Guyanese Immigrant Family Wins First Battle in Struggle For Insurance Claims
By Felicia Persaud

New York, August 2001: The door opens into a front room that has been crammed to fit the furnishings of a living room since the actual living room area has been turned into a bedroom. The walls in this section of the house are swollen but lead into a dining room area that is surrounded by bare concrete walls that give the appearance that wallpaper or a wall of wood was abruptly torn off. The kitchen walls too have been ripped clean of whatever covering they once held, leaving them bare and ugly to the eye. The attic tells a similar tale, except it is boarded up and bare; the ceiling has been ripped wide open to reveal exposed electric wires while the windows have all been boarded shut resulting in a dark look and a dank smell. Only an electric bulb hangs overhead, connected from a few stands of electrical wires that give the room an eerie appearance. Downstairs in the basement, the boiler that has heated the house for 21 years is silent and cobwebs and mildew have made it their new home.
In this visually unhealthy and hazardous condition live Mr. Henry, a legally blind Guyanese immigrant and his wife Eileen. They live here not by choice but because a sudden electrical fire turned their happy lives upside down.
April 7th this year was supposed to be a happy one for these Brooklyn residents and their daughter Sharon Vincent. But not only did an electrical fire pull the plug on their celebrations; it also led to months of frustration and stress. For four months, the Henry's, both ailing senior citizens, and Ms. Vincent, tried to get answers about a fire insurance claim they filed with their insurance company for 20 years, Ostego Mutual through public adjustor, Rubin & Rosen Adjustors, Inc., also of Brooklyn. Unable to get any answers and living in the unhealthy and unsightly conditions mentioned above, they wrote to several politicians citywide as well as the mayor's office, the public advocate, community advocates, and several major news media, but to no avail. Only State Senator John Sampson of Brooklyn responded to the Henry's letter by providing advice through Meredith Jones, consul with the office, and by sending out an independent adjustor Mrs. Bernard, to assess the situation.
That's when the Henry's got the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office Senior Affairs Bureau on their side. On Wednesday, August 15th, Eugene Kelley, deputy district attorney and head of the Unit, along with Sonia Bishai, administrative accountant with the Bureau, turned up unannounced at a meeting called by the head of R&R Adjustors, Ira Rosen with the Henry's. As Rosen began reading out his costs to the Henry's, DDA Kelley handed Rosen a subpoena of his records. That's when the meeting reached its highpoint as an obviously shocked Rosen quickly retracted his statements and instead told the immigrant family he would waive all the costs he levied against them.
The DA's Office subpoena followed a check with the city's Consumer Affairs Department, which showed that Rosen had previous violations against him and the Henry's case was just the latest. According to Kelley, his office found that the complaints date back to 1997. In that year, Rosen & Rubin, which runs a construction company, was cited by Consumer Affairs for operating with a suspended license. On April 20, 1999 a complaint was also filed against them for shabby workmanship.
Then this year, the company contacted the Henry's following their fire, and offered to be their public adjustor and work as their representative in getting the insurance company to process the claim. The Henry's say they agreed to a fee of six percent of the total on the structural settlement claim paid by the insurance company. They also claim that R&R officials had them sign a contract hiring them as their contractor for an additional 20 percent of the final rate. The Henry's also claim R&R agreed to find them an apartment or hotel until their home was renovated. They say they were told that this expense, along with the restoration, would be covered by the insurance company.
But the family accuses R&R executives of going back on their word. Instead, they claim that when apartments were located and R&R officials were informed to supply the required documentation needed by the potential landlords, calls were not heeded or returned.
Ms. Vincent claims that the secretary at R&R would always answer and when appointments were made to see the owners, they never showed. "This happened several times," alleged Vincent, who added that being asthmatic, she and her ailing mother had to seek lodging with relatives while Mr. Henry had to endure staying alone in the house for fear that it might be vandalized. Additionally, the Henry's claim the company's officials promised to sit down with them and see what clothing were salvageable from the fire, itemize them and send it out to a reputable cleaning company for cleaning and prompt return.
But they say that never happened. Instead, according to Ms. Vincent, "they waited until my 70-year-old mother and my 66-year-old blind father were alone, sent in their crew and took all of our clothing."
"We were left with the clothes on our backs," continued Vincent. "We received no money for the clothes (and) we incurred that expense out of pocket."
Vincent added that the clothing was returned in boxes about a month-and-a-half later but because of space constraints and the condition of the house, they were unable to sort out the clothing. The boxes they say are still lying unopened in the house.
The family also alleged that R&R executives promised to send a licensed contractor to clean up the debris left by the fire, but only a small portion was done. Instead, the Henry's allegd that the contractors "ripped off damaged paneling from the walls, leaving the areas unsecured and exposing us to mold, lead and asbestos."
Mr. Henry further stated that he was forced to pay an independent person $800 to clean up the house, since R&R's hired help never returned. The Henry's also say they then began approaching R&R officials for the cleaning bill on the cleaning company's letterhead. But they say they never received it. What they did receive, they say, was a bill from R&R stating they owed them $3,000. The Henry's also say they then asked for a bill from the contractor that R&R had brought in to do the clean up. It was then they say they found out that R&R Adjustors were also R&R Restoration. The Henry's were then asked to sign a new contract, which would essentially hire R&R Restoration as the contractors. Thinking it would hasten the process of renovation, the Henry's claim they signed the contract. But still nothing happened.
