Flooded Birch Cliff basement
Residents of Ward 36 whose basements flooded with sewage and stormwater this summer are angry and frustrated after receiving letters from the City of Toronto’s insurance adjuster stating that their damage claims against the City have been rejected.
The letters say that they won’t be receiving financial compensation because an investigation has proved the City was not negligent with respect to the flooding.
The City’s Manager of Insurance and Risk Management, Jeff Madeley, has confirmed that all 217 claims filed by residents of Ward 36 after the July 15th flood have been denied. Six claims filed after the August 10th flood are still being investigated.
The third-party liability claims were filed by flooding victims who weren’t insured or were trying to recoup money for uninsured losses and deductibles.
“I’m frustrated. I’m upset,” says Wendy Batt Brown of Hollis Avenue, who is out $10,000 because her insurance policy didn’t cover basement flooding. “I feel like the City’s done a whole song and dance. We went to those meetings at the community centre and I feel they put those in place to shut us up.”
Crescentwood Road bathroom
Notified via form letters
Birch Cliff News has seen several of the letters from the city’s insurance adjuster, Granite Claims Solutions and they appear to be form letters, with the exception of one paragraph in each that pertains to the claimant’s particular street.
In the letters, homeowners are reminded that the onus is on them to prove negligence when filing a third-party liability claim against the City.
The customized paragraph indicates that Toronto Water conducted an investigation into the conditions of the sewers which included “a review” of inspection and maintenance as well as the results of closed circuit television inspections that were conducted after the storm.
Here’s a sample:
[box] “The city’s records indicate that the stretch of the XX Road sewer servicing your property was flushed in 2005 and 2008. The catchbasins in the area were also cleared in 2009 and 2011. The maintenance activities which occurred prior to the events of July 15th did not indicate any problems affecting the capacity of the sewers. The sewer line was inspected after July 15th as well. These inspections confirmed that the sewers were structurally sound.”[/box]
Dave Daffern in his newly-renovated basement
City says losses due to extreme rainfall
The letters then inform residents that their loss was due to extreme rainfall for which the City is not responsible.
Many residents of Ward 36 say the response from Granite isn’t good enough. Dave Daffern, who lives on Chine Drive and was trying to recoup $5,000 his insurance didn’t cover says he’s disappointed the investigation wasn’t more thorough.
“Two guys came along, they went in the basement. They looked at the hole I said “this is where it came out”. They spent about a minute looking down the hole and walked away again. As if to say we know it’s happened and we don’t want anything to do with it, says Davvern”
Marianne Mills, who lives on Montvale Drive and sustained about $29,000 in damages, says she wants concrete proof, not a form letter with generalities
Marianne Mills’ basement in the Chine north area
Mills is an interesting case because her claim for the July 15th flood has been rejected but she also filed a claim for a second flood on August 10th. When city workers came to her house after the second flood, they found there was a root blockage on the city’s side of the pipe to her house and beyond that a section of the pipe was broken.
“Show me the proof,” Mills says. “In their maintenance they’re supposed to be checking for root blockages. It’s their pipe, not mine. How come they didn’t check into my root blockage? There was 100% blockage from tree roots and a broken pipe. My root blockage didn’t happen on July 14th. This has the case for a long time.
Ian Harvey’s claim for minor flooding on Warden Avenue was also denied, and he says the City needs to be transparent and make the reports and the video footage public.
“I don’t see anybody giving us the reports or giving us the footage. We’ll have to depend on our councillor Gary Crawford to see if he can make those reports public to everybody’s satisfaction, because there’s going to be a lot of upset people.”
Investigation results to be available to victims
This afternoon Jeff Madeley told Birch Cliff News the results of the investigation, which are street specific, will be made available to Ward 36 residents if they contact the City’s adjuster.
Clean-up crew on Crescentwood Road
The skepticism and anger in Ward 36 is not surprising in light of a 2011 report by the City of Toronto’s Ombudsman that found 98% of sewage back-up claims in the past have been denied.
When the report was released, Ombudsman Fiona Crean accused the City of “shockingly bad service” in the administration of third-party liability claims.
Crean studied a five-year period of damage claims from 2005 – 2010 involving 12,449 claims.
Scathing criticism from Ombudsman in 2011
Her scathing report included the following criticisms about how the City dealt with damage claims for basement flooding, fallen trees and potholes.
- more than 90% of claims were denied
- the administrative process was not fair
- claims were denied at the outset, with homeowners receiving a letter saying there was an investigation when, in fact, there was no investigation
- claimants were not provided information about their claims
- adjusters closed files when claimants stopped contacting them
- no one told the claimants when their files were closed
When it comes to sewer back-up claims, the denial rate was even higher – 98% – or 2,399 out of 2,437 claims.
