Sask. disaster relief program only covers flood damage, and woman can't afford to sue

Published: Monday, May 15, 2006

Carole-Anne Wilson-Hough was just stepping out of the shower last June 29 when her daughter yelled that the power was out. A few moments later she descended her basement stairs into a sloppy, smelly nightmare. Life has not been the same since.

"It was gross," the single mom recalls.

It wasn't rainwater that backed up into the lower part of her home. It was sewage.

By the time the record-breaking rainstorm that swept though Saskatoon was over, Wilson-Hough's basement was swimming in muck more than a foot deep. Clothing, bedding, mattresses, washer and dryer, a fridge and a freezer full of food were floating in the reek.

"And I had just bought groceries," she says.

Her daughter's collection of porcelain dolls, valued at about $500 each, was destroyed by black mold in the weeks that followed.

Less than a year later, Wilson-Hough has had to declare bankruptcy because of the cost of replacing what she lost, which she estimates was more than $10,000. When she moved into the house, she had asked the landlord if the place ever flooded when it rained. Never, she was told. Struggling to raise two daughters alone on a small salary, she decided to forego the extra expense of flood insurance.

Since that nightmare day last June, she's been waiting and hoping for some kind of compensation. People whose homes suffered water damage from the storm got money from the provincial disaster relief program, but it doesn't cover sewer backups.

Wilson-Hough was more than a little disappointed when she got a letter from the city recently, advising her that she may have to sue to recover anything. She's one of about 40 uninsured Saskatonians who were hit by the deluge, and lawyers cost money.

"I can't sue anybody," she says. "If I had known a year ago that I had to sue, I could have done that as part of my debt. Because I know they're expensive -- which is why, a year later, after all I owe, there's no way that I can sue now. I'm not being greedy, I just want something. . . . Tell us that we all get $100 -- something. Just to feel compensated would mean a lot. Anything is better than nothing."

Wilson-Hough wants to hear from others facing the same pickle. City staff can't give her the names of the other uninsured flood victims because of privacy restrictions.

City administrators told her the issue of compensation for the June 29 flooding was ultimately up to city council, so she wrote a letter about the situation to the councillor for her ward, Myles Heidt. He called her back to say the matter was in the hands of city administrators and there was nothing he could do for her, she said.

"It's that runaround part that really annoys me. Just make a decision . . . just to feel compensated in some way, that they at least tried. We help people all over the world, but we can't help our own at home?"

Heidt could not be reached for comment on Friday.

City Solicitor Theresa Dust said the city has received about 750 claims for flood damages from the storm, the vast majority of which are from insurance companies. Engineers are still working to figure out what caused the flooding in various parts of the city, "but they're not finished yet, because it's complicated," she said.

Until city councillors know what caused the problem, they can't decide whether to accept liability for the damages and voluntarily compensate residents for their losses, Dust explained, noting the Cities Act stipulates the city is not liable for damages caused by an "extraordinary natural event."

Depending on which area of town they live in, some residents might not get an answer on that issue until late September. The earliest anyone will get an answer is June 30, Dust said. Coincidentally, the statutory time limit for filing a lawsuit -- which is the only way to seek compensation if the city denies liability -- expires June 29.

"What we included in the letter, because we felt we had to legally, was to explain to them that their right to sue the city, by law, runs out within one year," Dust said.

"This, of course, is not going to make any difference to the people with insurance, because the insurance companies will file the (lawsuit). We realize that there are a few people who don't have insurance and don't have lawyers, and we aren't telling them that they have to file a claim, but we also felt we had to explain to them that there is a one-year limitation and that we weren't promising them an answer until that one year was over. I don't know what else you do."

lcoolican@sp.canwest.com

© The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon) 2006
_________________________
Jimmy McDonald
http://www.StartRemodeling.com
Jimmy@StartRemodeling.com

http://www.ToxicMoldUSA.com
McMoldMan@ToxicMoldUSA.com

Jimmy McDonald ( RemodelingGuy) specifically assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information or process disclosed. The above further expressly advises that any use of or reliance upon the information and or opinion disclosed is at your risk .