Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Office of the Commissioner
Office
of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation
Massachusetts Division of Insurance
1000 Washington Street - Suite 810
Boston, MA 02118-6200
__________________________________________________________________________
GWENDOLYN CRANMORE,
Petitioner/Applicant
v.
MASSACHUSETTS PROPERTY
INSURANCE
UNDER-WRITING ASSOCIATION (MPIUA),
Respondent
___________________________________________________________________
PETITIONER’S
VERIFIED PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE REFEREEES, ANDREW J. HIMMEL, PAMELA BUSH
AND RICHARD CORNETTA DATED NOVEMBER 14,
2012 PURSUANT TO M.G.L. Part 1 Title XXII Chapter 175 SEC. 100 ;M.G.L. Part
1 Title XXII Chapter 175 SEC. 101B; M.G.L. Part 1 Title XXII Chapter 175 SEC.
101D; M.G.L. Part 1 Title XXII Chapter
175 SEC. 101E; M.G.L. ch. 106 § 2-718; MGL c.176D
(Unfair Methods of Competition and Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices in
the Business of Insurance); Massachusetts Regulations, 940 CMR 3 ( Consumer
Protection - General Regulations) ; 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Due Process Rights and
Procedural Due Process); M.R.C.P. 65; G.L. c. 175, § 186; Northwestern Mut.
Life Ins. Co. v. Iannacchino, 950 F.Supp. 28, 30 (1997); Chicago Ins. Co. v.
Lappin, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 769, 773 (2003); Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co. v.
Iannacchino, 950 F.Supp. 28, 30 (1997); Employers' Liability Assurance, Ltd. v.
Vella, 366 Mass. 651, 655 (1975); Bagley v. Monticello Ins. Co., 430 Mass. 454,
458 (1999); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. SCA Servs., Inc., 412 Mass. 330, 336-37
(1992); Government Street Lumber, Co, v. Amsouth Bank 553 So 2b 78 72 (Ala
1989); Keeton v. Bank of Red Bay 466 So
2b 937 940 (Ala 1985); National Security Fire & Casualty Co. v, Bowen, 417
So 2d 179 (Ala 1982); etc.
_______________________________________________________________________
1
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
A. RECORD
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Location of the
Disputed Property: 631 Blue Hills Parkway
Milton MA 02186
Nature of
Proceeding: Insurance Reference
Proceeding
Names of the
Referees: Mr. Andrew J. Himmel, Chair
Ms Pamela Bush (for the Insured)
Mr.
Richard Cornetta (for the Insurer)
Representatives or Attorneys: Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates for
the Insured
Mr. William O. Monahan for the Insurer
Parties: Mrs. Gwendolyn Cranmore – Insured
Massachusetts
Property Insurance Under-writing Association - Insurer.
Date of Site Visit: 10/15/2012
Date of Start of Hearing
(Brockton): 10/15/2012
Date Hearing location was opposed: 10/15/2012
Hearing Location: Hyatt, Braintree, MA
Start of Hearing in Braintree: 10/23/2012
Hearing relocated to Hilton, Dedham, MA
Hearing relocated and Continued at Hyatt, Braintree, MA
Date of Closing Argument by the Insured/Insurer:
11/14/2012
Date of Decision: 11/14/2012
Date Decision was served up on Insured and Insurer:
11/14/2012
Nature of Decision:
In part Insured Prevailed
Award Issue to the Insured: $92,958.00 ____________________________________________________________________________
2
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
Petitioner or Insured,
Mrs. Gwendolyn Cranmore, hereby requests that the Commissioner of
Insurance Review the entirety of the
Decision of the Referees, Mr. Andrew J.
Himmel, Ms Pamela Bush and Mr. Richard Cornetta dated November 14, 2012 because
of the following reasons supported by the laws aforementioned:
B. BACKGROUND
1. In March 2010 and August 2010 two heavy
rain/wind storms hit Insured’s home and rift off her roof and brought massive
water into her home and for over nine (9) months the insurer failed to remediate
the incident and allowing her home to be soaked and moistured. This delay led
to outbreak of dusty and toxic mold and fungal into her home which infected
insured’s entire body and life, dumped her in multiple illnesses and finally
destroyed her business and caused her durable homelessness and heavy loss of
income and earning, etc. To cover this
damage, the insurer paid insured’s agents to deceive her to report fire
incident as paid path to connect water and fire to defuse March 2010 rain/wind
storm because there is a connection between water and fire in several insurance
transactions. Now this third prong led to three loss claims (Nos. 274179,
274772 and 279935) selfishly presented
by the MPIUA in breach of the Insurance Reference Proceeding.
