Californians Are Being Forced To Live In Toxic Homes

Newsweek

4 days ago

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Altadena resident Luis Cazares was among the few lucky homeowners whose property was still standing after the devastating wildfires that ravaged the tie-knight community northeast of downtown L.A. in January were finally extinguished.
When he returned home after being evacuated by authorities, "we saw the house standing and I was happy," Cazares told Newsweek. "But I felt guilty that only my house was standing and none of my neighbors were safe."
His initial relief turned into dismay when he discovered that his beloved home, which he had bought and improved after years of renting, was covered in toxic lead ash that made it inhabitable—and that insurance would not pay for the cleaning.
"The insurance company's failure to do right by him is just devastating for everybody, but in this case, it's just really shameful," Eric Stracener, Cazares' lawyer and a member of the California Fire Victims Law Center, told Newsweek.
Cleaning? 'Do It Yourself'
When the fires broke out, Cazares was in the process of changing the roof of his home. That means that his property was partially exposed when the fires ravaged the neighborhood—allowing all the soot, ash and debris caused by the blazes to easily get into the property, contaminating everything that survived the flames.
On top of that, Cazares believes that the heavy rain that followed the January fires caused its roof to collapse in the weeks following the blazes. "Every time I came to see the house, there was a new chunk of ceiling on the floor," he said. "And so I assumed it was a direct effect from the fire. But the insurance refused to pay," he added.
Luis Cazares standing in what is left of his home's patio in Altadena, California.
Luis Cazares standing in what is left of his home's patio in Altadena, California.
Luis Cazares
Cazares' home was covered by the California FAIR Plan—the Golden State's insurer of last resort. The company offers fire insurance to anyone who cannot find it on the private market—a blessing for many homeowners at a time when several insurers have scaled back their presence in the most at-risk areas of the state, even though its coverage is not as extensive as that offered by private carriers.
After assessing the damage made by the fires to his home, Cazares made a claim to the California FAIR Plan. Then he waited—for months and months.
"They just kept saying, you know, come in two weeks, come in two weeks. Almost four or five months went by until finally they decided to pay me a very little amount, $55,000, and only $7,000 for the damages," Cazares told Newsweek.
For Cazares, it was devastating—especially after a contractor had assessed the cost of fixing everything in the house at a total of $250,000.
"That's when I say, I need a lawyer here," Cazares said, "because I'm not going to go anywhere with this insurance. They keep refusing to pay, even to clean the house."
Before the home started collapsing, Cazares asked his insurer to pay for cleaning the toxic substances in his home. "When I asked the insurance to pay for cleaning they said that, 'you can do it yourself.'" Cazares asked if they would cover the cost of replacing the content of the house, including the contaminated sofas and mattresses, but the FAIR Plan said that if they had not burned, they couldn't give him any money for them.
"Test after test have shown that 100 percent of houses in the area have toxic lead contamination," Stracener said. "Also, his insurance limits were $500,000 for the structure. And they paid him $7,000."
On May 2, Cazares—with the help of the California Fire Victims Law Center, filed a lawsuit against the California FAIR Plan, alleging bad faith and breach of contract. Newsweek contacted the California FAIR Plan for comment by email on Monday.
Growing Anger Against California Insurers
Cazares is by far not the only wildfire survivor whose insurance claims seem to have fallen on deaf ears and who are still facing high levels of toxicity inside their fire-ravaged homes.
A Pacific Palisades couple, Scott and Lissette Jungwirth, sued the California FAIR Plan in May to force them to turn over claims documents after claiming the company delayed payments to fix their homes. The couple's home, much like Cazares', did not burn during the January wildfires, but it was made inhabitable by the amount of lead, cyanide and heavy metals which was left inside their property by the blazes.
While they had to live in hotels, Airbnbs, and family's places for the past months, adding to the distress experienced by their family, the couple is still to receive any payment by the California FAIR Plan.
Their lawsuit accused California's fire insurer of last resort of bad faith, breach of contract and other wrongdoing—behaviors that would constitute a violation of the state's customer protection laws. Stracener said the insurer has done about the same with his client, Cazares.
"Forty days is the time limit in which they are supposed to have made a final decision on whether or not they're going to honor Luis' claim," Stracener said, explaining how long it took the FAIR Plan to come to a decision on Cazares' claim. "They went way over 40 days. I can't remember the exact date, but I want to say it was close to 80 days."
Cazares formally complained against FAIR Plan's behavior, which Eric called "a prime example" of how the insurer is violating policyholders' rights "by stretching out the time, putting more and more stress on the homeowner."
This is a tactic used by insurers "to put the homeowner in a desperate enough situation where they will take a diminished amount as opposed to what they are due under the law," he said.
"People have given the insurance company weeks and months to do right, and now they're getting final denials," Eric said. "After this amount of time, the insurance companies dragged it out, dragged it out and dragged it down. And fortunately, California has some very favorable consumer laws."
