back to a cabin post from May 2013 where we were talking about setting up the water system for the season.

It was really fun to re-read the post and step back in time, so this post is going to be a little reminiscing and a little bit of comparison.

The water pump.

 

As I re-read that post from over a year ago I was thinking, I bet most people on municipal water have no idea what a water pump looks like for a cabin. So I thought I would share a picture. Luckily  on October 4th I had taken a picture of the pump .

The pump sits in the pump house, a tiny room connected to our cabin yet accessed from the outside. The pump sits on a metal grate so if there is ever any leakage the water goes down into a pit below. The incoming water comes from an external 1250 gallon tank through the water line you see on the right. The water then goes through the pump and goes into the cabin through the water line on top. A little different to just turning on the tap for municipal water.

The external water tank.

 

I would like to thank whoever was reading that post for reminding me of it. I was really fun re-reading it and having the chance to think about cabin life and how it changes from year to year. The post from May 2013 discusses my husband hooking up the pump and fixing 4 leaks. As I look at the picture of our pump it tells the story. Look at how overdone the clamping is on our pump on the top section. Three clamps. This is the story of that weekend. That weekend while he re-hooked up the pump after winter, he would hook up the pump and it would leak at that junction. He would re-hook it up and another leak. Did it again at another angle and the pressure popped the tubing from the fixture. So after four attempts he said “forget the one clamp system”, clamped a longer section with multiple clamps and he never had a problem again. I am sure anyone who has ever set up one of these pumps is laughing at the number of clamps, our “security measure”, but it is better to be safe than sorry.

May 2013

May 2014 – no water in the back field

 

The picture above is also from that blog post of May 2013. This is the area behind the cabin beyond our fence. Our yard is raised about 2-3 feet from the area at the back that becomes wet in the spring. Looking at that picture I started to think about how the various years are different at the cabin. Actually the first thing I thought was “this year we had no frogs in our yard”. When we first owned our cabin we had tons of frogs in the spring; the kids would chase them, and hold them, and there were really big ones living in our wood shed. I am not sure if we even saw one on our property this year, quite sad really. I know we saw frogs in ponds at the Wagner Natural Area west of Edmonton, and frogs in Gaetz Lake in Red Deer (Alberta, Canada), but none at the cabin.

Frog in Gaetz Lake, Red Deer, Alberta. May 13 2014.

 

I mentioned this to my husband as I re-read that blog post and then another thing hit me, the post talks about the septic holding tank, that is buried deep in the ground,  filling with groundwater in the spring. This is a real “thing” in our area. I remember many years ago, going through many of pump outs in the season. Once my husband asked the pump out company if it was normal, and they laughed and said it is happening to everyone and that they couldn’t keep up with the work load. This evening, after reading the post I turned to my husband and said “How many pump outs did we have this year?”. He wasn’t sure so we went back through our cheque book. In our true geeky style we decided to look back over a few years. In 2011 we had three pump outs. In 2012 we had four pump outs. We can’t find the 2013 cheque book at the moment, obviously in a “safe place” or filed with my business receipts. In 2014 we only had ONE pump out.

Cabin marigolds 2013.

 

I knew the pump out bills were way down, and that I had to water the flowers a lot more, and that we had no frogs, but it is really quite surprising when you put it all together. The question is, was it a “dry year” or is it actually “climate change”? It is a little surprising to compare the years, to see the flowers struggle more for water and to see the frogs disappear, but when you realize the groundwater issue (even for a tank buried so deeply) has also disappeared that is interesting and worrying.

I truly  thank he person that brought my long ago blog post back to my attention. I love looking back but I am also now thinking to the spring. I wonder if we will have frogs…..I certainly hope so……..but the trend isn’t looking so good.

Wawanesa COMPLETELY IGNORES Insurance Issue ( Wawanesa Ombudsman supports lies and fictionalizes a second cause)

Does anyone remember a blog post from a few days ago? Remember the one about our cabin?Remember the insurance report that lied about when we found the issue, lied about the construction of our cabin, and the construction and restoration crew (sent by the insurance industry) that refused to look for the problem.

Yes…it rings a bell doesn’t it.

It probably was the blog post that made you think back to your own insurance claims where you were royally screwed. It was the blog post that made you kick yourself because you are now wondering what lies were written in the report. Seriously I didn’t mean to give you sleepless nights. I didn’t mean to induce another ulcer. I did want everyone to be aware of just what is going on through my OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

If you would like to read the original post click HERE!!!!!!!!

 

But before we get to the fun let’s share another piece of relevant information. On Friday November 14th  I sent out the original blog post to SEVEN different people/departments at WAWANESA to express my concern regarding how our claim was being handled. NOT A SINGLE PERSON FROM WAWANESA HAS EVEN TRIED TO CONTACT US.

NOT OUR ADJUSTER.

NOT THE ADJUSTER’S MANAGER.

NOT ANY OF THE OTHER MANAGERS.

NO ONE.

Not a phone call. Not an email. Not a smoke signal. Nothing. (But we DO know Wawanesa knows about it thanks to our very awesome broker……it is great that someone is AWESOME!)

So in the spirit of consumer protection, I am including below the email I sent  so everyone will know who will actually ignore you and never get back to you at Wawanesa. Feel free to click on the below image to view full size.

(click on image to view full size!)

In actual fact the only interested parties were our broker and “The Office of Consumer Affairs”. Wawanesa did not contact us all week long.

————————————————————————————————————

Oh wait, breaking news……..  minutes ago I received an email from Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service after no contact at all all week long. I will include it just below, click on it to enlarge:

We’ll discuss this email in a moment. But before I get to it, continue reading.

Today I received this, the letter indicating Wawanesa will not be covering our loss:

Would you like to have a read? The whole package we received is scanned below. Please click on the images to view full size. I am all about honesty and transparency.

I am now going to share a few highlights with you.

Let’s review the dates. On September 29th the “independent adjuster ” came out looked around, took a statement, took a few pictures and told US to “find the source”. Our broker told us he has never heard of the insured being told by the insurance company that they are the ones who have to find the source; he says this is unheard of.

On October 4th we went and tried to find “the source”, found fresh water, took tons of pictures and tried by phone to contact every resource we could in the insurance industry to give us guidance. The only one interested was our broker. We couldn’t even register information with Wawanesa.

On October 25th the “independent adjuster” and the representative from Titan Construction drove out to our cabin together in the ‘independent adjuster’s” vehicle. They looked around, took some pictures and agreed to send out a construction crew to LOOK FOR THE SOURCE. Then they went for lunch together.