Ms. Vincent says she then began vigorously calling the adjustors as well as the insurance company to find out what exactly was the status of the claim while Mr. Henry began writing several local and city politicians including Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles Schumer, Congressman Major Owens, Councilwoman Una Clarke, Public Advocate Mark Green, City Comptroller Alan Hevesi and the mayor's office to try to get them to intervene on their behalf.
Then in June, Ms. Vincent says she received a fax on plain paper, minus a letterhead, from R&R, which claimed that the document was a "Sworn Statement In Proof Of Lost," from Ostego Mutual. A copy obtained by this writer showed that the amount of the claim was listed as $36,017.70. This was after a $5,140.73 "hold back" cost was deducted along with a $250 "deductible." The Henry's refused to sign the form, specifically because they claimed it did not seem to come officially from the insurance company. Following their refusal, the adjustor they say began avoiding them and they got no answers from anyone. Their frustration level grew, until the DA's Office was called to the case.
Ira Rosen of R&R Adjustors has, however, denied any wrongdoing. In a phone interview on August 22nd, Rosen said that his company simply followed procedure in dealing with the case. According to Rosen, one of his employees, Jimmy Garcia met and signed a retainer agreement with the Henry's in April. He denied that the clothing was not taken to a reputable cleaning company stating that Carisso Cleaners were hired to do the job since it is one of the company's the insurance agency recognizes. He also said that there was no way the insurance company would pay for living expenses upfront. "I told them the insurance company will pay for rent once the claim was settled and not before them," said Rosen, who also alleged that the Henry's are lying about staying with relatives and still live in the house. The Henry's have, however, stated that Mrs. Henry and her daughter are staying with a sister while Mr. Henry continues to live in the house.
Rosen also said that the "Sworn Statement" sent to the Henry's is standard procedure and is normally typed up by his company, then sent off to the insured to be signed and faxed to the insurance company in order for payments to be processed.
He blamed the "confusion" on the Henry's, who he says want more money than what was stated on the claim. So instead of the $36,017.70, Rosen claims the family wants over $72,000.
The R&R head also defended his business, saying they have been operating since 1982, and although they had two complaints filed against the construction company, the matters were basically about shoddy workmanship, not insurance money. He also said he decided to waive all charges because "it's not worth all the aggravation." Rosen also denied that the Henry's case was being added to a list of complaints by Consumer Affairs, saying instead that his lawyer has settled everything with the department and there is no issue. He was also adamant that he has a license to operate a construction company as well.
But the DA's Office has stated that R&R's license to operate as a renovator was suspended. Kelley and his team indicated they had enough on the renovation end to pursue legal action against the company. Consumer Affairs has also moved in and issued a summons against Rubin and Rosen. They were reportedly fined $2,8000 on August 21st.
Consequently the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office, working in conjunction with the city's department of Consumer Affairs, completed its investigation into the case, resulting in R&R Restoration and Home Improvement Co., Inc. being fined $10,000 and ordered to release the Henry's from all contractual obligations.
The DA's Office investigation and subsequent subpoena of R&R's records followed a check with Consumer Affairs. The inquiry showed that Rubin and Rosen, who own both the adjusting and the construction companies, had previous violations against them. While their adjusting license was intact and the DA's Office found no complaints in that area, DDA Eugene Kelley and his assistant Sonia Bishai did, however, find that Rubin and Rosen were running the construction company with a suspended license. Additionally, despite the suspension, the company had entered into a contract with the Henrys' in which they were demanding a profit of twenty percent of the insurance claim for the proposed renovation. They had insisted on holding the Henry's to this contract, until the DA's Office stepped in and found out that because of the suspension, the contract was null and void and constituted an illegal act with the obvious intention of conning the immigrant family into paying money to a company which was operating illegally.
However, because the property was boarded up after the fire by a different company, the Henrys' will have to pay $319.34 for that service. Sharon Vincent, daughter of the Henrys', say they have no problem paying the money and are just happy that the nightmare with R&R executive is over.
"I'm glad they're out of our lives," said Vincent, reached for comment on Saturday. "Now we can have open communication with the insurance company."
The structural damage claims is also close to being settled. According to Vincent, Ostego Mutual, the insurance company, is now offering over $89,000 to settle the claim. The recent development followed a reassessment of the damages caused to the property by the insurance adjustor and structural engineers brought in following a meeting with the DA's Office, the family and R&R. Company officials have since blamed R&R executives for the slow processing of the claim. With winter just a few months away, the family is hoping that the check is issued soon and the renovations can get underway.
The personal damage claim is still, however, up in the air. The family claim that according to their policy, they are supposed to have their expenses covered by the company until the structural damage claim is settled. But company officials are still examining the clauses of the policy closely before making a decision. The Henrys' want their rent, clothing and food expenses to be covered in this claim.