Land Slip

Integrated Engineering Causation, Notice, and Pattern of Inaction

1. Early Structural Notice and Administrative Movements (2003)
In 2003, during the period in which I first provided notice of structural deficiencies affecting the subject properties, zoning changes and deed movements were simultaneously initiated or planned. This temporal overlap establishes an early pattern: when notice was given of potential structural or drainage failures, managing attorneys responded with administrative or ownership actions rather than engineering corrections. This pattern persisted in the years that followed.

2. Contractual Duty and Failure to Act (2005)
By September 2005, the implementation deadline set forth in the Jackson and Kelly agreement had passed. None of the agreement’s provisions—specifically those addressing the diversion and control of Platinum Properties’ drainage—were attempted or executed. This constituted a failure to act after formal notice and agreement.

3. Engineering Awareness Without Implementation (October 2005)
In October 2005, a rough drawing prepared by Triad Engineering depicting a large rock blanket was forwarded to me by Rich Lane. The drawing demonstrates that subsurface conditions and drainage concerns were known to the project’s engineering representatives. Despite this knowledge, Platinum Properties provided no response and undertook no corrective measures.

4. Field Meeting and Explicit Engineering Warning (Late 2005)
A site meeting was arranged at the fence line involving myself, Triad Engineering engineer Scott Krabill, and Laurita Construction supervisors Jeff and Ott. Mr. Krabill stated repeatedly that he had not previously been provided the Jackson and Kelly agreement, confirming a breakdown in communication among owner, counsel, and engineer. At that meeting, I reiterated concerns regarding improper drainage diversion and the condition of the access road.
The Triad engineer insisted that corrective work begin immediately, demonstrating professional recognition of an imminent engineering risk. Laurita Construction preferred to delay until drier weather, and the parties agreed to perform the work during the following spring and summer months. No work was performed.

5. Continued Pattern of Non-Correction After Notice (2006)
By early 2006, I provided Platinum Properties’ managing attorneys at Jackson and Kelly with typical retaining wall designs and sequential engineering plans. These materials specifically addressed the fence-line-supported lateral building and utility support wall installed or influenced by Thrasher Engineering. The purpose was to prevent foreseeable failure before a disaster occurred. These submissions were ignored, consistent with the earlier-established pattern of administrative maneuvering in lieu of engineering remediation.

6. Foreseeable Mechanical Failure (Late 2006)
In the latter part of 2006, Platinum Properties’ six-inch underground roof drainage line, located beneath an active traffic area, was repeatedly loaded by garbage trucks and was crushed. The failure was foreseeable given the pipe size, lack of protection, and known traffic loading—conditions that had been discussed and warned about in advance.

7. Hydraulic Consequences and Damage Pathway
Once crushed, the drainage system became hydraulically blocked. With no alternative outlet provided, drainage was forced backward toward Thrasher Engineering’s coal-seam placement at 109 and 113 Platinum Drive, exacerbating subsurface instability and structural stress.

8. Engineering and Professional Conclusion

The resulting damage was not anomalous or accidental. It was the predictable outcome of:

Repeated notice of structural and drainage deficiencies beginning in 2003;

Failure to implement agreed-upon corrective measures;

Professional warnings that were explicitly ignored;

Use of undersized and unprotected drainage infrastructure under heavy vehicular loading; and
A consistent pattern of legal and administrative action substituting for physical remediation.

The cumulative record demonstrates foreseeability, preventability, and a sustained departure from accepted engineering and professional standards of care.

An Uplifting Experience - March 2007

In March 2007, a local businessman asked me whether I was paying property taxes on the areas identified as 109 and 113 Platinum Drive. I replied that I was not. He then stated, “You will be soon,” which prompted me to pay closer attention to subsequent developments. This statement was not made in isolation. In late 2006, a small tractor had been staged at the front of 109 Platinum Drive, indicating preparatory site activity prior to any formal notice or recorded change.

I located a February 26, 2007 WBOY TV News Report that covered 109 Platinum Drive's structural upheaval. The floor of Building 109 Platinum Drive had raised in 2001. So, the above WBOY New Report illustrated a larger repeat of said 2001 Situation).

Following that warning, I went to the Harrison County Courthouse, where I located a recently recorded Quitclaim Deed dated December 5, 2006. The deed transferred the property parcels at 109 and 113 Platinum Drive from Platinum Properties LLC to Platinum Leasing LLC. The timing and nature of this transfer, occurring amid unresolved structural and drainage issues, were indicative of liability-avoidance maneuvering rather than corrective action. By the time the subsequent letter was issued, it was already too late for us—and, ultimately, for many others, both innocent and culpable alike.