On OCTOBER 29TH, 2014 , a date OMITTED FROM THE TOWNSEND AND LEEDHAM letter posted above, the construction crew came to the cabin and wrote the report that deemed the claim to be denied. My previous blog post will outline and share the letter, but to give you four main points :
1 – they LIED about when we discovered the problem (we discovered it the weekend of September 7th, 2014, they said approximately 2 years ago….we have a blog post to prove it)
2 – they LIED about the construction of the cabin (they said we have foam underlay….we don’t…their pictures prove it)
3 – they REFUSED to look for the source – the source was never found because the CREW that was sent BY THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY REFUSED TO LOOK (and then this information was omitted in the above letter)

4 – to quote their report that caused the claim to be denied …”My theory is this is a condensation issue.” THEORY. The claim is denied on a “theory”…a guess…..a guess because they refused to look for the source (report viewable below, please click to view larger). However the cause in the “report” is listed as “condensation” but the letter today from the very same independent adjuster who agreed to the condensation claim on November 14, 2014 is now stating “seepage and leakage” as the cause even though this was NEVER MENTIONED in the very report he is using for denial. The report resulting from Titan Construction’s visit to the site of the claim on October 29th, 2014. The date and information was COMPLETELY OMITTED from the letter we received today from Townsend & Leedham Adjusters Ltd (of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada).

Why was this information omitted in the letter today? Why can’t the insurance industry stick to FACTS and TRUTH. Why can’t they be TRANSPARENT and HONEST?

Just to be thorough, the November 14th date was the date the “independent adjuster” told my husband Mark over the phone that the claim was denied. The independent adjuster who will never reply by email so that we have information in writing and always calls us on a “blocked” phone number. We can’t trace emails, we can’t trace phone calls, plus we have misrepresentation of the claim and lies on the report, and then a whole new cause manufactured on the letter dated November 14, 2014  from Townsend & Leedham Adjusters Ltd……….impressive isn’t it.

So remember the lie on the report about when we found the damage? Here is that page of the report (click to view full size).

Guess what surfaced in the letter today……………

….why the quotations? Do you see it? I will help you…….

“An action or proceeding against an insurer under a contract must be commenced, in the case of loss of damage to insured property, not later than 2 years after the date the insured knew or ought to have known that the loss or damage occurred.”

We knew about the damage in September of 2014. They flat out LIED in the report. We are being called LIERS, the report is SLANDERING us.  I am sorry but Mr. Hunter DID NOT CONFIRM that he put in the shims approximately 2 years ago….it was September 2014…we have the Home Depot credit card record to prove it.

Just for fun read the wording again…….this part……. “or ought to have known that the loss or damage occurred.”.  How can anyone “ought to have known”? In our case it was COMPLETELY CONCEALED plus there was no evidence of an excessive amount of water being consumed to create damage (you’ll understand this when you read the very end of the blog post). The source is still concealed because Wananesa and their associates REFUSED to look for “the source”.

Let me ask you, are you required to climb up on your own roof to assess hail damage? Are you required to play with your home’s wiring after an electrical fire? Are you required to track down the criminal after your house has been broken into, or find the arsonist that burnt your house down? Probably not, but this is what they expect us to do.

———————————————————————————————————————-

Let’s continue.

Let’s move on to today’s email from Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service. I’ll paste it again here, click to enlarge.

Let me show you a close up:

The Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service has deemed the damage to be caused by “continuous seepage and leakage”. Hmmm, yet the “report” that caused the claim to be denied  declared, and I quote, “My theory is this is a condensation issue.” Which is it? “Continuous seepage and leakage” wasn’t in the report. I just checked. The term “seepage” and the term “leakage” are NOT USED AT ALL IN THE REPORT. In the time span from November 14th to today November 20th the Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service has FICTIONALIZED, perhaps with the assistance of the TOWNSEND & LEEDHAM adjuster, A WHOLE NEW REASON FOR THE DAMAGE WITHOUT ANYONE EVER HAVING SET FOOT IN THE CABIN.

Compare the paperwork included in this blog.

THEY MADE IT UP TOO.

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE REPORT TO SUPPORT THEIR CLAIM OF DENIAL. THE REPORT STATED “CONDENSATION”, IT NEVER MENTIONED “LEAKAGE OR SEEPAGE”.

The Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service made up this information (perhaps with the assistance of the Townsend & Leedham adjuster) just like the report made up when we discovered the issue and made up that we have foam underlay. There is no proof or information in the report to verify this claim. Surely the ombudsman would at least look at the report responsible for denying this claim.

WHERE DO THE LIES END?

————————————————————————————————————————–

So let’s refer back :

I would like to point out that “the source” has NEVER been  discovered. We DO NOT KNOW IT IS SEEPAGE OR LEAKAGE BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO LOOK. The Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service has based their decision on this:

Two tiny cuts in the wall. This is the ONLY EXPLORATION the insurance industry would do. Evidently this is the only place that water supply lines run in our cabin in their professional opinion. Let me share a diagram.

This is our bathroom. The tiny orange area is the only area they cut to look. Somehow water mysteriously gets from our pump house to this area without supply lines according to the insurance industry. Can someone tell me how the exploration is at all fair? Water runs to the kitchen, to the bathroom sink, to the toilet and to the shower yet the ONLY place they cut open was in front of the hot water tank.

The “source” has NEVER been found because WAWANESA REFUSED TO LOOK. UNFAIR. We have a “theory” of condensation and then the “out of thin air revelation” by the ombudsman and Townsend & Leedham of “leakage and seepage”.

Surely after paying for insurance for YEARS on THREE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES (at the same time!) we at least should be granted the fairness of them LOOKING and ASSESSING the situation fairly.

WAWANESA REFUSES TO LOOK FOR THE PROBLEM and are ASSUMING…….ASSUMING……it is “continuous seepage and leakage” (wherever they got that information from). They have NO PROOF because they REFUSE to look and “continuous seepage and leakage” wasn’t even in the report. This has been fictionalized by the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service after a panic decision by Townsend & Leedham to include it in their letter of denial with no proof of it whatsoever.

This claim has been denied on lies and assumptions and Wawanesa’s Northern Alberta Ombuds service SUPPORTS THESE LIES AND ASSUMPTIONS.

Did the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service address the LIES about when we discovered the damage – NO.

Did the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service address the LIES about construction of the cabin – NO.

Did the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service address the fact that exploration for the source was NEVER DONE to a satisfactory level – NO.

Has the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service ever seen the cabin or the situation – NO.

Has the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service even talked to us – NO.