Birch Cliff flood clean-up
Denial Rates for Sewer Back-up Claims
Year Number of claims denied
2005 1105 / 1110 (99%)
2006 171 / 183 (93%)
2007 157 / 161 (96%)
2008 440 / 445 (99%)
2009 456 / 464 (98%)
** Source: Potholes, Floods and Broken Branches: How the City Handles Your Claims, Appendix B, page 50
The City Manager promised to review and revise the system and the Ward 36 floods are the first real test of whether that has happened.
For Ward 36 homeowners, there are some specific areas of concern stemming from the Ombudsman’s report.
Flooded home on Kalmar Avenue with the familiar dumpster out front
“No instructions to deny first time claims”
In 2011, the Ombudsman’s office interviewed a Vice President and four adjusters and studied the company manual for handling claims. The manual stated that all first time claims should be denied.
When asked if this is still the case today, the City’s Jeff Madeley says “there are no instructions to adjusters that first time claims be denied.”
The Ombudsman found that the “review” of sewer claims by adjusters consisted of nothing more than checking weather records from Environment Canada.
If there was a storm on the day of the sewer back-up, the claim was automatically denied, which the Ombudsman called misleading, saying a review of weather records does not constitute an investigation.
Actual investigation, not relying just on schedules
Water levels were thigh-high at Wirral Court, Chine Drive area
The letters that were sent to Ward 36 homeowners include rainfall data but go one step further and provide dates for sewer inspection and maintenance.
In one of her case studies, however, the Ombudsman noted that the adjuster “provided the cleaning and maintenance schedule but no information about whether the sewers on (the) street had been cleaned and maintained within that schedule.”
In the case of this summer’s flooding, the City says the results were not based simply on schedules:
“The responses provided are based on actual records of maintenance and inspection exercises that were reviewed. They were not based on information about scheduled maintenance and inspection exercises,” says Manager of Insurance and Risk Management, Jeff Madeley.
Many Ward 36 residents are skeptical about the denial of their claims and trying to decide how hard they will fight back.
One of them is Wendy Batt Brown who’s trying to decide if she’s up for a David vs. Goliath battle:
“I want to continue to fight this but just being one person I don’t know how I go about proving the city is negligent,” says Batt Brown.
Flooding Meeting July 22, 2012
Marianne Mills thinks the City of Toronto is counting on a divide and conquer strategy in order to save the City money.
“They’re denying it because they know how much work it is to fight,” says Marianne Mills. “If you deny 200 people something there will maybe be 10 who are headstrong enough to pursue until they win. The rest will not fight. I’ve already spoken to a lot of people who say “let it go”.”
Mills is not one to let anything go, however, and is at the centre of a lively discussion on the Facebook page Flood July 15 2012 about whether to launch a class action lawsuit.
If you’d like to comment on this story, please scroll down.
A sad and shameful response from the city but not a surprise. If these sewers were in good working order, then why where there work crews all over the neighbourhood for 6 weeks after the storm repairing the sewers? On our street, the catch basin that had been broken for 16 years was fixed within days. Unfortunately, it’s likely going to take a lawsuit to get to the truth and get the home owners the compensation they deserve. Meanwhile, lets hope it doesn’t rain next summer.
Great article Hedy. What is shocking is that 4 and a half month’s since the flood and only two month’s since the community information session they are still not addressing basic questions we have in Chine North about potential contributing factors. I have been gathering information, however, have not follwoed through to the fact that I am busy. I have a fulltime job and am a mother and a wife. Advocate is something I don’t really have time for….BUT, it looks like the lack of consideration of our circumstances and the misuse of my taxpayers dollars will require me to add to my daily stresses. Would just have been nice to have the folks paid to get the answers actually try. A form letter is not good enough!!!
Hi Hedy Thank you for your well spoken article on the flooding. This problem the city has with it plumbing and adding more housing is getting out of control. Yes it would be easy to just move, but I have been here for over 20 years and this is the only home I ever known. I have raise my children, got to know all my neighbors and we are all very close. I never had a green thumb until I move into this house and I used to get lots of lovely comments on my garden, this year has been a major ride off went it comes to my garden, due to all the money and time spend on my basement and fighting with the city about their downspout, sewage and now backwater valve subsidy. We get nothing and the city gets our hard earn money. Not to sound bitter or anything but I also work for the TDSB. I believe there is a time to wait things out and a time to get mad and fight will I am pretty mad right now over all of this, and feel I have been let down by my government.
Thanks for your article Hedy. 4 plus months after the City dumped a foot of sewage into my home, I am beyond disgusted with their lack of transparency and respect shown to loyal tax payers. The City assumes we are less than intelligent and that an insignificant “form” letter denying our claims without sufficient investigation and disclosure on their part is shameful! We’ve had nothing but headaches and heartaches dealing with the emergency clean-up crews, insurance companies and the City not to mention the massive financial hardship. Absolutely disappointed with the City and their lack of accountability for what their inadequate infrastructure did to our homes!