2. March 2010 and August 2010 two heavy
rain/wind storms rendered insured’s home
unlivable because of over nine (9) months delay and negligence of the Insurer,
MPIUA to recognize the double storms and
the devastating damage done to her home particularly the outbreak of dusty and
toxic mold and fungal which infected her home and her entire body and life, destroyed her business
and caused heavy loss of income and
earning, etc. Insurer failed to provide additional living assistance and
rendered her homeless. Checks issued for some remediation were not issued on
her name in order to sanction usage of the money particularly to remediate and
clear the dusty and toxic mold and fungal to enable her return to her business
and personal residence.
3. Expert, Mr. Ernest Kirwan said that "MPIUA/RURJ complete property
inspection report dated 08/31/2009, with no special conditions applied, mold
infectation or on-going water seepage identified...Report by AirCare
environmental Engineering - indicating
widespread mold infestation and Expert, Mohamed H. Hussein, P.E.
Consulting Engineer report - recommending
3
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
gutting the house - down
to studs and treating the molds...MPIUA internal document: " investigation
& Adjustment Report Form" with conflicting reports for " Cause of
Loss" and "Detail of Loss & Recommendation" for Claim
#174179...Insured’s inspectors found no
visible signs of "ground water and sewage had enter through the
basement" and no evidence provided by MPIUA or SFME to support said
claim/denial. ( exhibit #5, 5a, 5b)...Settlements 174179 and 274772 totaling
approx $70,000.00 is inadequate to restore the house back to, up to code
requirement, its original state before the storm damages and or a habitable
standard (ex. #7)...Aegus, in their Mold Report fail to mentioned the March 2010
three day rainstorm with hurricane force winds, dislodge tree branches that
also penetrate the rear roof above the bathrooms causing severe water
intrusion. Also the August 2010 three day record breaking rainstorm that MPIUA
and SFMe agreed (ex. #6) duplicated the March 2010 storm damages."
4. Insured retained experts, Construction company Gusten, Mr. Chinedu
Augustus U. Okoye, Cedeno Construction Co., Mr. Ernest Kirwan AIA) and Mohamed
H. Hussein, P.E. Consulting Engineer and they did site inspections of her home
and they wrote reports which cut across
piece by piece but under estimated some real costs required to fix or rebuilt insured’s home.
Fixing must include but unlimited to patched roof, porch and rain/wind storm
water damage, expert mold remediation of the detected interior spaces and other
repairs and restorations of her home, the following estimates were reported and
herewith attached and apportioned as follows:
4. a. Mr. Chinedu Augustus U.
Okoye:..........................$475,000.00
General Contractor Profit
15%..............................$45,254.25
4.b. Mr. Patrick
Cedeno:.............................................$334,650.00
General Contractor
Profit.......................................$43,650.00
4.c Mr. Ernest Kirwan AIA supported the estimate submitted by
Mr. Okoye
B. JURISDICTION
5. Per legislative power embedded under M.G.L. Part
1 Title XXII Chapter 175 SEC. 100 ;M.G.L. Part 1 Title XXII Chapter 175
SEC. 101B; M.G.L. Part 1 Title XXII Chapter 175 SEC. 101D; M.G.L. Part 1 Title XXII Chapter 175 SEC.
101E The Honourable Commissioner of
Insurance has personal and subject matter jurisdictions over this Petition.
4
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
6.
M.G.L. ch. 106 § 2-718; MGL c.176D (Unfair Methods of Competition and
Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices in the Business of Insurance);
Massachusetts Regulations, 940 CMR 3 ( Consumer Protection - General
Regulations) overwhelmed the entire reference proceeding which was heard October 2012 through November 14, 2012.
7.
5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution (Due Process Rights and Procedural Due Process); M.R.C.P.
65; are severely violated to extent that the insured was not
allowed to present her loss claim and the three loss claims stated above which
were presented by the insurer failed to disclose any expert reports on costs to
rebuild insured home which was invaded by 8000 counts of mold and other deadly
fungal. During the entire hearing Mr. Monahan hijacked the chair of the
references and the entire proceeding thereby commanding the chair, Mr. Himmel
by motion to left and right against the insured.
