Robyn Elliott is moving on from the pain and dislocation caused by Canberra's Mr Fluffy asbestos crisis, but more than a year after its peak, a priceless possession is dragging her back.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
She lived in a rented Fluffy home in Hughes with her two daughters for more than four years. While on holiday in Melbourne in September 2014, news of the presence of loose-fill asbestos made their house unsafe to live in.
Despite being self-employed and regularly working from the house, she immediately made plans to move out, leaving behind nearly everything – including the wedding dress worn by her mother Geraldine in 1958.
Geraldine Elliott died in 2001.
Since realising the dress was still in the house, Ms Elliott has been seeking help from the ACT government's asbestos taskforce to retrieve it. On recent visits to the house, taskforce contractors were unable to find the dress, and photos from the search revealed that contaminated winter coats and ski jackets could be missing.
The home has been sold as part of the government's buy back program and is due to be demolished sometime in 2016.
"The whole thing isn't fair," Ms Elliot said.
"I had mentally let go of everything I had lost. It is thousands on thousands of dollars worth of items that I won't get back. It's been a year, I feel a lot stronger and I feel I have the emotional capacity to take it on again now."
She said former rental tenants had been sometimes forgotten in some of the Fluffy response and media coverage. Many lost thousands of dollars worth of belongings, including clothing, furniture, household items and soft furnishings.
Ms Elliot received $14,000 in emergency government payments plus access to counselling and other support. With her daughters, she moved to a granny flat at a family member's home and is now living in her sister's house.
"The [house] owner knew the risk as soon as Mr Fluffy started hitting the headlines, given he built the house and he put Mr Fluffy there, he had it removed in the 1980s ... but he didn't think it would be a problem for his house because he had a clean up certificate.
"I actually felt quite betrayed. There was a family living in that house and even if he felt there was no risk, I should have been notified when he received a registered post letter," Ms Elliott said.
The search for the wedding dress is continuing.
Ms Elliott believes contractors have been looking in the wrong cupboards. A taskforce spokeswoman said she will have to pay for a third visit for contractors to search again, wearing protective equipment.
"Ms Elliot cannot personally attend this property as it has been decommissioned in the lead up to demolition," the spokeswoman said.
"Officers are willing to again enter this property for a final time to search for the dress if Ms Elliot can provide additional information on location. Noting this is the third time the property has been entered since she left the items behind, cost recovery of this activity will be sought."
"It is important to note there were also positive samples detected for amosite asbestos in the wardrobes she was seeking to retrieve the dress from."
The spokeswoman disputed suggestions that rental tenants had not been cared for in the Fluffy process. Renters had access to emergency payments and changes to rental laws had made it easier for either a tenant or landlord to terminate a lease because of Mr Fluffy. Tenants needed to give only two days notice to terminate their lease without financial penalty, while landlords could give one week's notice.
Mental health support, some business discounts and invitations to attend forums and information sessions were also given to rental tenants, the spokeswoman said.
