The Advocate
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
page 6B
Pamela Ortis
The author starts the article by talking about how she was screwed over by FEMA and was forced to pay for her flood insurance. All though she was unsure on how to handle the matter, she should have know never to sign anything unless you have read every small detail and are completely sure of what is going on. She goes on to tell us that FEMA would refuse to apologize and how she should have know better.
I agree with FEMA that it is in someway her fault because she didn't make sure what she was signing into was what she wanted, and she should have asked before signing. On the otherhand I feel that FEMA acted very unprofessional and should have tried to work things out with the author.
Although this article gets its point across, it is written very unclear and some areas of the article are a bit hard to understand.
I remember the hurricane quite well and I can remember all of the trouble FEMA caused and how much they didn't help. This does not surprise me at all that this woman was not helped by the FEMA crew, neither was the rest of the city. She should have read all of the fine print, yes, but in times of crisis, you aren't really thinking straight and will do anything to make things a little easier.
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like the author just needed to vent on paper. I guess he/she wanted to warn others before they did the same thing, but isn;t it her fault for not looking into something before she signed it?
ReplyDeleteI think its very wrong for FEMA to take advantage of people in that situation...of course they don't read the small print when something they've worked for their entire life just got destroyed in one second.
ReplyDeleteFEMA in general has just been getting the mess beat out of it by every author that covers it. I think that the author knew this would get some attention and that no one would disagree with him because he was saying bad things about FEMA.
ReplyDelete