Did the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service endorse the fictionalized  cause to be “continuous seepage and leakage” – YES!!!!!!! It wasn’t even listed as a cause in the report that denied our claim.

What a farce.

Wawanesa accepts lies and uses it as documentation. They deny a claim on assumptions and theories and fiction. Then the ombudsman pulls a whole new cause out of thin air , with the help of Townsend & Leedham, with no fact to substantiate it.

The report that they used to deny our claim was filled with lies. The lies we had addressed with our Wawanesa adjuster over the phone by our broker as we sat in his office. The lies were addressed in the previous blog post, with documentation of when we FOUND the problem in September 2014. Wawanesa knowingly accepted a report that they KNOW has lies in it to deny our claim.

Our insurance broker said that the insurance industry must have  code of ethics that they must follow. Is accepting outright lies part of the code of ethics? Is the ombudsman creating imaginary causes out of thin air (with assistance from Townsend & Leedham) with no proof at all ethical?  A blog post proves “discovery” was in September 2014. The insurance report pictures PROVE there is no “foam” in our cabin. Their own pictures. Check out the previous blog post for verification. Their own pictures discredit their own report. The report and the ombudsman deny the claim on completely different issues, without any proof.

I am sorry but when a company can’t even compare the pictures in their report to the words in the report, when the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service accepts a report with lies when we have addressed and proven otherwise, when the ombudsman fictionalizes a cause with no proof (with the help of Townsend & Leedham), and when an insurance claim denies on assumptions rather than fact, the company is one of two things….INCOMPETENT OR CORRUPT.

In the eyes of Wawanesa Insurance the insured is guilty until proven innocent.

We were never treated fairly.

To sum up the situation:

– Wawanesa accepted lies about when we discovered the damage – slander

– Wawanesa accepted lies about construction of our cabin – the lies are proven by cross referencing the pictures in the report compared to the words in the report

– Wawanesa REFUSED to do a thorough exploration (below is the only exploration carried out)

– Wawanesa denied a claim based on THEORIES listed in the report (phone call by the Townsend & Leedham adjuster on November 14th and the report he provided us) and then DENIED A CLAIM BASED ON MANUFACTURED FICTION  (the letter we received today “stated leakage and seepage” terms NEVER used in the report). Why even do a report if they are just going to create whole new causes out of thin air?

– the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service then denies the claim a second time on a FICTIONALIZED CAUSE, a cause never even mentioned in the report

– Wawanesa also has never addressed this picture, the one of LOCALIZED water coming from somewhere. If they would have followed the water they would have found “the source” but they REFUSED to look. Wawanesa even REFUSED to put the picture in the report or address the issue even though they have had this picture sent directly to them in an email. They have refused to address this water even though their own “independent adjuster” and the construction crew, and the author of “the report”, have had their own hands in the puddle. Here is the picture:

Soaking wet. Localized, not seepage. A puddle. This is the problem, it isn’t shown or talked about in the report. Nothing in the report, visually or written , accurately reflects the issue. Surely an insurance report is required to reflect the situation accurately. Surely an insurance report is required to tell the truth. What we have discovered is that the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service doesn’t care about truth or accuracy, it simple is a non issue….lies, lack of accuracy, refusing to find “the source, and assumptions and theories are the order of the day.

This situation is no longer just about “the claim” or “the water” or “the source”. This situation is now about SLANDER where a report LIES about when we found this problem. This situation is about LIES where a report LIES about the construction of our cabin. This situation is about MISREPRESENTATION of the actual claim by the independent adjuster and the report. This situation is about FAIRNESS and that every insured should be entitled to real exploration of the problem not the insurance industry refusing to look. This situation is about an insurance company so corrupt or incompetent that the report denies the claim on a “theory” of “condensation” while the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service denies the claim on “seepage and leakage” when that term wasn’t even in the report that caused the claim to be denied. The ombudsman denied the claim on a FICTIONALIZED CAUSE. The cause has never been found, the insurance industry refused to look.

Shouldn’t a report be based on the TRUTH?

Shouldn’t a report be based on FACT?

Shouldn’t the insured be treated FAIRLY?

Shouldn’t the report and Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service at least agree on why the claim is being denied. The Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service never looked at the cabin, never had any further information, they made it up. They decided to just come to another conclusion and pulled “leakage and seepage” out of thin air along with the help of the “Townsend & Leedham” and their sudden change of mind, it wasn’t even in the report. They are denying claims without even a fictionalized report to back them up. Pure fiction. The Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service denied coverage based on PURE FICTION.

Wawanesa does not base their claims on fact. Wawanesa does not base their claims on fairness. Wawanesa will do whatever it takes to wiggle out of a claim.

Code of ethics? I’ll let you decide.

———————————————————————————————————————————————

Cabin Water Information

Now let me share a little water information regarding our cabin, as it is quite interesting, and everyone refused to listen. The construction crew was stating condensation and groundwater even before they entered the cabin (as I said, never given a fair chance to show the real situation).

-First regarding “seepage and leakage”, the ground under the floor joists is bone dry and vented, the bottom joists are bone dry as well, the water damage has come from the top down. None of the pictures in the report show that , neither do the words.

– Second, the wet spot is localized. This much water can only be forming from a teeny tiny supply line, it is the only source of water. It isn’t the roof (no staining or swelling) and it isn’t coming in through the exterior walls (again no staining or swelling). It isn’t groundwater, the ground is dry beneath the joists.

 

The construction professional put their moisture meter inches from the wet spot and it showed “no moisture”. He cut a hole where it said “no moisture”. I put my hand in that hole and it was soaking wet. All that separated the moisture meter from soaking wet wood and insulation was 1/2 inch drywall….how can it show “no moisture”? Isn’t that curious?

The report deemed this wet spot to be condensation; how can condensation form when there is no heating, the space is vented, the wet area is completely open to the room, and the puddle ONLY FORMS WHEN THERE IS WATER IN THE SUPPLY LINES? “Condensation” is the cause listed in the “report” that caused our claim to be denied. How? (Please see the report below, click to enlarge.)

