To the editor
I was the victim of a water main break on the corner of Halliford and Lime Streets on January 26, 2018, which flooded my basement causing the destruction of some of my personal property along with water damage to belongings and wall and floor structures. (Over one foot of water.)
Thankfully I have home owners insurance. Since the break was not on my property I thought that the Town of Princeton should cover and pay my insurance deductible and I made that request.
As stated in the Spotlight dated February 1, 2018 by then director of infrastructure Michael Mazurek: “The break was a significant one.”
Mr. Mazurek also stated that the pipe that burst was likely between 60 to 80 years old and was in a section of the original town water pipe layout.
He stated in the same article that the 2012 analysis completed by the municipality on the capacity and state of the town’s water system had identified these old original sections of piping.
The analysis did not set out a capital plan at that point in time to update the older sections of the town’s piping network. The lack of an upgrading plan resulted in the town’s decision to deal with burst water pipes on a failure by failure basis.
So my question to the homeowners, tenants, businesses and taxpayers of Princeton is: do you want to be on the hook for your insurance deductible (and higher annual insurance rates) if you are held accountable for any and all damages when these old outdated fragile water mains burst in your immediate vicinity?
When I put in my claim to city hall I was given a pamphlet to read on property damage information due to water services, road hazards and potholes and sewer backups which stated:
1) You have two months from time of incident to submit your claim for damages on the form they supply to you. I filled out and submitted said form within the required time frame in accordance with Sub Section 286(1).
2) On page two of this pamphlet, under water services, it states: The property owner is responsible for the section of pipe from the dwelling to the property line and the shutoff valve. It then states: The municipality is responsible for the section of pipe between the shut-off valve and the water main. It defines a water main as normally running underneath the roadway and it provides the water to the individual properties.
On April 5 I was sent a response from the Municipal Insurance Association of B.C. (the town’s insurer) that stated my claim had been denied. My neighbour across the street from me also had his claim denied for property damages. He had a five foot geyser coming out of the flower bed in his yard, leaving behind 40 feet of washed out garden top soil and plants to be replaced by gravel and boulders and an additional eight inches of the same on a large section of his front lawn. The length of time it took to shut off the water was unacceptable also, as additional damage was being done while the water flooded the surrounding area.
I have therefor decided to write this letter to the paper to warn and inform all homeowners, businesses and tenants that they could incur all personal damages and related costs to their properties should a water main burst. I know there are a lot of seniors that would be hard pressed to even come up with the deductible for an insurance claim, never mind paying for increased insurance costs for a number of years.
I myself have had insurance on my personal belongings as a renter from 1968 to 2005 and never had a claim during that time. I have also had homeowner’s insurance since 2005 when we purchased our home here in Princeton. That’s 50 years of insurance with no claims. My first insurance claim ever on January 26 now will cost me around $250 a year for three years on top of my normal yearly insurance rate.
In my opinion we should be focusing on upgrading the town’s ailing infrastructures first before any other major projects and expenditures are undertaken. We all have a voice and a say in the matter come election time.
Gail Davidson