5815 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Thanks to shoeflack for discussing his issues with obtaining home insurance. It turns out shoeflack may not be out of the woods yet, as should the dispensary in his building alter their product line-up the home insurance will need to be re-evaluated and could be denied.

 

Unlicensed and unregulated marijuana dispensaries setting up shop in mixed-use residential and commercial buildings may be putting their neighbours at risk in ways not previously considered.

 

Bad high: Victoria condo owner finds City’s unregulated pot shops and home insurance don’t mix

http://victoria.citi...ance-don-t-mix/

 

The City of Victoria’s rapid proliferation of unlicensed marijuana dispensaries has become more than a mere regulatory hurdle, according to a City of Victoria resident who recently discovered that a neighbourly pot shop could void his home insurance.

“It was so frustrating sitting there having the broker say we might not be able to do this,” said a Victoria condominium owner who contacted Citified Media following an arduous experience at the hands of an insurance broker.

The resident, who requested anonymity and whom we’ll refer to as John Smith, was shocked to learn that the recent opening of an unlicensed marijuana dispensary in a retail space along the ground floor of his condominium building could have denied him his home insurance, and still might, due to increased risk.

“It was rather embarrassing to have to essentially plead to the insurance broker that they should insure me when she said they might not be able to,” Smith said, adding that a stipulation of the insurance he eventually received was to alert the brokerage immediately should the unlicensed dispensary alter its product line-up to include on-site baked marijuana edibles. [Full article]

[Nparker]

As a taxpayer in the CoV I shouldn't have to the cover the costs when a property owner successfully sues the city after he/she is denied insurance because the City allowed illegal businesses to proliferate. Her Worseship has directed this abysmal policy and she and her colleagues on Council need to be held accountable.

[shoeflack]

Thanks for the story, Mike. Hate to go all anonymous, but having just moved in, the last thing I want to do is start off on the wrong foot with a new strata raising hell and all. Happy to answer any questions about my experience.

[HB]

The resident, who requested anonymity and whom we’ll refer to as John Smith, was shocked to learn that the recent opening of an unlicensed marijuana dispensary in a retail space along the ground floor of his condominium building could have denied him his home insurance, and still might.

The story is informative and heart warming but a little suspicious. Why does this person need to be hidden and why do they not disclose the location of the illegal shop.

the story would in my opinion have more weight if it showed a human face to the words instead of ...well...just words.I fthis person lives in a building then everyone there is at risk of not being covered. It would make sense to name the store.

 

if an illegal kiddie **rn store opened up shop people would name it and its location but in the case of an illegal pot shop they are given some protection here by the poster.

 

i say name it why help them.

[Nparker]

Thanks for the story, Mike. Hate to go all anonymous, but having just moved in, the last thing I want to do is start off on the wrong foot with a new strata raising hell and all. Happy to answer any questions about my experience.

Have you had any response from the CoV regarding the precarious position in which their policies have put you?

[shoeflack]

Have you had any response from the CoV regarding the precarious position in which their policies have put you?

 

Just a couple of "thanks for bringing this to our attention" type notes from Thornton-Joe and Isitt.

[Mike K.]

Shoeflack also brought the following article to my attention: http://www.vancouver...2201/story.html

 

A Vancouver residential highrise that had wanted to house a dispensary in a retail unit was told they would not receive insurance.

[shoeflack]

The story is informative and heart warming but a little suspicious. Why does this person need to be hidden and why do they not disclose the location of the illegal shop.

the story would in my opinion have more weight if it showed a human face to the words instead of ...well...just words.I fthis person lives in a building then everyone there is at risk of not being covered. It would make sense to name the store.

 

if an illegal kiddie **rn store opened up shop people would name it and its location but in the case of an illegal pot shop they are given some protection here by the poster.

 

i say name it why help them.

 

In the email I sent to Council, I did disclose the address and business name. Feel free to FOIPPA the email. It'll buy me the couple months I need to feel comfortable with the new strata, per my note above.

[HB]

Have you had any response from the CoV regarding the precarious position in which their policies have put you?

Not just him...the whole building ...if one insurance broker knows the rest do and if they didn't now they do after reading this

[Nparker]

Just a couple of "thanks for bringing this to our attention" type notes from Thornton-Joe and Isitt.

Ugggh.

[HB]

You own the home ...why would you worry about upsetting a strata about something as serious as this as I said before it affects them all not just you,

[HB]

I would be mighty pissed to find out I cant get insurance because of the illegal store...I wouldn't be sitting there being all quiet and polite about it I would inform each and every person in the building via notes posted in public areas and further ones under the door of each apartment,

the last thing I would be doing is thinking about upsetting the Grand Poobah...but hey that's just me.

The media should be made aware of it and the snowball effect will be every condo in the city will be on it then the Queen will need to act

i wish you luck and hope you can find a way through it...

Edited by HB, 14 February 2017 - 03:45 PM.

[Mike K.]

The name of the building or the pot shop is irrelevant, though. If you live in a residential building that has a marijuana dispensary operating in it, you should race on down to your insurance broker and double check everything is a-ok, otherwise you might find out you're no longer covered.

 

You may also wish to request an emergency strata meeting, or an emergency meeting with the management firm taking care of your rental building.

[shoeflack]

Just so we're all clear, I was able to obtain insurance at the end of the day, and the condo building itself also still does have insurance.

 

Having just taken possession, I haven't had the opportunity to attend a strata meeting to discuss this because one hasn't yet been held. So I don't have the other side of the story. I don't know what discussions have been held informally by the strata (as there is nothing the the minutes to suggest formal discussions). Hell, maybe the dispensary is reimbursing every strata owner for their insurance cost for causing trouble. The issue is that I only have one point of evidence to suggest that there is a problem here. I'll certainly discuss this with my strata at the next meeting in order to obtain more information. The last thing I'm going to do is plaster the hallways with flyers when I don't yet have all the facts.

[Mike K.]

Can you elaborate why the baking of edibles would require a re-assessment?

[todd]

Insurance was provided in the end may have just been an untrained insurance broker?

[shoeflack]

Can you elaborate why the baking of edibles would require a re-assessment?

 

I was told that them baking edibles would increase the general risk to the building (higher chance of fire due to baking equipment, etc.). I'm not sure what generally happens if a ground floor commercial unit features a restaurant (such as the Era building) and how that impacts residential insurance.

 

The issues that they raised with me were the on-site baking issue, as well as they wanted to make sure that the business had a separate entrance (it does). If those two issues were reversed, they said they would not have approved the insurance.

 

I'm not sure that the broker was a total novice on this. She was clear that when she asked around the office, no other brokers had dealt with the situation before, and that she had to get approval from the insurance adjuster who made the remark about on-site baking requiring re-evaluation.

 

This was not some small time broker. This was one of the largest insurance brokers in the province.

[rjag]

Another challenge (not sure if this was already mentioned) is that if you cant get insurance then you most likely cant get a mortgage.

[sdwright.vic]

Illegal, unlicensed businesses most likely face many hurdles in getting insurance. If the start baking, there are no regulations in place about the type of oven or safety equipment they must have (unlike a REAL bakery). Those things alone, I can see a insurance companies precautions.

[todd]

Another challenge (not sure if this was already mentioned) is that if you cant get insurance then you most likely cant get a mortgage.

 

Illegal, unlicensed businesses most likely face many hurdles in getting insurance. If the start baking, there are no regulations in place about the type of oven or safety equipment they must have (unlike a REAL bakery). Those things alone, I can see a insurance companies precautions.

 

Except you can get insurance...