It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BP fund lawyer says 'huge number' of claimants lack proof

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   

BP fund lawyer says 'huge number' of claimants lack proof


www.ctv.ca

Kenneth Feinberg, the lawyer who is serving as the administrator of BP's $20-billion oil spill claims fund, says a "huge number" of claimants are failing to provide basic documents such as tax returns and financial statements, which are necessary to prove the extent of their losses.

"We've notified people that they must give us some substantiation, some proof," Feinberg told CTV's Canada AM during an interview from Washington on Wednesday morning.

Feinberg recently suggested that as many as 80 per cent of the remaining claimants will not receive compensation because of documentati
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   
First off I must admit that there will always be scam artists looking to profit off a claim like this. But in my opinion I think everyone within a certain distance of the Gulf Coast should qualify for compensation, and the people who can provide documentation should qualify for extra benefits. We can tell that BP had this all planned the whole time. He is asking for tax returns proving this and that. And none of us hear anything from Obama about this. He has his head stuck in the sand as always. Also I still see a couple stories a week on ATS and in the general media indicating that we are not even beginning to comprehend the impact of the spill. Way to go BP.

www.ctv.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


The beauty of it is He doesn't even mention they aren't paying for those who do have documentation.
Or if they are it is a cap limit so that if news gets out about how bad it truly is, they will not be paid any more than they already were.

Here your life is over, have $25,000 to feed your family of seven. Oh and that won't even cover the gas it will take for you to run around and try to find a new job in this economy.

Oh and you have health problems in relation to the spill. Naw, wasn't us. Go see one of our doctors. He will let you know that it is merely a cold. Take two of these and be dead by morning.

Thanks BP.


**Sorry, I am worked up this morning**



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


One of my favorite Seafood Restaurants is thinking of closing the doors. They have been around for 30 years, but when you make your money off Apalachicola Oysters and Gulf Shrimp the BP spill is pretty devastating. They are 30 miles from the coast, and they still have some business. How are they supposed to show "proof?" They can show previous year's numbers compared to this years, but BP can come back and blame the economy, the housing market, the unemployment rate, etc.

Of course nobody has enough "proof," and this is exactly what we all said would happen!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Given that Louisiana is basically a welfare state, scammers are to be expected.

Nothing wrong with requiring proof before cutting a check.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


The claims are not from "welfare" folks. They are from business people. How could a welfare recipient be impacted by the Gulf Spill? I'm sure some are trying to file frivolous claims, but those claims are quickly ignored and/or dismissed.

The important claims are from the small business owners that have had major economical impacts, but proving it is a result of the spill is next to impossible. BP promised to stand up and do what was right, but instead they are playing hardball with the claims. The MSM is off of this story and on to Charlie Sheen, so no reason for BP to play nice any more.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Doing "whats right" doesnt include just handing over a check to anyone who shows up.

What kind of responsible business owner cant even provide a copy of tax returns?



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Great posts guys. I was never aware that the people who have documentation are still not getting paid, but it is to be expected. I tend to agree with getreadyalready over HaveAnotherOne due to the fact that most of the people filing for claims are business owners who were affected by the oil spill not welfare collectors. Not just the fishermen were affected, but restaurant owners, hotel/motel owners, tourism industry... etc. I believe the whole region on welfare or not deserves a cut. When daddy can't put food on the table it causes a ripple effect. The kids goes to school hungry, it can cause marital problems, depression. Meanwhile this lawyer is keeping as smug face as he says you do not have enough documents to prove that BP stole your family's lively hood due to their greed. I feel no pity for these corporations.
edit on 9-3-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: grammar and punctuation



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


It isn't about "handing over a tax return," I know several business that have handed over boxes of documentation, but it still isn't enough. I also know that BP hasn't paid up to the State or the Counties yet, and I know that the Florida Department of Revenue is undergoing a special project to document the expenses they have incurred. BP is even denying the State's claims!

"Doing what's right" means not playing hardball with the people they have affected. Sure, they should investigate the claims, but they shouldn't look for loopholes and legal wrangling to get out of paying!

If you don't have any personal experience in dealing with this situation, then you shouldn't be shooting from the hip on the subject. BP is basically denying every claim, and playing the legal game to force people to appeal over and over again. They are seeking to exhaust people's will power or financial resources and avoid paying as many claims as possible.

BP closed down their "claims office" in Panacea/Crawfordville before the leak was even plugged up! They started turning people away because the lines of claimants were too long, and then they closed that office and redirected people to Panama City.

They are playing dirty.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Of course they will say that the lack proof.
Alot of them probably can't prove it and a lot probably are scam artists.
However I think BP should pay out to the scam artists aswell that will be their penance for the land and animals that were destroyed that can't file claims.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
getreadyalready, You are so preaching to the choir here!

Our Mayor runs the local golf course which is owned by the POA. They have four boxes of documentation proving their economic loss, and guess what? DENIED.
A local businessman with no prior health problems (with x-rays to prove it) worked for 5 days on the cleanup and he is dying. His lungs look like a 20 year chain smoker. Guess what? DENIED.
Our family owned tourist shop was paid a fraction of what we would have grossed. (Hey I agree, we should rejoice we were paid something!) Which we then used ALL of to pay our distributors for the merchandise we purchased with the intention of selling it during season. They pay on profit lost, but profit has never been enough to PAY THE D@$N BILLS! We are sitting on merchandise that we pray to the forces that be we can sell this year. (I try to ignore that sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach whenever I hear the latest news. I don't want to be in denial, but I really don't like the truth.)
Now, no one can actually sell and move out, because NO ONE is buying! So we are all stuck with property that can make no income, with high tax liability, and foreclosure looming over heads.