8.
Local and other cases are opposed to the conduct of the reference
proceeding. See Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Iannacchino, 950 F.Supp. 28,
30 (1997); Chicago Ins. Co. v. Lappin, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 769, 773 (2003);
Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Iannacchino, 950 F.Supp. 28, 30 (1997);
Employers' Liability Assurance, Ltd. v. Vella, 366 Mass. 651, 655 (1975);
Bagley v. Monticello Ins. Co., 430 Mass. 454, 458 (1999); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
v. SCA Servs., Inc., 412 Mass. 330, 336-37 (1992); Government Street Lumber,
Co, v. Amsouth Bank 553 So 2b 78 72 (Ala 1989); Keeton v. Bank of Red Bay 466 So 2b 937 940 (Ala 1985); National
Security Fire & Casualty Co. v, Bowen, 417 So 2d 179 (Ala 1982); etc.
C. STATEMENT OF ARGUMENT
9. Because
of the irate domination and control of the chair of the referees by the counsel
for the insurer, the chair of the referees overruled extreme majority of the
reports signed and notarized by experts such as the Construction company
Gusten, Mr. Chinedu Augustus U. Okoye, Cedeno Construction Co., Mr. Ernest
Kirwan AIA and AIRCARE Company, Mohamed H. Hussein, P.E. Consulting Engineer , the
official position of the United State Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA),
etc. The unsupported opposition of the Counsel for the Insurer and Chair of the
Referees manufactured the insufficient award to the Insured. See EXHIBITS A, B, C, D, E & F.
10. 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution
of the United States such as the Due Process Rights of the Insured and
Procedural Due Process of the Reference Proceeding were matchlessly violated.
Insured’s Loss Claim was not allowed on the table of this proceeding.
5
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
Insurer’s Loss Claims,
Nos. 274179, 274772 and 279935 were allowed and considered and used to
construct an award consideration of the sum of $92,958.00 which is contrary to
all expert reports ( Construction company Gusten, Mr. Chinedu Augustus U. Okoye,
Cedeno Construction Co., Mr. Ernest Kirwan AIA) and Mohamed H. Hussein, P.E.
Consulting Engineer report relating to the actual amount of $475,000.00
required to gut down and rebuild Insured building located at 631 Blue Hills
Parkway Milton MA 02186. Experts stated above supported the Expert Report of
the AIRCARE Company. In support of this Petition the Insured has incorporated
the expert reports of Construction company Gusten, Mr. Chinedu Augustus U. Okoye,
Cedeno Construction Co., Mr. Ernest Kirwan AIA and AIRCARE Company, Mohamed H.
Hussein, P.E. Consulting Engineer report and will be marked EXHIBITS A, B, C, D & E.
11. Apart from the expert reports issued by
the Construction company Gusten, Mr. Chinedu Augustus U. Okoye, Cedeno
Construction Co., Mr. Ernest Kirwan AIA and AIRCARE Company, Mohamed H.
Hussein, P.E. Consulting Engineer, the Insurer has no expert reports showing
the costs to rebuild insured’s home or costs required to bring the home to livable
which cannot be less than gutting down the entire building because of 8000
counts of mold which was brought into the home because of the unprofessional
work of the ServiceMaster and the negligence of the Insurer to timely remediate
danger ahead after the extensive rain/wind storm which occurred in March 2010 and further extensive rain/wind storm
which occurred in August 2010.
12. Paragraph B.1 above suffered set back
because Mr. William O. Monahan for the Insurer controlled the Reference Proceeding
Chairman, Mr. Andrew J. Himmel and Mr.
Monahan opposed over 98.3% of the evidence presented by the insured for
admission into exhibits. Each time Mr. Monahan opposes the submission of the
insured Mr. Himmel overrules and concurs with the frivolous and personal opposition
of Mr. Monahan. Under the strict control
of Mr. Monahan over Mr. Himmel, there was a shameful and ugly incident when during prior hearing Mr. Monahan lured
Mr. Himmel to overrule submission of the insured’s signed, and notarized documentary
or paper exhibits and Mr. Himmel ruled that the author of such intended paper
exhibit must be present before him before the paper exhibit could be entered
into evidence but during further hearing in this proceeding Mr. Monahan and his
witness present an unsigned and unnotarized paper issued by fictitious person
called SERVICEMASTER and shamefully Mr. Monahan forced Mr. Himmel to enter this
fictitious paper into evidence and swiftly Mr. Himmel entered it into evidence.
