The $100,000 Challenge

THE $100,000 PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY CHALLENGE (funds have been placed in a designated trust account at RBC bank, Richmond, BC)

$100,000 CAD REWARD

In 2021 an unnamed major Canadian property insurance company denied a claim, alleging that a Claimant invalidated his coverage by physically accessing a ledge, exterior to his 18th floor unit of a residential high-rise building, located in Richmond, BC, Canada. The entire building is insured (policy No. 5PNGL0819) by the unnamed insurance company, under the Strata Plan LMS2845. For more than five (5) years the insurance company and six (6) of its lawyers, including the DWF Group Insurance Law Department head Nigel Beckmann and the firm's Senior Associate Meera Jain have pursued litigation in the BC Supreme Court, in confirmation of the unnamed insurance company's determination that the Claimant had physically accessed the 18th floor ledge, a photograph of which is displayed at the top of this page. Yet another lawyer, insurance expert David A. Joyce of QA Law, has also filed legal pleadings, in support of the narrative that the Claimant had physically accessed the ledge.

THE CHALLENGE:

The facts show that the unnamed insurance company executives and six (6) litigation lawyers have maintained a multi-year position in the BC Provincial and Supreme Courts that the official18th floor exterior ledge of Strata Plan LMS2845 (below) was physically occupied, possessed, or used by the Claimant. For a corporate legal department to advance such a narrative, their position must rest on a compliant, physically possible reality. We are offering $100,000 CAD to the first participant who can demonstrate the architectural fact upon which the insurance company and their lawyers rely.

Look at the official blueprints below: Can you guess how the unnamed insurer has denied coverage to the Claimant, on the basis that he gained physical access to the inaccessible ledge?

ELIGIBILITY:

Open to legal residents of Canada who have attained the age of majority in their province or territory of residence.

CONDITIONS TO CLAIM:

  1. Submissions must identify an official, engineered structural opening on the registered plan permitting direct physical ingress and egress to the ledge from the suite interior.

  2. Submissions cannot rely upon the removal, alteration, or bypass of mandatory building code safety mechanisms (including 100 mm window opening restrictors governed under the BC Building Code Section 9.8.8.1 / 3.3.1.7). Any path constituting violation of any building code or other law, forced window opening, hardware removal, or breach of structural window safety devices is strictly disqualifying from participation in this challenge.

  3. Access via external equipment, ladders, scaffolding, bosuns' chairs and other temporary platforms, structural alterations, or forced entry is strictly disqualifying from participation in this challenge .

  4. Digital media, photos, video recordings, AI-generated assets, or modified visual media will NOT be accepted or reviewed under any circumstances.

  5. Eligibility: Open to Canadian residents, as well as all personnel, claims managers, representatives, and legal counsel of the unnamed insurer.

  6. Time Limit: Concludes on 10 March 2017, at 11:59 PM PST. 8. Single Reward: Exactly one (1) grand prize of $100,000 CAD awarded to the first verified submission by timestamp.

  7. Mandatory Authentication: Requires a signed, stamped attestation from an active P.Eng., Registered Architect (AIBC), or licenced Professor of Structural Engineering.

SUBMISSIONS & VERIFICATION:

Formal architectural citations, engineering proofs, or legal inquiries regarding this challenge may be directed in writing to legal counsel for the unnamed insurer:

Attorneys Meera Jain and Nigel Beckmann
DWF Group
2400 -200 Granville St.
Vancouver, BC V6C 1S4
Tel. 604.682.5466 contact.ca@dwfgroup.com

As indicated by the letter to the left, more than five (5) years ago, this unnamed Canadian property insurance company determined, after the conclusion of an investigation, that the Claimant's claim had been denied, on the basis that the Claimant had invalidated his coverage because he had "possessed" "occupied" or "used" the "property designated for exclusive use".

The insurers five (5) lawyers, as well, have concluded that the Claimant had invalidated his coverage because he had "possessed" "occupied" or "used" the "property designated for exclusive use".

The Claimant's position is that neither he, nor any other human, could have gained access to the property, and hereby offers the sum of $100,000 (CAD) (one hundred thousand dollars (CAD) to anyone who can support the insurance company's determination that any human could have "possessed", "occupied" or "used" the "property designated for exclusive use", according the the conditions, as posted above.