 

– Third, water is only accessed and available to the water supply lines May to October with an average usage of 12 two day weekends per year. Water only actively flows through the pipes of the cabin for 24 days a year. Otherwise there is no water available for seepage or leakage. This year we used 750 gallons ( I documented that we had 500 gallons left in an email to the independent adjuster) of water for a family of 7 including filling up a hot water tank (possibly 40 gallons). Let’s do the math:
750 gallons- 40 gallons =710 gallons of used water for the year (hot water tank was full)
710 gallons divided by 7 people is 101.43 gallons  of water per person for the year
101.43 gallons of water (per person) divided by 3 gallons (estimate) per toilet flush = 33.81 toilet flushes for the year for one person
33.81 toilet flushes divided by 24 days of use = 1.41 toilet flushes per person per day

***this doesn’t include hand washing, dishes washing or watering trees and plants

This damage isn’t continual leakage or seepage as we would be going through huge amounts of water. This can only be happening when we are actively using water ; a total of 24 days a year. Our water tank has the gallon markings on it, we would be able to watch it go down disproportionately. We can physically see the amount of water we use as we are on water haul. Our lines are only actively in use 24 days a year,  water is in the supply lines May to October until we drain off the water for winter. No water is available at all October to May. No water is accessible when we are not at the cabin May to October as the pump has the power turned off to it. The water holding tank is outside, if there was ever an issue it would simply water our lawn. Other than when we are in the cabin for 24 days a year, water is not being pumped through our supply lines.

The empty water tank behind our son. We would actually “see” the water going down if it was constant leakage and seepage.

 – Fourth- when the area was first opened up there wasn’t a massive amount of mold, you could find an odd teeny patch if you looked hard enough. This hasn’t been wet for years. The whole area would have been full of mold if this was a situation ongoing for years. The soaking wet sheeting used on the subfloor fell apart in your hands, a chip board type of composition, the top was discolored the center was wood colored. The water had dissolved it.

If anyone had bothered to assess  the situation and listen to us they would realize the construction does not allow for condensation and that the water system is only active approximately 24 days a year.

Instead we get theories and manufactured causes without proof from the Wawanesa Northern Alberta Ombuds service.

 

 

————————————————————————————————————————-

Now I am also going to share another little “FYI” which Wawanesa really needs to take note of. When things like this happen I do send them out to the media, depending on my mood the odd blog post has gone out to over 100 outlets in an evening (by the way the total media sends aren’t all listed on the email above…I took a break to eat dinner!). They get exactly the same email that Wawanesa received. Wawanesa is probably sitting there saying “Squeeky wheel, moaning cow, no one is picking up this story, what a stupid (fill in the blank!)”. This is definitely the thought process as no one got back to us (until moments ago)…..but they are missing the point. I am not aiming for “media coverage”, I’m aiming for “water cooler gossip”. Think about it. “Water cooler gossip” is the most damning thing that exists. People embellish, over exaggerate a story, try to out do one another and essentially one little story has the potential to become urban myth. Even better, people hate dealing with insurance companies, the insured are treated like criminals, we are guilty until proven innocent , so they are going to LOVE a story like ours. Happily we are also approaching the “festive season”, happily we will  be mixing “water cooler gossip” with alcohol at company Christmas parties….this story has potential to grow legs of its own. People NEED to know this story.

Wawanesa had plenty of opportunity to stop this. We sent emails to our “independent adjuster” that were forwarded to our “Wawanesa adjuster”. We sat in our broker’s office while he attempted to bring the situation to our “Wawanesa’s adjuster’s” attention. We sent out the previous blog post. Attempt after attempt and COMPLETELY IGNORED.

Just how much bad press do they want, because the first post is receiving hundreds of views a day.

———————————————————————————————————————–

Edited to add this LINK:

Wawanesa states on the third page of their 2013 Annual Report the following values:

VALUES

•

We treat others in a respectful and truthful manner.

•

We conduct business with integrity, honesty, consistency and fairness.

•

We act ethically and lawfully.

•

We take pride in making service a priority.

•

We encourage collaboration, innovation and excellence.

•

We support the communities in which we work and live

Spot the difference with what we have experienced!

Wawanesa Insurance Claim Denied Based on Lies – (Reasons to view your insurance report.)

Anyone who has been following the blog for a while knows we have a cabin. You may also remember a certain discovery that we made in September of 2014. For anyone interested you can read the first blog entry HERE and the second one by clicking HERE. I am quickly discovering it is beneficial to describe a huge portion of our everyday life on my blog as it seems one needs evidence when a situation becomes unfair or someone chooses to state blatant lies against you. This is one of those times.

The short version of what you are about to read is we have had an insurance claim denied based on a report that actually contains LIES. We are now in the situation of “having nothing to lose”. If we have nothing to lose we NEED to SHARE THE SITUATION WITH THE PUBLIC so that they can protect themselves.

We have a cabin full of water. A cabin where we can now not correct the problem for 6 months because we are on a seasonal water system. A cabin where we can now not correct the problem because the insurance industry took their own sweet time over dealing with it even though we CONSTANTLY stressed it was time sensitive due to both weather and water supply. A cabin deteriorating by the day because the insurance industry REFUSED to look at where the problem REALLY is.

Originally the below text was going to be a letter to the supervising adjuster of our claim with Wawanesa. After careful thought I came to two conclusions. First the public needed to know what the INSURANCE INDUSTRY was doing and how straight out LIES are being written in the reports that are causing claims to be denied. Secondly, I had no interest in months of butt-covering excuses and being passed off from person to person in a game of bureaucratic musical chairs….a game known to try to make people give up. The fact is the insurance industry is playing a game, but when they step into the forum of telling lies, accepting lies, not cross-referencing information, and denying claims on reports that claim ACTUAL LIES ABOUT THE INSURED it is time to make the situation public.

EVERYONE NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON.

EVERYONE NEEDS TO GET ACCESS TO THE REPORTS THAT THEIR INSURANCE CLAIMS DEPEND ON……OR YOU WILL BE VICTIMIZED LIKE US.

So let’s proceed. Here is the letter that earlier today was going to be sent to our Wawanesa adjuster who was overseeing  an independent adjuster from Townsend & Leedham out of Edmonton, Alberta. I have decided in turn to just forward her the blog post; it will be more explanatory.

