Make no mistake about it, with the implementation of 495 we now have a whole new class. This new class of claimants has to clear a whole new set of hurdles the previous class claimants did not. You know, the previous class where the PSC members expedited their own clients' claims....
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "DHECC - Comment Bump June 7, 2014":
As of 7/25/14 new denials between 6/2/14
523 Exclusion Denials
444 Causation Denials
280 Other Denials
5,821 Incomplete Denials
Totals 7,068
IN-HALE
Update:
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "DHECC - Comment Bump June 7, 2014":
As of 7/25/14 new denials between 6/2/14
523 Exclusion Denials
444 Causation Denials
280 Other Denials
5,821 Incomplete Denials
Totals 7,068
IN-HALE
Update:
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "DHECC - Comment Bump July 25, 2014":
Just to be clear the 7,068 denials are from the time period the Claims Administrator announced payments would resume after the injunction was lifted and policy 495 would be implemented.
The total amount of denials issued by the claim center is 55,588 with only 45,975 unique claimants receiving a payment.
One more interesting fact out of the 45,975 unique claimants paid 19,258 or 42% of them are Coastal Claimants only receiving $2,500 to $5,000 dollars.
IN-HALE
15 comments:
Just to be clear the 7,068 denials are from the time period the Claims Administrator announced payments would resume after the injunction was lifted and policy 495 would be implemented.
The total amount of denials issued by the claim center is 55,588 with only 45,975 unique claimants receiving a payment.
IN-HALE
One more interesting fact out of the 45,975 unique claimants paid 19,258 or 42% of them are Coastal Claimants only receiving $2,500 to $5,000 dollars.
IN-HALE
Add the VoO and Wetlands claims, which were being paid even before the settlement, and the majority of claims paid to date would have been paid anyway. Why is the PSC still getting $600,000,000?
Are you suggesting there's a cause and effect relationship between PSC members' efforts to expedite their clients' claims and the adoption of Policy 495?
Only $2500 to $5000?
That is peanuts. Forthy two percent-- edging up to half of the claims-- is processing the claims of those who only lost a few thousand?
I`m not going to belittle those losses. Those are do-or-die amounts of money for most of us.
But I do not understand. The scale of the disaster and the harm caused is immense.
Almost half the people with vaild, urgent claims cannot be in the peanut league.
What should they do? File a million little, tiny claims and hope for the best? Is that strategy legal?
"Are you suggesting there's a cause and effect relationship between PSC members' efforts to expedite their clients' claims and the adoption of Policy 495?"
fuck yes
Juneau allowed and excused the PSC to expedite the claims of their private clients.
Juneau, PSC and BP wrote 495.
BP is silent on the expediting issue.
"Juneau allowed and excused"
Not sure about that. Are you?
"After publishing my story on the email chain I received detailing efforts within the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims Center to expedite Plaintiff Steering Commitee's (PSC) personal claims ahead of other class claimants, I received a response from Claims Administrator, Patrick Juneau, implying that the PSC claims were expedited as part of "sampling program" in preparation for a fairness hearing that occurred in November of 2012, about six months after the office officially opened.
In that response, Mr. Juneau made the following statements:
"After discussion with the Court, BP and the PSC, it was determined that a larger number of claims should be examined before the fairness hearing so that the Court, the parties, objectors and claimants could see how the settlement program was working. "
and
"The Claims Administrator, with the knowledge and input of the PSC and BP, asked the PSC to provide a listing of such cases and a sampling was taken of those cases." "
Explain. 495 was the result of the 5th Circuit's matching directive following BP's appeal from a Juneau order. How was that prompted by PSC expediting activity?
"How was that prompted by PSC expediting activity?"
That's not what I said.
A Coastal Claim is a condo, boat slip or water front property basically 1 to 2 blocks off the beach defined by the mapping system in light blue.
This is a small strip of land that gerrymanders around to avoid several expensive pieces of property.
They require two documents the deed and the property tax receipt the compensation amount is based on the assessed value.
It’s not uncommon for small investors to own 2-10 vacation rental properties.
The intent was to compensate them for the loss of enjoyment or association, management fees and taxes incurred for 2010.
These require little to no work to process but they rack up numbers that Patrick uses to make it sound like tons of work is being done by the court vendors.
In reality based on the status sheet as of 7/25/14 that includes claims needing calculations items 2-6 starting with Individual Claims thru Failed Business claims 155,022 claims filed and only10% or 15,275 unique claimants paid.
Who’s winning!!!!!!
IN-HALE
I believe their efforts to expedite their own claims may have been prompted by their prior knowledge that the terms of the settlement may change or even collapse.
My "cause and effect" question was the reverse; I was asking whether you were saying that the PSC's expediting effort somehow caused 495 to come into effect. From your response, I guess you're not suggesting that. Rather, you're saying that some of the expediting was prompted by a concern that the deal might not be approved "as proposed", and/or that eventually there would be some significant change -- like 495.
Another 1162 incompletes denials went out in the last 2 days vs. 37 payments to the BEL class.
IN-HALE
Post a Comment