Laserfiche WebLink
~I~I TRTIIM 8 RSSOCIRTES-TEL~713-995-7191 May 24,.95 512 No.007 P.02 <br />.~ t.. ... ~. 'cnTS.lt c. LPL I,:, ! - <br />May 24, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br />thickness is 450 Peet, my house can't be effected because it <br />is more than 347 feet away, THEN when DMG corrects the <br />distance from the mine to my home to 362.5 in the August 12,. <br />1993, letter, DMC using a 30 degree angle of draw and 445 <br />foot overburden thickness, !ells short of the "calculated <br />effects from subsidence 116.2 feet..." from the structure. <br />Consistent - 1 thi~ik not. <br />The preliminary conclusion as related to me by Mr. <br />Gerrity after the May 19th on-site visit, expressed by tho <br />State and OSM, waa~ that the structural damage was related to <br />the water problem from the roof. For the record, the FZRST <br />indication we had that the house was moving was the crook in <br />the dining room floor, the dining room window, and the <br />constant movement in the roof. It is obvious that the <br />damage to the upstairs sitting room is water related, <br />however, this WAS NOT a problem until the structure moved, <br />and it became impossible 'to maintain the roof with the <br />constant movement. KEEP IN MIND THIS HOUSE HAD NO PROBLEMS <br />UNTIL AFTER THE MINING STARTED ZN 1988 - A FACT WHICH CAN BE <br />CONFIRMED BY MANY PEOPLE. <br />I am requesti.nq copies of the study protocols from all <br />parties who wer- present at the last two on-site <br />investigations, resumes from Dr. Pendleton, Dr. Craft, and <br />Dr. Kohl ,. as well ss responses to my last several letters. <br />I am also enclosing a copy of the May 19, 1988, letter <br />from the mine -refer to page 2, paragraph '1. The mine was <br />well aware that they did not have to monitor the stsuctura <br />until they were one month away Prom mining under the <br />structure. It is apparent that this STATE REQUISEMENT, <br />Stipulation 28, which, in turn,•refers to Section 2.06:6 of <br />the Board Regulations, is woefully inadequate as it does <br />not flefine the distance from which they must monitor, only <br />the time. This makes absolutely no sense: The mine <br />committed a fraud on us with an intentional perversion of <br />the truth. The false, misleading, and -untrue <br />representations of the mine induced us into agreeing with <br />the mine's request. <br />Elements of a cause for "Fraud" include false <br />a reasonable person, or group of people, in the doing of <br />some act which a person of ordinary prudence would mat have <br />done. Contributory negligence would be the act or odssion <br />amounting to want of ordinary care on the part of the <br />complaining party, which concurring with the defendant's <br /> <br />.-.~..~(~~,M.n .... .,. <br />