The letter reads:

November 14, 2014
RE: Wawanesa Claim #969112
Dear Sirs,
I am writing in response to a report that was provided in which Wawanesa decided to use as a base to decline our claim.
In short we have a completely concealed water situation that still remains concealed to this day even after Wawanesa and their independent adjuster from Townsend & Leedham had sent out construction professionals from Titan, a construction and restoration firm, to explore the source of the damage. In short the two individuals refused to look for the source, were looking for excuses even before they entered the cabin as to why it wasn’t sudden or accidental and took no notes whatsoever during their time in our property. NO NOTES at all, then wrote a report to deny our claim.
The “source” of the problem is within an area of 17.5 square feet. This is the area that our water supply lines run. The ground beneath our cabin is bone dry, the crawl space is vented, the ceilings and walls of our cabin have no leakage, discoloration or swelling. The wet spot is very localized in the area where our supply lines run. If we do not drain off our water lines completely in between usage more water appears in the very localized spot.
The water is coming from a very specific spot, as shown in a photograph I have shared with the independent adjuster, has been witnessed by the independent adjuster, has been in a picture evidently forwarded to the overseeing Wawanesa adjuster, and has been witnessed by Bxxxxx of Titan Construction while in the company of the independent adjuster from Townsend & Leedham. THEY PUT THEIR HANDS IN THE PUDDLE.
Amazingly this picture DID NOT APPEAR IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM IN THE REPORT THAT CAUSED OUR CLAIM TO BE DENIED.
Upon reading the report one can see the agenda has been to deny the claim right from the start. Let’s review the report, I shall copy and paste it below:
Hi Mxxxxx,

Regarding the Hunter cottage located at #8 Horn beach.

My lead carpenter, Rxxxxx, met with Mxxxx from Compass Plumbing yesterday to inspect and try to determine the cause of the water and rotting floor joists.

(1.) The plumber drained and removed the HWT to give access to my carpenter to open the adjacent wall containing the water supply lines. As you can see from the pictures the lines are good. And the wall cavity has no signs of water damage.

Rxxxxx had a look underneath at the floor Joists. His comments were that he was surprised at how rotten the wood was, and although the joists weren’t pressure treated it would still take years to get to that point. He also observed that in the bathroom just in front of the vanity, between the joist and the sheeting, there were some shims. Mr. Hunter confirmed that (2.) approximately two years ago he put in the shims to shore up the floor as it was staring to get soft in that area.

Based on our inspection last Saturday and Rxxxx’s inspection and comments Wednesday, My theory is that this is a condensation issue. There could be three issues at play here.

(3.) 1) There is no subfloor under the tub. It’s just kind of hanging there. Condensation could run off the underside of the tub and water could be affecting the floor under the laminate.
2) This could be a condensation issue with the floor in general. Robert said that he removed some more laminate and the laminate was completely dry but (4.) the foam layer between the laminate and the OSB was quite wet on the underside between the foam underlayment and the OSB. Sorry if this sounds confusing. To be clear, the foam underlayment was dry on top but wet underneath against the OSB.
5. 3) There are no gutters on the cottage. When it rains, much of the water would run under the cottage. And then evaporate up into the subfloor and Joists.

One thing is clear Mxxxxx, there is nothing sudden or accidental about this claim In my opinion. Whatever is causing this issue has been happening for years. Furthermore it looks as though Mr. hunter knew about a problem some time ago when he put the shims under the floor to shore up a soft spot.

The Hunter family seem like very nice people so it’s difficult to write a unfavorable report. I’m not sure how this will affect their claim, positively or negatively But I also know you value my honest opinion.

Pictures attached for your review.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,

Bxxxxx Vxx Uxxx

Let’s examine the problems with this report:
1. The plumber drained the tank, but then the carpenter cut two holes in front of where the tank sat and called it good. The tank did not even need to be removed for this. When we asked them to cut further back and explore further along the line they REFUSED. The line from where they cut runs east approximately 3 feet, north at least another 5 feet and then runs further to the pump house. They refused to look at all. Period. It was at this point that we completely knew we were being set up. They refused to look even though a very specific area is all that is wet.
2. It was the weekend of SEPTEMBER 7, 2014 when we went to shim up the floor, not TWO YEARS ago. I have a blog post to prove it: https://htheblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/07/not-all-things-are-as-they-seem/

FRAUDULENT STATEMENT THAT IS COMPLETELY UNFAIR. Complete fabrication and a complete lie, and this is the report that is causing our claim to be denied.
Why did they say “approximately 2 years” , perhaps because you only have two years to make an insurance claim. The report was trying to question the credibility of the claim.
3. First of all the wet spot is only at the one end of the tub away from the taps. Once the floor was opened up and started to dry out the wet spot was strongly apparent. This picture was not even included in the report even though at the time I even had the area masked off with bright green masking tape and I pointed out the spot to them at least a hundred times that afternoon and they continued to ignore me. Condensation requires heat meeting cold. The building is unheated. The crawl space is vented. The tub has not been used for 4 years as we did not have a working hot water tank installed. The ground is dry, dusty dry; condensation would drip. Condensation would not happen at one end of a tub, the end of the tub where the tub is no longer touching the floor. Condensation would not still be occurring because the whole are is completely opened up. It CANNOT scientifically be condensation.
If it was condensation, why did Bxxxxx, writer of this report , send out a crew when he himself had seen the situation just days before. Milking the system or “not condensation”, you decide.
4. There is NO foam layer. NONE.
Here is the order: 1-laminate, 2-vapour barrier, 3- sheeting (possibly OSB), 4-joists
This is evident in the pictures provided to the insurance company on the report. It is poly, you can see through it. It is clear as day in the pictures supplied with the report.
More fabrication of the situation, they are even lying about the construction.
5. If the gutter theory held, first the ground under the cabin would be wet, not dusty and dry. Second there would be staining, and swelling on the ceiling and walls, but there is none. Third the bottom of the joists are bone dry, so it isn’t ground water. Fourth the wet area is localized.

Beyond all of this the report COMPLETELY OMITTED pictures of the actual wet spot. Complete omission. Complete misrepresentation of the situation. This was completely avoided.
REFUSING TO SHOW THE TRUTH. WE HAVE HAD OUR CLAIM DENIED ON LIES.
The independent adjuster forwarded all of our emails to the overseeing Wawanesa adjuster of our claim. Our insurance broker confirmed this as we sat in his office listening to the phone call he had with the adjuster this afternoon, November 14, 2014. If she had been bothered to cross reference any of the information she would have realized the report was filled with lies right down to when we discovered the problem. There is a vast difference between September 7, 2014 and “approximately 2 years ago”.
The independent adjuster also assured our broker that it was “100%” not a supply issue, “100%”, yet they refused to look any further than the stud located directly in front of the hot water tank. Another lie, how can anyone claim to be sure 100% when they refuse to open up the walls and ceiling.
Fact is the report is filled with lies. Titan, the construction company provided by the adjuster, refused to look any further.
Come and look at the cabin and see for yourself. Localized completely concealed water and a construction firm hired by the insurance industry that completely refused to find the source.
We brought ALL of these items to our independent adjuster’s attention over a week ago, Mxxxx Bxxxx of Townsend & Leedham, who has actually witnessed personally the fact that we HAVE NO FOAM LAYER, and that we discovered the problem in September 2014, yet he used the report to deny our claim.
Here is the thing, the insurance industry keeps saying you MUST FIND THE SOURCE. The insurance industry sends out a construction and restoration firm that REFUSES TO LOOK FOR THE SOURCE and the LIES in their report. Fact of the matter is, the way this has gone, even if we personally open up the walls ourselves, walls filled with electrical and water, the INSURANCE INDUSTRY WILL SAY WE DAMAGED THE LINE DURING OUR DISCOVERY.
This feels like reverse insurance fraud, something the public needs to know about.
Debra & Mark Hunter

 

Just for good measure I will also include scans of the email of the report that I received. Please click on the email to view full size. I am all about transparency:

Why I am blanking out names I have no idea. It doesn’t seem very fair to protect those who write lies in a report about you personally (My husband worked on the floor September 2014 as indicated in the blog post , not approximately 2 years ago!) or lies about the property’s construction (we have no foam underlay).

