Photo: castanets file photo
A West Kelowna firefighter extinguishes a fire on a house on Preston Road in Upper Glenrosa on April 5, 2012
An insurance company was sacked in connection with a fire in 2012 on property in West Kelowna that was previously used to grow cannabis.
The house at 3237A Preston Road in Upper Glenrosa was destroyed by fire on April 5, 2012. The fire, caused by an arsonist who was never caught, occurred about three weeks after RCMP searched the house and found an illegal grower.
The annex was hidden in a bunker under a terrace next to the house and consisted of several hundred plants. The property’s power supply had been tampered with, causing the West Kelowna Community to hit a “no-live” notice on the house after the warrant was enforced.
At the time of the fire, the house was occupied by a long-term tenant who was billed for the extension. The tenant was a family friend of the property owner Marjorie Drechsler, who had owned the 18 hectare property for 18 years at the time of the fire.
After the fire, Canada’s Northern Shield Insurance refused to pay wood turners for their losses, prompting them to file a lawsuit.
The insurance company argued that Drechsler broke its policy when it failed to notify it of a “significant change in risk” to the insured property after discovering the breeding facility and tampering with the house’s electrical connections.
Drechsler had no knowledge of the grower, the bunker, or that the home’s electrical system had been tampered with prior to the March 23, 2012, West Kelowna District receiving the “Not Occupied” notice.
The insurance company argued in the process that it would have canceled the insurance policy with five days’ notice if it had been informed of the situation as contractually required.
Drechsler visited the property on March 24 or 25, 2012 after receiving the letter, although police tape prevented her from entering the apartment.
In a ruling by the BC Supreme Court last week, Judge Steven Wilson ruled that Drechsler should have notified their insurer within at least two days of visiting the property of receiving the letter.
“Here the plaintiff has not taken any measures to change the risk for the property after receiving the [District of West Kelowna] Letter, except for visiting the property and speaking with the tenant. None of the steps were successful in eliminating the risk, ”judged Judge Wilson.
“This is remarkable when you consider that the [District of West Kelowna] The letter described several steps the plaintiff had to take to regain access to her property and to reduce the risk. “
“The plaintiff is not entitled to exemption from the consequences of her violation,” so the judgment.
