All the sense of guilt of the survivors was fleeting for those residents whose houses remained standing after forest fires crossed the Los Angeles area three months ago.
Many worried that the smoke of the Eaton Wildfire that destroyed more than 9,000 structures and killed 18 people may have taken Toxinsincluding lead, asbestos and heavy metals, in their homes. But they had trouble convincing their insurers to prove their properties to make sure it was sure to return.
Nicole Maccalla, a data scientist, said Embers burned more than half of her roof, several windows and eaves were damaged, and her house in Altadena was full of ashes, rubble, soot and damaged appliances. She said her insurance adjuster said that Usea would pay contamination tests, but after choosing a company and returning with the results, her claim was rejected. The adjuster said the company only covered the tests in houses with important damage.
“Each element is a battle,” Maccalla said. “They are denials, appeals, denials and appeals, and you expect weeks and weeks and weeks for answers.”
Maccalla and others joined while Eaton Fire residents join together, share environmental test data and compile the results in a Online map. Of 81 houses tested so far for lead, they all show high levels, according to the group.
“I have already made several people communicate and say:” Thank you for publishing this map … because my insurance company has changed their minds and approved the tests “, said Maccalla, who helped design data collection to verify the results and maintain privacy.
Many housing owners paid the evidence in private after their insurance companies refused, revealing gaps in the coverage. The group expects the data to help residents who cannot afford their insurers to cover evidence and remediation.
“If I can demonstrate that my community is not suitable for the human room, then maybe I can show that my house will not be,” said Jane Lawton Potelle, founder of the residents of Eaton Fire Unite.
It is not easy to understand how and when it is safe to return home, said Lawton Potelle. The small print of insurance policies can be frustrating and confusing, and the government has not intervened to help.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency said it has no plans to perform generalized environmental tests. The Los Angeles County Public Health Department is tracking environmental evidence largely by academic researchers and a handful of government agencies, but most studies evaluate outdoor pollution.
Reports of Other urban forest firesin which construction materials, appliances, cars and more burns at incredibly high temperatures show higher levels of heavy metals, including lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (HAP), such as benzene that are linked to negative health risks. But insurance companies have not standardized evidence for those pollutants.
House insurance widely covers fire damage, but there is a growing dispute about what damage should be covered when the flames do not set the property.
The California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, launched a newsletter in March that put the responsibility of the companies to properly investigate the damage to smoke reported, saying that they cannot deny such claims without thoroughly investigating, including the payment of justified professional tests. But many residents have been allowed to fight for coverage anyway.
Janet Ruiz, spokesman for the Insurance Information Institute that represents many important insurance companies, said it is difficult to compare the neighbors because each claim is unique due to the physical structure of each home, real damage and defined insurance coverage limits.
“You can vary and insurance companies are sensitive to what the claim is,” Ruiz said. “You must work with your insurance companies and be reasonable about what could have happened.”
Dave Jones, director of the Climate Risk Initiative at the University of California, Berkeley, and the former State Insurance Commissioner said the tests should be covered despite the fact that some insurance companies do not agree.
“It is perfectly reasonable for people to perform some type of environmental test so that their home is safe and that their property is safe,” Jones said. “We are talking about very catastrophic temperature fires where all kinds of materials melt and some of them become toxic.”
The statement of the state of the state, known as the just access plan for California insurance to the insurance requirements plan, has been analyzed for years on how to handle smoke damage claims. A change from 2017 to the limited coverage of the fair plan to “permanent physical changes”, which means that smoke damage must be visible or detectable without laboratory tests to approve claims. State officials said the threshold was too high and illegal, and ordered a change.
Dylan Schaffer, a lawyer who leads a collective claim that challenges the threshold of Justo’s plan, said he was surprised that private operators are disputing similar claims of fire damage.
“The damage is not due to smoke, the damage is the contamination of fire,” Schaffer said. “They make it complicated because they save them money.”
Meanwhile, Altadena residents in the Fair plan Let’s say your statements are still denying. Jones believe that the debate will only end when legislators take action.
The spokeswoman of the Just Plan, Hilary McLean, declined to comment on the ongoing litigation and the individual cases, but said that the fair plan pays all the claims covered based on the recommendations of the adjusters.
“Our policy, like many others, requires direct physical loss to be covered,” said McLean.
Lawton Potelle said that the first idea that his house could be toxic came after meeting with his AAA insurance adjuster in the days after the fire. Although he had used a mask, his chest hurt and arrested his voice, and wondered if his house was safe for his 11 -year -old son.
Stephanie Wilcox said her child’s pediatrician recommended trying her home. Its farmers insurance policy includes lead and asbestos coverage, in addition to its forest fire coverage, but after multiple denials, he paid his pocket.
“After the initial inspection, (the farmers) had told us that the remediation would cost around $ 12,000 and that it would be habitable, as if we could return tomorrow,” he said. “But now there is no way.”
She plans to request a new estimate that includes lead reduction and other costs, citing the results.
Similarly, Zach Bailey requested the contamination tests at the end of January. The house he shares with his wife and child sits on an island of houses largely saved between the blocks erased by the fire. After months of denials, State farm He agreed to pay lead and Asbestos tests because the remediation company cited federal workers’ security regulations.
It shouldn’t have been so difficult, he said.
“It seems that insurance companies should have a play book right now,” he said. “They should have a process to keep people safe because this is not the first disaster like this.”