Thanks for the information, Hedy. As you know I’m trying to monitor this from British Columbia while my Mom still lives in her home in Ward 36 (since 1952). It’s difficult for her to do the “leg work” as she is 88 (as you know). Mayor Ford stood on my Mom’s porch on July 19 (day before her 88th Birthday) and promised her that the city would look after her. You were there…you heard him. Later, when senior staff were downstairs with me, again I was told that they’d take care of her. The day I had to leave, she had another flood…the main pipe from her house burst (on city property…their problem). They were there in an instance digging up her driveway and replacing the pipe. She then paid a ridiculous amount of money to have a pipe put in her basement to prevent future flooding. I spoke to my Mom today and as of today, she hasn’t received that letter or the yellow advertisement that is obviously a scam. I have asked her to contact me immediately if she gets this letter next week. I’ve worked in a Mayor’s office for 6 years. I can tell you how to plug their system. If you want to get anything done, then you have to be willing to make their lives miserable! It isn’t difficult…just a wee bit time consuming. I’d be glad to help. No one should allow this to slide. Stay on their backs 24/7 if you have to. Good luck to everyone.
I felt from the moment I called 311 and filed a claim against the City, that the result would be prejudiced. The following is the City’s statement from their website, “It’s important to know that the majority of property damage claims made against the City of Toronto are denied as City divisions regularly meet or exceed standard service levels.” Other emails from Granite Solutions mentioned, either before or during their “investigation” the amount of rain over a short period. I suspected our claims would be rejected. I asked questions about the impact of the new development north of Chine Drive and so far have not received an answer. I think the sewer system may have been able to handle the storm load, but the storm water coming from the new development exceeded the capacity of the sewer. In addition the City knows how costly and time consuming/labour intensive it is for residents to take the City to court and they know that the majority of the time people give up. Your article is excellent and I really am not satisfied with the cavalier response I received from the City (Granite Solutions ). So now what? Begin a class action suit? Take the City to small claims court? Refuse to pay a portion of taxes? Make it an election issue?
Hedy,thanks for your article. I’m appalled that a company manual can direct one to “deny all first time claims”. That speaks volumes about how the outcome of the Chine North claims may have been handled; as we are first time flooders and likely first time claimants. I am also disappointed that the report outlining the complete investigation and decision making process was not included with the outcome “form letters” they issued. We were told at the Scarborough Village meeting that we would receive a full copy of the report along with our letters. There was also no mention about an investigation into the new development at Chine and St. Clair which was also alluded to as being part of the investigation at the Scarborough Village meeting. How do we know that the sewers and storm drains installed in the new subdivision were adequately sized to support it and is separately and apart from ours? How do we know that their drainage “pond” is doing what it was intended to do? I for one am not satisfied that the capacity of that new development was not a big part of the problem, let alone the ongoing issues with the City’s aging infrastructure.
I think the City owes us a complete accounting of their investigation and verification leading to the conclusion of their decision. Here we are less than one month from Christmas which is supposed to be a joyous occassion and my home remains disorganized and in disrepair. The finacial loss, emotional and physical stress has made the last half of 2012 an exhausting and disastrous year. I don’t think the impact of our losses is fully understood by the City because I don’t believe their response would be so cold and unempathetic if it were.
I WAS DENIED ANY CLAIM FROM THE CITY OF TORONTO DUE TO THE STORM IN JULY 2013.
i WOULD LIKE TO JOIN THE CLASS ACTION IF THERE WILL BE ONE.
The city also denied my claim. Please let me know if there is a class action suit that I could be a part of.
My claim for damages from July 13 was also denied by the City
Should there be a Class action, please count me in.
On July 8th, 2013, I had 7 feet of water in the basement & I live in the basement.
I own the home & rent the upstairs. My Kids & I barely made it out alive – major appliances were floating around blocking the exits.
My Children & I remain traumatized & I had to relocate for almost a year, while I rebuilt my home on weekends.
It has left me afraid to live in my own home but I cannot afford to move.
The $12,000 in plumbing upgrades including a sewage pump saved my when my neighbour got another 4 feet of water from the sewage backup on June 22nd, 2014.
There are many of us who have been cut off entirely for any insurance water coverage now, due to the sheer volume of sewer backups we keep getting.
Class action must be launched – please keep me informed if anyone gets a lawyer interested, & If I get one I will contact you all as well
Michael Peak
66 Hilldale RD.
York (Toronto), ON
M6N 3Y2
416-835-7841
I’m out about $150,000 in property damage & loss of personal belongings, not to mention the ongoing psychological damage to my kids who are afraid to come over because they nearly drowned last July 8, 2013.
I lost every sentimental video, picture, or prized belonging I ever had for my kids. That can never be replaced. It has changed our family forever.