So tell me again how it is the welfare state who is whining about not getting a check from BP and I'll tell you you have another think coming.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 




They are playing dirty.


That's exactly it! They picked the right guy for the job too. This Kenneth Feinberg is quite the character. Here is a bit of information about him from his Wikipedia page.

wikipedia.org


Kenneth Feinberg (born October 23, 1945, Brockton, Massachusetts)[1] is an American attorney, specializing in mediation and alternative dispute resolution. Feinberg was appointed Special Master of the U.S. government's September 11th Victim Compensation Fund and currently serves as the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation, popularly called the "pay czar." Additionally, Feinberg currently serves as the government-appointed administrator of the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund. He is also an adjunct professor at the Columbia University School of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Georgetown University Law Center, New York University School of Law, the University of Virginia School of Law and at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law.


This guy even had his hands in the September 11th Compensation Fund. Everything this guy touches is corrupt, but then again he is a corporate lawyer. His nick name is the "pay czar".



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   
When looking at what James Hardy done with the asbestos compensation this is going to drag out for decades and people will be lucky to get a fraction of what they lost, most will die before finalisation. These corporations have the resources to play the courts like a fiddle and only care about the bottom line. Unless there is a Tunisia like event to alter the balance of power the claimants will not have a chance.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Those that can prove damages from the spill have every right to be compensated, and BP's unwillingness to do so could be considered a criminal matter.

That being said, people who cannot prove damages have no claim to any BP money.

BP has no fiduciary responsibility to just recklessly hand out cash. As a civil matter, people cannot just walk into a courtroom, claim damages and be handed a check without providing substantiating evidence.

BP has no obligation to hand out cash in order to alleviate social problems, as was mentioned in a post above.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


But what is the standard of proof for "lost income" or "lost tourism" or the expense to the state in terms of unemployment compensation? Department of Revenue is currently undergoing a monumental task of documenting every phone call that had to do with the Oil Spill. There are 100's of different call centers that get 1000s of calls per day, and many of those had to do with the Oil SPill.

There were people who stopped paying child support because they lost their job due to the oil spill. So, mothers and children went without support, while fathers were unemployed and falling further and further behind on child support. Those same mothers had to go to the State for WIC and Welfare and Food Stamps. So any single unemployed fisherman or jet ski renter or bartender may have had 3 to 8 additional claimants. How do they all prove their cases? Who gets paid back first? How can BP quantify any one claim over that of another?

I don't think they should have to pay every frivolous claim. My Mom and Dad got worried and moved back to Missouri. They incurred moving expenses and loss of income, while I incurred further household bills and a new daycare bill. I don't think I have a valid claim, but others might disagree.

I think BP needs to err on the side of awarding a little too much instead of holding up 99% of their claims over lack of documentation. It will be next to impossible to document all of the losses, so someone will have to use common sense somewhere along the way.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


But what is the standard of proof for "lost income" or "lost tourism" or the expense to the state in terms of unemployment compensation? Department of Revenue is currently undergoing a monumental task of documenting every phone call that had to do with the Oil Spill. There are 100's of different call centers that get 1000s of calls per day, and many of those had to do with the Oil SPill.

There were people who stopped paying child support because they lost their job due to the oil spill. So, mothers and children went without support, while fathers were unemployed and falling further and further behind on child support. Those same mothers had to go to the State for WIC and Welfare and Food Stamps. So any single unemployed fisherman or jet ski renter or bartender may have had 3 to 8 additional claimants. How do they all prove their cases? Who gets paid back first? How can BP quantify any one claim over that of another?

I don't think they should have to pay every frivolous claim. My Mom and Dad got worried and moved back to Missouri. They incurred moving expenses and loss of income, while I incurred further household bills and a new daycare bill. I don't think I have a valid claim, but others might disagree.

I think BP needs to err on the side of awarding a little too much instead of holding up 99% of their claims over lack of documentation. It will be next to impossible to document all of the losses, so someone will have to use common sense somewhere along the way.


Erring on the side of awarding a little too much would damage BP shareholders, and is never a smart idea. The entire process will prove to be one epic mess because deciphering the damage done to tourism by the spill, or by the poor economy itself will be an almost impossible task.

Those that can prove actual quantifiable damages should be paid immediately upon verification. Those that cannot prove damages need to prove their case. Fisherman are a case in point. Take their previous numbers caught, and subtract whatever they were able to catch this year (if anything), and pay them the difference. Fisherman who cannot prove prior year catches are simply SOL. Thats the price they pay for being irresponsible.

How would you personally go about differentiating the losses due to the spill, and those due to the recession?
edit on 9-3-2011 by HaveAnotherOne because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 



How would you personally go about differentiating the losses due to the spill, and those due to the recession?


I wish I had an answer for that. Like the example I put up with the unemployed father paying child support. The father is a fisherman, loses his job, stops paying child support, the mother loses income, files for public assistance, the father files for unemployment, so the loss of a single job has affected 2 people and the several state agencies. Who should get paid? Everyone? No one? Just the fisherman?

Since there is already a fund set up for oil spills, and there is an additional fund set aside by BP, and there is additional insurance money that BP can claim, I think they should pay everyone that makes a decent case. If the facts seem plausible and the affiliations can be verified, then I think they should pay.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join