Let’s carry on with the topic of “foam ” underlay. Lets play a game. I am going to show you six pictures, pictures that accompanied the report to Wawanesa. Pictures taken by Titan Construction. Pictures used to create a case against the claim. Here, take a peak:

Did you catch it?

Hint: no foam underlay, the vapor barrier is poly. The pictures contradict the report. The report Wawanesa is using to deny our claim.

Ps. did I mention those doing the report took NO NOTES the whole time they were in the property and that they were looking for excuses BEFORE they even entered the cabin….looking for things like ground water….they were trying to discredit the claim before walking in the door (more about that later!).

Let’s carry on with the “picture game” as it is pretty fun.

Did anyone notice the picture that is missing? The picture missing from the report? The picture sent over and over to the independent adjuster who in turn forwarded the emails to the over seeing adjuster? The picture that tells the story…………..

wait for it………..

wait for it……………….

Taaaaaa Daaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

May I present to you “localized water”………….kind of blows a hole in the whole “condensation theory”, doesn’t it?

And for good measure one more…………..

…..how it was when the construction professionals came to do their “exploration of a source”. The green tape I had put down as I had been taking phone pictures and I wasn’t sure what the resolution would be (resolution was pretty good!)

But amazingly a soaking wet isolated area, green tape and me pointing out the area at least one hundred times over the course of the afternoon was not enough for the picture to be included in the report, the report that caused our claim to be denied.

Soaking wet fresh water was insignificant in a water claim.

Let us carry on on the topic of “exploration” or finding the “SOURCE” as the insurance industry likes to use that term.

Let me show you the extent of the exploration…………………..

Yep, that’s it. They REFUSED to look further. REFUSED. The construction/restoration company provided BY THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY “REFUSED” to look further.

Now let me give you a giggle. See the bottom hole? It looks a lot like this picture below doesn’t it?

Probably because it is the same hole. The bottom picture is one of the pictures supplied with the report. Now for the “funny” part, I stuck my hand inside that hole, through the insulation and it was SOAKING WET. SOAKING. By the way the independent adjuster knew all this…..I’ll share that letter in a moment…..but the floor and insulation were soaking wet but they REFUSED to look further.

Now if that wasn’t enough our insurance broker chatted on our behalf to the independent adjuster. Sometimes it is good to get someone else’s take on a situation. The independent adjuster from Townsend & Leedham assured our broker that it was “100% not a supply line issue”………”100%”.

Let’s look at a diagram….I like diagrams.

Anyone spot anything curious? The orange area is the area of “exploration”. I invite anyone who wants to to come out to the cabin and witness that NOTHING else has been opened up. Nothing. Based on two tiny cuts, cut in-line our adjuster is “100%” certain it isn’t a supply line issue.

100%.

You see a ruptured supply line would mean a valid claim. They don’t want a “valid” claim. They want out of it and don’t want to risk finding “the source”.

They refused to look. They lied in their report.

Anyone seeing a pattern?

This is all fact.

This is why EVERYONE needs to review the reports submitted to their insurance company. You need to verify that everything is true.

Protect yourself and get the paperwork. If it happening to us there is a chance that this procedure is epidemic.

I invite anyone or any organization to ask for the paperwork on our claim, you will see everything that is published here is identical to what Wawanesa will have. Check it out. Please.

And just to leave you with some real entertainment, I am going to publish below the letter I sent to our independent adjuster after witnessing the construction workers refusing to look for the source. Remember our independent insurance adjuster….the one that was 100% sure it wasn’t supply line related even though only two tiny cuts were made in the wall……………well have a read………….the whole situation resembled Monty Python’s Flying Circus so feel free to get some popcorn and have a laugh.

The letter from October 29, 2014 reads:

