Insurer Agrees to Extend Deadline for Holocaust Victims’ Claims

February 15, 2007

  • February 15, 2007 at 2:53 am
    Chip says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    1. Not being in underwriting or claims, I have two strikes against me, so excuse my ignorance but isn\’t \”acts of war\” a typical exclusion?

    2. Regarding opening the records of the camps, why would the personnel of death camps keep records of the people they were slaughtering?

  • February 15, 2007 at 3:20 am
    MARK L. SPINELLI says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    act of war is excluded, these claims are for war crimes.

  • February 15, 2007 at 3:36 am
    Chip says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What\’s the difference if a soldier blew up my house during the invasion or blew it up afterwards because I harbored guerillas or \”persons of interest\”? What is the difference if they blew it up because they wanted to set up radar on my property or because they wanted to build a mess hall for themselves on my property?

    If invading foreign soldiers destroy my property it\’s an act of war. If the army of my own nation destroyed my property because they perceived me as the enemy, or potential abbetor of the enemy, is that an act of war or a war crime?

  • February 15, 2007 at 4:07 am
    David says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    First of all, it is my understanding that the \”act of war\” exclusion was introduced to most insurance contracts because of WWII, and second, the exclusion does not apply to all insurance contracts.

  • February 15, 2007 at 4:14 am
    Mark says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Chip, war crimes tend to focus on what people do to other people during periods or war such as \”ethnic cleansing\” or genocide — not property destruction or crimes such as in your examples. Google the definition to get a more complete, articulate reply.

  • February 15, 2007 at 4:38 am
    MaryAnn says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I believe these deal mainly with life insurance however some were for businesses, factories etc. There was collusion between the companies and the Nazi\’s. Policies were lost or voided that had been paid in full but claims were not paid. It is now up to the families to present proof that there was a policy.

  • February 15, 2007 at 4:45 am
    Chip says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What about Allied soldiers who looted German and Italian property? I mean, it did happen.

  • February 15, 2007 at 4:52 am
    MaryAnn says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That has nothing to do with this article. As to acts of war you are on your own there. For you question on why opening the records would help, some people do have the life insurance policies for their family but nothing to show when and where they died. With the sealed records they can obtain a death certificate to get the policy to pay off.

  • February 15, 2007 at 5:47 am
    Mark says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The Allies did not start the war, nor did they commit genocide (except perhaps the two A-bombs on Japan)- we didn\’t systematically exterminate millions of people. The Germans did (primarily), and many German or European companies, including insurance comapnies, profited by the wurders. To learn more about the Holocaust insurance issues, check out the Int\’l Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims website: http://www.icheic.org/related.html

  • February 16, 2007 at 8:53 am
    Chip says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That\’s my question – what would the records show? If the Nazis were slaughtering people by the thousands each day in the camps, were they writing down their names and addresses first?



Add a Comment

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

*