This conduct drew opposition from the insured and the insured requested to exit
or withdraw from the proceeding because this type of misconduct had occurred
6
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
time to time throughout
the hearing.
13. The Insured was sanctioned from recording the
proceeding or hearing whereas the Insurer was allowed to record the entire
hearing. During the hearing the insured’s rep observed that the recording
company usually tempers with the gadgets and closely watching him, he (reporter)
stops typing each time the insured is presenting important evidence and
speaking on core part of her case. To get copies of the tapes and transcripts,
Insured has to pass through lengthy process and there is no evidence that the
insured will get complete and accurate transcripts of the proceeding.
14. Expert, Mr.
Ernest Kirwan said that "MPIUA/RURJ complete property inspection
report dated 08/31/2009, with no special conditions applied, mold infestation
or on-going water seepage identified...Report by AirCare environmental
Engineering - indicating widespread mold infestation and Expert, Mohamed
H. Hussein, P.E. Consulting Engineer report - recommending gutting the house -
down to studs and treating the molds...MPIUA internal document: "
investigation & Adjustment Report Form" with conflicting reports for
" Cause of Loss" and "Detail of Loss & Recommendation"
for Claim #174179...Insured inspector and the site visit on October 15, 2012 by
the referees and other parties in this proceeding found no signs of "ground water and
sewage had enter through the basement" and no evidence provided by MPIUA
or SFME to support said claim/denial. ( exhibit #5, 5a, 5b)...Settlements 174179
and 274772 totaling approx $70,000.00 is inadequate to restore the house back
to, up to code requirement, its original state before the storm damages and or
a habitable standard (ex. #7)...Aegus which claim being smack experience of
detection of mold. Aegus’ Report fail to
mentioned the March three
7
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
day rainstorm with hurricane force winds, dislodge tree
branches that also penetrate the rear roof above the bathrooms causing severe
water intrusion. Also the August 2010 three day record breaking rainstorm that
MPIUA and SFMe agreed (ex. #6) duplicated the March 2010 storm damages"
and caused irreparable damage because of the negligence of the Insurer, MPIUA.
D.
RELIEF
15. Reliant
on the foregoing, Applicant requests that The Hon. Commissioner of insurance grant
Insured’s Loss Claim as reported by experts or other relief as The Hon. Commissioner
deems appropriate to rebuild her mold
invaded home.
16. Payment of
all overdue Advance Living Expense (ALE) which was stopped for long time and
caused Insured untold hardship and homelessness and the money she works is
diverted to food, housing and other
personal maintenance expense instead of payment of her mortgage. EXHIBIT G
17. Remove all
liens placed on insured property including the $10,000.00 put by the ServiceMaster
that jumped into gutting her home with over 8000 counts of mold and fungal as
path to remediate these quantity of dusty/toxic molds and fungal without knowledge,
training, experience and license for treatment and removal of molds and
fungal.
E. VERIFICATION
I, Mrs. Gwendolyn
Cranmore hereby respectfully verify the above mentioned documents and that they are correct to the best of my
knowledge and signed and authorize submission under the pains and penalties of
perjury this 20th day
of November 2012.
____________________
Mrs. Gwendolyn Cranmore - Petitioner
8
Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I,
Dr. Phillip Ofume certify that a true copy of the above mentioned
Petition was served up on all
parties by U.S. Postal Service first
class mail or Hand Delivery on November 21, 2012 at:
Mr. William O. Monahan
MONAHAN & ASSOCIATES , P.C.
113 Union Wharf East
Boston, MA 02109
Mr.
Edward M. Phelan
Counsel to the Commissioner
Massachusetts Division of Insurance
1000 Washington Street - Suite 810
Boston, MA 02118-6200
Clerk, Civil Action
Suffolk County Superior Court
Department
Suffolk County Courthouse , 12th
Floor
Three Pemberton Square
Boston, MA 02108
Mr. Richard Cornetta
649 North Main Street
Brockton, MA 02032
Ms. Pamela Bush
66 Maple Street
Hyde Park, MA 02136
______________________
Mrs. Gwendolyn Cranmore
No comments:
Post a Comment