Hi MXXXX,
The almost three hour drive home allowed us a lot of time to think about the situation at the cabin. This is a written account of our thoughts.
Everyone is telling us a little bit of water can’t do that sort of damage, and the plumber is saying the pump should come on all the time, so I decided to run some numbers to approach the situation from a science and mathematical view rather than a personal one.
I thought about water drops I have seen in the past, it is usually a slow accumulation of water until the droplet forms and then gravity sends the drop down to the ground. I decided to take a conservative approach and assume one water droplet fell per minute which would be a very small pipe leak. I then had to come up with a tangible measurement for a water drop, so I took a 2.5 mL measuring spoon and counted the drops it took to fill the spoon. In three tries the results were 15 drops, 17 drops, and 20 drops. For the rest of the calculations I assumed 20 drops = 2.5 mL (the most conservative situation).
The following calculation shows how the water, at a rate of one droplet per minute, accumulates:
1 drop per minute = 60 drops per hour
60 drops per hour = 7.5 mL of water leaked per hour
1 day at 1 drop per minute = 180 mL of water leaked per day
1 week at 1 drop per minute = 1.26 L of water leaked per week
1 month (based on 4.33 weeks per month ) = 5.455 L of water leaked per month
5 months of cabin season water usage (May- Sept) with a calculation of 5.455L x 5 = 27. 279 Litres of water leaked in a cabin season.
As the floor started to “bounce’ beginning of this season we can assume the water damage started at least the previous year which leads us to the calculation of 2 years x 27.279 litres = 54.558 Litres of water dripping unseen on to the floor.
To give a visual, over the span of 10 months that is like pouring the equivalent amount of liquid on to the floor as 13.6395 large 4L containers of milk.
The plumber wouldn’t listen to the concept of hidden, trapped, accumulating water that is flowing down the inside of one of the walls and situating itself hidden under the tub. The plumber kept arguing the pump should be coming on all the time.
This brought me to my next calculation. I know the pump doesn’t kick in for the first few seconds when the water is running, it must be set up so that a certain amount of demand is needed before pumping. I also know that I can rinse my toothbrush in a length of time that does not require the pump to kick in; I’ve been doing it for years. When I got home I decided to measure how much water is used when I rinse my toothbrush. I tested it twice, both times it was bang on 250 mL of water (which both gives a tangible quantity and proves I am OCD!).
Then I decided I wanted to figure out the bare minimum of how much of the waterline had to be emptied of water to engage the pump into action. So I went to Home Depot and measured the internal measurement of the 1/2 inch water supply line used in the cabin. The internal measurement is 11 mm. From here I figured out if I have a minimum of 250 mL of water to trigger the pump and the pipe has a diameter of 11mm, that I would need an pipe length of 657.665 mm (or .66 meters) empty of water to trigger the pump.
At the cabin the plumber waited 5 to 10 minutes waiting for the pump to come on, of course it didn’t, and pretty much decided his job was done. The fact of the matter is it would take 33.33 hours for the pipe to empty to the pump trigger amount of 250 mL. This is why we would never see the pump spontaneously trigger due to a leak, water is used more than once every 33 hours.
I just wanted to share the math with you as we keep seeing fresh water coming from some concealed source and the construction professionals today just would not listen to us. The numbers show the quantities of water that could be accumulating without any detection at all. I think numbers give a nice objective perspective.
I just have a couple more thoughts from today’s experience and supposed exploration to find the source of the problem.
The water causing the problem has to be accumulating in small quantities as it is a case of absorption rather than flow. Flow would have allowed us to hear the water and see the seepage.
The water is absorbing, as under the laminate there is no light or heat to aid in evaporation. This is also evident as mold is minimal. There is not enough heat to grow mold. This also rules out condensation, as condensation needs the hot and cold temperature contrast to occur.
The ground water argument by the plumber also is not logical. First the ground in the crawl space is dry and powdery. Secondly if it had been wet the damp smell would have manifested itself long ago. Thirdly, the wood is wet from the top down not the bottom up when you look at the joists supporting the subfloor. Fourth, the subfloor is a minimum of 9.5 inches above grade. Converting that to metric, it is 0.24 meters. The difference between high and low tide on the west coast (Port Browning, Pender Island – I watch them daily) can be 0.1 meters. We would have to have waves lapping in for this theory to work.
Mark said no matter what, insurance will say “find the source”. This is what we hoped to accomplish today, it is in our best interest to solve the problem once and for all, solving it protects our investment. This has been the fourth trip to the cabin specifically for this insurance claim, two of which both Mark and I gave up work days for. Today, with the assistance of construction professionals supplied by the insurance industry, we hoped to get to the source of the problem.
The problem area, which is visually apparent due to its soaking wet nature , is a 2.5 ft by 7 ft area for a total of 17 .5 square feet.
We had a construction professional and a plumbing professional in attendance. When the pump did not come on spontaneously the plumber lost all interest. I would ask questions like “where do the supply lines lead?” to encourage further exploration and his response was “Straight up.” Both construction professionals were more interested in throwing out wild ideas than helping us locate the source of the issue. When neither will get their hands dirty, but I am crawling and digging around in hopes of finding the source of the issue there is a big problem. At one point in the afternoon, the gentleman from Titan cut off a piece of the 4×8 sheeting and plopped it on over the hole to “seal it up”. It doesn’t fit, a raccoon could fit through the gap at the north end of the tub, but seriously, what was the point in saying anything.
From here the afternoon really improved. The construction professionals started packing up their things to leave, they just decided. They didn’t say anything to us, they hadn’t looked for or found the problem, they just packed up. In a last ditch attempt to find the problem, the reason we had driven for almost three hours and given up work time, I tried to encourage that we continue to look further. No one looked at the back of the hot water tank closet, no one looked in the ceiling where the pipes go “straight up” according to the plumber, no one bothered to wiggle under the tub, no one could even reach into the wall that they had cut open and feel that it was soaking wet. It was an utter disappointment and waste of our time. The cherry on top was when I asked the gentleman from Titan if we could look further into the walls, and he said ” I don’t get paid enough to make decisions like that.”
How can we possibly find the source when the professionals recommended by the insurance industry refuse to look?
It was the equivalent of Mark standing at the curb to look for hail damage.
I will be honest MXXXX, I am still shaking my head from the events of the day. I feel frustrated from the time we wasted. I feel frustrated that no one even wanted to look for the problem. I feel insulted by the suggestions of condensation, especially when they said the condensation was in “high traffic areas” . I alluded to this in one of the previous emails however now that I can write properly I must tell you the rest. One of the “high traffic areas” would have been under the air hockey table, the other is near our toaster….no one eats that much toast (just saying!). We also have the “groundwater” suggestion which would involve waves of biblical proportions lapping across the prairies.
I fear these two construction professionals have now compromised our position. As I have indicated on many occasions, due to the seasonal water system we were forced to drain off the system and remove the pump. This was our very last chance to find the source of the issue . No one wanted to look. No one tried. We put our trust in them and we are now left with nothing.
I hope you received the multiple emails and all the pictures. I imagine as I continued to send them, you could sense the frustration we experienced today. We hoped to find the problem, but the construction professionals had no interest.
Thank you for reading this email.
Debra Hunter

(By the way there are a lot more emails running up to this point if anyone is interested. I like sharing!)

So here we sit. We have a cabin full of water. A cabin where we can now not correct the problem for 6 months because we are on a seasonal water system. A cabin where we can now not correct the problem because the insurance industry took their own sweet time over dealing with it even though we CONSTANTLY stressed it was time sensitive due to both weather and water supply. A cabin DETERIORATING by the day because the INSURANCE INDUSTRY REFUSED to look at where the problem REALLY is.

We’ve been told we can do our own “exploration”, but we know insurance will just say we damaged the pipe when we, the amateurs,  opened the wall. We also know that once we find the issue insurance will then argue that the break isn’t “big enough” or there isn’t enough “water flow” and they will deem it “seepage” not an event that is “sudden and accidental”. The report was very careful to use the popular insurance terminology of “sudden and accidental”…a report that couldn’t even use proper capitalization…..yet the report was planned enough to use the specific insurance term. The report was planned to deny the claim from the beginning.

The moral of the story is everyone MUST GET ACCESS TO THE REPORTS BEING PRESENTED TO INSURANCE. Don’t suffer libelous statements like the ones we are facing. Don’t suffer the corruption.

…..AND PASS ON THIS POST TO EVERYONE!