Barn Area Slip

In approximately March 22, 2007, I forwarded an urgent letter to Platinum Properties’ attorney/s, proposing a small access road to mitigate drainage issues on their property. This proposed access road was distinct from the one contemplated in the 2005 Jackson and Kelly agreement, as it was far too late by this point.

Immediately following the submission of the letter, my father, Frank Lacaria, informed me of a slip at the road that ran along our barn. He also reported that my recently widowed Aunt Mavis had discovered three feet of water in her basement on February 21, 2007. (A plat of the area is provided.)

Notably, there had been no precipitation during this period, indicating that the flooding resulted from accumulated, redirected drainage rather than rainfall. This demonstrates that we were experiencing the effects of pent-up drainage from upstream properties. Media coverage at the time underscores the context: the February 26, 2007 WBOY news report stated, “Repair work on these two buildings started about two weeks ago,” confirming that the problems predated any remediation efforts.

Platinum and Insurance Company

I contacted Platinum Properties Attorney. I asked when Platinum Properties corrected their Western Front area above, if they would then correct our barn area in unison. He affirmed that they would.

I contacted Cincinnati Insurance representative that was in the meeting that produced the breeched 2005 Agreement. He informed me that their Attorney George Stewart was currently in meetings with the Platinum Properties Attorney. Both of whom created their now 2005 Breeched Agreement. Shortly thereafter, we received a letter. The letter gave the impression of confusion pointed us to the entities that created the recently completed Platinum Drive. The City of Bridgeport and the State of West Virginia as responsible.

Focus Change

In other words, both attorneys effectively gave me permission to shift my focus to these additional areas. At the time, my focus had been limited solely to Thrasher Engineering’s claimed fence line, as no one should examine beyond the immediate issue. Yet these two attorneys encouraged me to pursue the broader area. This raised a critical question: why was I being directed toward issues involving the City of Bridgeport or the State of West Virginia?

During my investigation, I located the September 1994 deed showing Platinum Properties’ purchase of the Said Area for $1,750,000. I then found the 2003 Purchase Agreement between Platinum Properties and the City of Bridgeport Planning Authority. The deed associated with the September 8, 2003 Purchase Agreement reflected a purchase price of $3,000,000—a difference of $1,250,000 compared to the original Property Deed,. This discrepancy was notable given that the property area acquired in 2003 was substantially smaller than the total area Platinum Properties had originally purchased in 1994.

Further, approximately $3,000,000 of taxpayer funds were used to construct Platinum Drive, extending from Eastpointe to Route 58. This road had initially been advertised as a congestion relief measure but was later criticized in the local press as “the road to nowhere.” The development also included CityNet Plateau, its large slope, and a retention pond. Visual documentation of these property movements and improvements was publicly available on a Realtor's website, providing further context for the financial and infrastructural changes.

An Odd look

The first person I consulted regarding the area was Mr. Richard Marsh, whose reputation for understanding and correcting these types of drainage and structural situations is well established.

Mr. Marsh identified the major underground saturation point near our barn and recommended the location for a test hole. He advised on the probable depth at which water saturation would be encountered and outlined a method to divert the water away from the area. His plan included installing a longer drainage system within a few feet of the barn to manage the flow effectively.

Upon inspection, Mr. Marsh observed that the barn itself had not suffered any damage—not even a hairline crack. He noted that the slip appeared unusual, resembling more of a dipped area than a traditional slope failure. In June 2007, we discovered the reason behind this irregular appearance, confirming his assessment of underlying subsurface conditions.

Coal Seam

Mr. Marsh and I drove to the developer’s property to inspect the property line area. On our way to the rear of 113 Platinum Drive, he asked me to stop at the front of Building 109 Platinum Drive.

After surveying the area, he asked, “Have they had any trouble with this building?” I replied that they had. He inquired further, “What kind of trouble?” I informed him of what I had read regarding the structural and subsurface issues.

He asked, “What did they say is causing it?” I explained that some type of mine soil mixed with water—likely pyrite—was suspected. Mr. Marsh nodded and stated that they had identified the water correctly. He then explained that Building 109 Platinum Drive was situated over a coal seam and that Platinum Properties’ activities had destabilized the area. He instructed, “Tell them to get the water off of you, and let’s go. I do not need to go further…”

Arduous Aspects

Below is a picture of the, 20' X100', plastic sheets I purchased, which had to replaced at times as heat and stretching caused cracks. We use blocks along with stakes to keep it tight. The second picture is where I later relocated the blocks and fence post. I had some help, but there were times I had to do the work alone.

The most difficult realizations: Platinum Properties two buildings of 109 and 113 Platinum Drive's roofs had been engineered as retention ponds. These roof's drainage and their rear parking lot had been "pumped" into our property which reached a focal point directly above at our red barn. (A red barn that suffered damage from the Platinum Properties surface drainage in 2003).