Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Flood area?
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:42:27 +0100, Janet wrote:
You've gone off course. The "act of god get out" was proposed as an excuse by the waterboard, should the flooded neighbourhood try to sue for negligence. No, I'm on course. I quoted a legal definition, not an insurance one. Notwithstanding this, if an action is brought against the privatised water company, it will be obliged to refer to its insurers. Ask any insurer and they'll tell you it's not worth bothering to refute a claim except in the most exceptional circumstances. ??? Insurers often refuse claims by their clients . But the "act of god" suggestion was not about insurance claims; it was a discussion of a potential legal defence by the water authority . I could have been clearer - refuting a claim on the "Act of God" basis will be difficult in these circumstances. They (the authorities or their insurers) may refute a claim on grounds of no liability and it then becomes a case of disproving the refutation. I have concerns that, in time, Baz may encounter problems obtaining or financing insurance cover (and he's thinking of selling and moving, to get a bigger garden, which will mean other obstacles to be overcome). However he is "on the ground where he is". He has first hand knowledge of what people are saying to him and he is thus better placed to judge the honesty, or otherwise, of what he is being told. Note that I mention my concerns that Baz may be wrong regarding future insurance. (Plus, I recognise that he will have difficulty selling his house now.) But I am not asserting that he IS wrong. No-one in this group (apart from Baz) can assert that without first studying documentation and speaking to those who have advised him. I think that assessment by you is an error which disregards Baz's most basic problem; he said he has dyslexia; a learning disability which makes it very difficult to organise and assimilate information. He has repeatedly demonstrated that problem on group, so there is every reason to suppose the same applies IRL. To his interpretation, of what insurers or solicitors say. There are several sub-types of dyslexia.I grant that in this group Baz has occasionally reacted (and has occasionally apologised for that), presumably on the basis of a quick read of what is written and maybe a quick temper. But I doubt very much that he is reading the documentation he has acquired quickly - and, in the main, those with dyslexia (I know several who are successful businessmen including an accountant and a lawyer) simply need to read more slowly to assimilate the facts; dyslexia, per se, does not affect their ability to interpret the facts once assimilated. Plus Baz is clearly receiving advice from his solicitor orally as well as in writing. Baz has stated clearly in the past that his dyslexia impacts on reading/writing and is not auditory. When someone with dyslexia gets it wrong, patting him on the head and telling him he knows best is absolutely no help to him. You seem to imply that I am being patronising but if you are then it is you who is being so. Re-read what I wrote - 'he is "on the ground where he is". He has first hand knowledge of what people are saying to him and he is thus better placed to judge the honesty, or otherwise, of what he is being told.' Note I use the word "saying", not "writing". Cheers, Jake ======================================= Urgling from the East End of Swansea Bay where sometimes it's raining and sometimes it's not. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Flood area?
In message , Baz
writes Janet wrote in : In article , lid says... On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote: They have this getout clause called "Actof God". The concept of "Act of God" is qualified, generally as "an overwhelming event caused exclusively by forces of nature, without the possibility of prevention and without intervention by any human agency." To establish an "Act of God" it must be conclusively proven that there is absolutely no human contribution. For example, allowing houses to be built to such an extent as to overwhelm existing drainage facilities is a human contribution (whether or not the person or persons allowing this were aware of the potential problem). Ditto, defining a flood risk but not doing anything about it is a human contribution. It is for the insurer to prove "Act of God" rather than for the insured to prove otherwise. You've gone off course. The "act of god get out" was proposed as an excuse by the waterboard, should the flooded neighbourhood try to sue for negligence. Ask any insurer and they'll tell you it's not worth bothering to refute a claim except in the most exceptional circumstances. ??? Insurers often refuse claims by their clients . But the "act of god" suggestion was not about insurance claims; it was a discussion of a potential legal defence by the water authority . I have concerns that, in time, Baz may encounter problems obtaining or financing insurance cover (and he's thinking of selling and moving, to get a bigger garden, which will mean other obstacles to be overcome). However he is "on the ground where he is". He has first hand knowledge of what people are saying to him and he is thus better placed to judge the honesty, or otherwise, of what he is being told. I think that assessment by you is an error which disregards Baz's most basic problem; he said he has dyslexia; a learning disability which makes it very difficult to organise and assimilate information. He has repeatedly demonstrated that problem on group, so there is every reason to suppose the same applies IRL. To his interpretation, of what insurers or solicitors say. When someone with dyslexia gets it wrong, patting him on the head and telling him he knows best is absolutely no help to him. Janet. For your information, Janet, dyslexia is not a disease, and it does not affect my judgement. Mine is a reading and writing disorder. It does not make me "thick" or uneducated, I just have to try harder to understand the written word. My IQ is not an issue here as much as your delusions of grandeur. Patting me on the head would only result in a verbal, but polite volley from me, and possibly an allegation of assault.. Then it would be up to the courts to decide who is an imbecile. For you information, my IQ has been tested many times during my life because of my dyslexia. average over the years is 124 peaking at 133 when I was 18 years old. I can read music, play the piano and a few other stringed instruments, play Bridge, oh yes! write music. I am dextrous which is essential being a carpenter and joiner, and my hobby which is restoring post war motorcycles. My main hobby now is gardening but I find time for all of the above. But, of course anyone can say that in a newsgroup. I am being sincere. Baz My son suffers with dyslexia. His IQ test results could vary from about 124 to 134 within a week. -- hugh |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Stolen or from a flood ? | Lawns | |||
flood underneath my liner | Ponds | |||
Flood tolerant shrubs/bushes | Gardening | |||
Flood irrigation | sci.agriculture | |||
[IBC] Junipers and the Weather - [IBC] The Flood | Bonsai |