 

When “News” Is Not Impartial – CBC News and censorship, a bigger problem than the Ghomeshi affair

I like to think of myself as an “informed” person. I listen to the news on the radio. I watch news on T.V.. I read the news on-line. I also follow news on social media as the comments are a great barometer of society’s opinion. For good measure I not only follow news produced by Canadian news organizations, but also British ones; it gives an interesting perspective.

In addition to “following”, I like to interact. Interacting on social media allows your opinion and thoughts to be heard. Sometimes if you watch very closely things happen and situations change because of comments made on social media. Interaction with regards to news events is a very good thing in a free society, it keeps society interested, and involved, and shows many sides to every story. Interaction and social comment can bring about change, out corruption and bring to light more information. Social interaction allows for public opinion, public speculation and public reaction.

Social interaction on a news website should allow for commenting from all sides. News should be impartial. News should be transparent…………….but what if it isn’t?

So let me share a story, a personal story, a story from last night. It involves a CBC story on their Facebook page, a CBC story involving CBC. I had read an “official statement” that CBC had given and a portion of it was “off”. The time-line of the chain of events was also curious if one was to think of what set everything in motion, and what wasn’t turned over to police by CBC right from the start. Something is “off”.  I alluded to the fact that a small portion of the statement made was way too personal for it to have come from an executive and wondered if there was a personal connection to the story, not just a business one. I also pointed out that there were inconsistencies on-line with regards to the executive, information that had come from the executive themself. (It wasn’t a case of playing Sherlock, I compared two items on the first page of a “Google” search…..an interview comment by the executive from a few years ago tipped me off to spend two minutes looking, sometimes a comment makes you look for credibility or lack there of).

So I made a comment. No bad language. Not racist. Not sexist. I just pointed out a few very obvious items and that it was very curious. I’m sure thousands have thought the same thing. Something, at least in the way it is reported in the media, is “off”. I thought it would be interesting to see what others thought. After all that is why CBC places a news story on their Facebook page with comments turned on, to have a venue for social opinion.

Any guesses as to what happened?

Well, two things happened.

First the comment was not approved, CBC would not publish it, they CENSORED it. This happened immediately (which is really interesting as it was between 10pm and midnight M.S.T. so CBC must have someone moderating comments 24/7). First I giggled and thought “CBC has their knickers in a twist.” . Then, of course, I copied and pasted my comment to another site……and then told CBC I had done it ( I like transparency). One could say I don’t deal well with oppression (so much for the helpless female stereotype!).

The second thing happened today. Today I was BANNED from being able to make a comment on ANY CBC Facebook story.

ANY.

The first response of some people may be “so what, you brought it on yourself”, or “its only social media” . I would like those reading to think deeper. Think about the implications. This news outlet is picking and choosing the comments they allow. They are manipulating their reading population by only allowing posts that they deem are acceptable. They are manipulating the public to only see their organization as “the good guys”. They are manipulating the public to only see the “he says/ she says” portion of the news event even though the CBC is deeply implicated in the story if at least one of the allegations are true. And when one random Facebook poster points out something is “off”, it not only censors the comment, but BANS the poster from their whole site.

How can the CBC report this story with impartiality and transparency if they are manipulating the public’s comments?

The CBC does not have to put the story on their Facebook page. They choose to. Not every story in the news is published on their Facebook page.

CBC has chosen to place this story, a story in which the CBC is deeply implicated, on their Facebook page to try and manipulate public opinion in their favor. They will let the “he camp” and “she camp” fight it out ( I bet you’ve figured out the news story by now!),  with vastly more support for the “she camp”, but mention CBC’s involvement and the result is a total BAN from their Facebook page. Whether CBC likes it or not, they ARE part of the news story. Their management IS part of the news story.The story is a threesome: the women, the radio personality, and the CBC.

If the CBC doesn’t like being examined on social media don’t put the story on the CBC Facebook site. That is fine. The thing that is really twisted, crooked and manipulative is removing comments that question the CBC organization. That is manipulating the public opinion and that is most certainly not the job of a news organization, especially one that is a crown corporation.

A crown corporation manipulating public opinion in their favor is a problem.

Using the media that they control, country wide, on tax payer’s dollars, to promote only their own interests and censor and manipulate public opinion is wrong.

How long has this been going on?

What else in this country has been swayed by the censoring of public opinion? No one knows the censorship and manipulation is going on until it happens to them.

CBC, according to their website, pride themselves on “accountability”. You can check out the link HERE.

Here is a quote directly from the page linked above:

CBC/Radio-Canada will keep working to honour and strengthen the trust Canadians place in us by entrenching accountability and transparency in everything we do as a broadcaster and as a corporation.

How can we “trust” an organization that censors?

How can an organization that “censors” the public be transparent?

Why are we as Canadian tax payers paying for such a manipulative and censoring organization?

If all Canadians are paying for this corporation, ALL Canadians should have EQUAL opportunities to voice their opinion within the social media opportunities the CBC provides.

The CBC should NOT play favorites, they should not manipulate the optics of public opinion. If the CBC can not provide equal opportunity on their social media sites for every single Canadian to express their opinion, they should simply provide NO options for comment.

This is an all or nothing scenario. One thing is for sure, an organization paid for by the tax payers has NO right to censor the very people paying their wages.

Until very, very recently I highly valued the CBC. I thought they were honest, reputable, fair; it is what one would expect of a publicly funded crown corporation. Now I know I was wrong. Very wrong.

The CBC isn’t fair. The CBC isn’t honest. The CBC isn’t reputable.

What the CBC is doing is manipulating public opinion to suit their own means. This is very wrong when the CBC exists to  provide Canada with news, and in turn Canadians provide the CBC with their hard earned cash.

If everyone is paying, everyone has the right to be heard. CBC should NOT be allowed to oppress the public’s opinion.

 

 

 

Knit, Purl, Knit, Purl…..Done!

(Please click on the above images to view full size.)

You may have noticed my blogging has been a little less frequent recently. Part of the reason is purely being busy. The last month has been filled with interesting photo restorations, sorting out the cabin (ongoing!), a plumbing issue on the coast (solved by our neighbour Mike!), sorting out a new vehicle after the accident, and a LOT of knitting.

Above are pictures of the latest order which will be on its way to the Whyte Museum Shop in Banff tomorrow. This time a few new items like Coffee Mug Sweaters and Coffee Press Sweaters are included in the order. I will share a few images in the coming days as the pieces are full of stranded knitting fun.

 

www.thehuntergroup.ca

Hand-knit items for gifts and for the home.

Knitting and dyeing by Debra Hunter
Red Deer, Alberta & Pender Island, BC, Canada