Similar litigation has been filed against other California insurers, including State Farm—California biggest homeowner insurer—which is now facing an investigation by state regulators following numerous complaints by policyholders.
"Under California law, insurers have to provide their estimate in 40 days. And they're just not doing that," Bryan Aylstock, founding partner of Aylstock Witkin Kreis & Overholtz and a member of the California Fire Victims Law Center, told Newsweek.
"We may not have the smoking gun where they're admitting that they're intentionally doing it, but the patterns tell the story. We've seen these patterns over and over again with the endless delays, requiring all sorts of crazy documentation on equipment or personal property that is just burned up," he said. "They're asking for serial numbers on lawn equipment that has disintegrated."
Another pattern observed by policyholders, Aylstock said, is "just the utter failure to come in and deal with the smoke and ash and soot that is everywhere, and even do the minimal testing to allow people to safely inhabit their homes."
Policyholders affected by the fires are forced to make a "horrible choice," Aylstock said, between putting their families at risk bringing them into their fire-affected homes or waiting for months for insurers to pay them their claims.
"Six tons of lead was released just in the Altadena fire, just from the lead paint. And that went somewhere. And sometimes it went, according to the testing, miles away," Aylstock said.
"It contaminated houses, and that needs to be cleaned up. There's no safe level of lead, particularly for children, and that can cause developmental delays, all sorts of issues later on. And what we're worried about is losing an entire generation of residents from that area, because people aren't aware or the insurance companies aren't doing what they need to do to make people aware and give them the testing so that they can protect their children," he said.
Luis Cazares' home remained standing after the January wildfires ravaged Altadena. But everything inside his home is now contaminated by toxic ash and debris.
Luis Cazares' home remained standing after the January wildfires ravaged Altadena. But everything inside his home is now contaminated by toxic ash and debris.
Luis Cazares
One of the main issues facing Cazares, Stracener and Aylstock is that California insurers currently have no clear obligation when it comes to smoke damage.
"For more than 30 years, California has lacked consistent statewide standards for investigating and paying smoke damage claims," said Commissioner Lara in a press release in May addressing the issue. "The result is confusion, delays, and families forced to return to unsafe homes. Consumers are angry and rightly so."
To address the issue, Lara announced the creation of a task force that would develop common standards for insurance coverage and clean-up of smoke-damaged homes. While this is a positive step forward for homeowners, it cannot come fast enough for wildfires survivors who've been living in limbo for the past six months.
A Lost Homecoming
Cazares is currently staying with his brother in Pomona, about an hour from his house. "I moved here because I wasn't sure whether I was going to go back home. And I didn't want to commit a year, which is what most people wanted to rent for, a contract for at least a year," he said.
"I've been going to the city and found out that we may be allowed to bring a trailer motorhome to live in there, because rents out here are tremendously high, to be honest. I used to pay $3,000 for my mortgage, and now everywhere is $4,000-$5,000. So I'm anxious to move," he said.
The California FAIR Plan, until now, has covered Cazares' rent. "At least they're helping with that part. But it's gonna run out of the coverage and I was told that they will stop paying for my rent," he said.
While he is considering moving into his lot with a motorhome, Cazares acknowledges that his former home is not safe to be lived in. "It needs to be repaired or demolished and renewed," he said.
However, saying goodbye to his home isn't easy for Cazares, who lived there when his nephew was growing up. "He was probably 5 or 6, and he played a lot of soccer on the weekend. His team loved to come to our house and get into the pool, the patio, we had celebrations most weekends when he was growing up. Now he's 25, and we have all of those good memories in the house."
Cazares said he is not asking for the California FAIR Plan to cover the entire amount it will cost to fix his home—only to pay more than what they are now. "It's so bad that I wanna tear it down. I don't think I'm gonna be living in it again," he said.
"I think it's a tear down," Stracener said. "Honestly, it would cost more than the insurance policy limits to actually fix it all the way and remediate the toxic damage because every surface is contaminated with lead ash, particularly in Luis's case, because the house wasn't closed."
But Stracener is optimistic about Cazares' case against the FAIR Plan. "We feel very strongly that this is a 100 percent related loss under his policy. And we are mystified that they are taking the position that they have taken in this case," he said.
"It doesn't make sense. And while what Luis is going through is awful, we feel very confident in his case."
There are signs that Cazares—and other wildfire survivors who filed litigation against the California FAIR Plan—may be in a good position to win their case.
On Tuesday last week, an L.A. county judge ruled that the California FAIR Plan is illegally underpaying and denying smoke damage claims. The decision, which could impact thousands of lawsuits filed since 2017—including those related to the January wildfires—and could have broader implications for smoke claims for non-FAIR claims, was taken in response to a lawsuit filed by homeowner Jay Aliff, whose home in Lake Tahoe burned in the Mountain View fire of November 2020.