Court Affirms Limit on Replacement Cost for World Trade Center

October 31, 2006

  • November 1, 2006 at 2:54 am
    1who knows says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thats usually a prety good sign of fraud – The owner has the structure burned down or destroyed before the company can even get the policy in the mail! Check this out…

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&q=loose+change

  • November 1, 2006 at 4:22 am
    Southern Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You wrote: \”The owner has the structure burned down or destroyed\”
    Are you saying Silverstein had them destroyed??????????????????????
    As I recall, the binders were issued in July.
    Answer: Not much but he slept at a Holiday Inn Express last nite.

  • November 1, 2006 at 6:34 am
    1whoknows says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Yea, just watch the video link I gave in the message – Its all very clear, post again after watching the video, thanks.

  • February 8, 2007 at 8:09 am
    Liability Man says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If Silverstein\’s insurance companies thought he was engaged in insurance fraud, they wouldn\’t have paid him a penny. The fraud charge is irresponsible.

  • July 16, 2007 at 6:13 am
    Your Name says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I doubt this artical is accurate,as it makes no mention of % $ paid/due.My guess is Trade center was not meeting its debts.
    Thus reposessed,over niggered.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*