2017 Okanagan Lake Flood Damage Class Action Suit

User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: 2017 Okanagan Lake Flood Damage Class Action Suit

Post by brentville »

GordonH wrote:brentville you can't blame people for maybe giving you & the class action suit a hard time, since any possible money won. Comes directly from yourself & rest of taxpayers of BC.

again good luck


Thanks GordonH.
Yes, but relief for those displaced from the ongoing wildfires also comes from our taxes.
I don't see anyone complaining about "money won" for them yet they were damaged by an "act of God".
I also don't see suggestions to those that lost homes, that they should have built elsewhere.

Flood damages were caused directly by the Province and even if a settlement of say 80% is reached, there are a lot of people that'll still be out-of-pocket a bundle....a 20% loss isn't fair either as who would accept such deductible terms on their home insurance? Does ICBC only cover 80% of vehicle damage? No matter what the outcome, this is NOT in any way, shape or form, "money won" !!!!!
User avatar
Fancy
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 59470
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: 2017 Okanagan Lake Flood Damage Class Action Suit

Post by Fancy »

brentville wrote:I don't see anyone complaining about "money won" for them yet they were damaged by an "act of God".

Sad isn't it? Floods and fire can affect the same people.
Truths can be backed up by facts - do you have any?
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 33666
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: 2017 Okanagan Lake Flood Damage Class Action Suit

Post by Glacier »

brentville wrote:The Ministry knew that even 10 day forecast data was not reliable yet used forecast data for months for in advance. Using this garbage data, the program predicted a drought and they accordingly left the lake level high. Does this constitute reasonable care?

Secondly, I've explained how the system should have been simply and economically improved to eliminate both the risk of upstream flooding and downstream water shortfalls. A reasonable person doesn't gamble knowing the data being used is suspect and a slight error will cost millions. A reasonable person would have had a professional risk assessment done. Instead, the Province, in it's wisdom, continued to roll the dice till they crapped out!

Well, Bucko, they have to assume worst case. That the forecast could be bunk, and thus make sure there is enough water come summer time. Guess what, this Spring was BY FAR the wettest ever, and it was not reasonable to assume a Spring wetter than anything ever seen before.
The worst part about a 7 day lockdown is the first 4 months.
User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: 2017 Okanagan Lake Flood Damage Class Action Suit

Post by brentville »

Glacier wrote:Well, Bucko, they have to assume worst case. That the forecast could be bunk, and thus make sure there is enough water come summer time. Guess what, this Spring was BY FAR the wettest ever, and it was not reasonable to assume a Spring wetter than anything ever seen before.


Who the hell is "Bucko", Bozo?
Yes, this Spring was the wettest on record and the Provincial forecast program led them to prepare for the exact opposite.
How can anyone with an IQ larger than my shoe size defend reliance upon forecast data that is known to be suspect?

The Province balances upstream flooding vs downstream water shortages by altering the natural lake level via Penticton's flood gates. Their method requires estimating next years inflow into Okanagan Lake months in advance....good luck with that! There are alternatives to using suspect weather forecast data yet no professional risk assessment has ever been performed. The risks of both flooding and water shortfalls could have been eliminated with professional help! If you feel a professional study wasn't warranted, let's hear it. If not, the Province was negligent!

Return to “Flooding 2017”