It took me so long to type that post (I got a phone call at work- imagine that!) that I didn\’t know \”B\” had already pointed out the \”eyewitness\” comment. I read your post \”B\” and I was like \”Exactly!\” So, please don\’t think I was trying to imitate what you had already posted. Ha, by the time I posted my comment, there were three more I had to read. That was an excellent post!
> With no way of knowing how
> someone died, or maybe escaped
> to Russia or America where
> many of them changed their
> names, what\’s that prove?
I agree with B that it seems unlikely that someone who survived WWII in Europe would not remember how a family member died.
Documentation was limited precisely because it was war. This is a situation where normal rules regarding death certificates and other proof had to be set aside. Due to the sheer number of people affected by the Holocaust, it becomes unconscionable for a company to deny help to possible beneficiaries simply because there weren\’t a lot of documents.
As for relatives escaping to other countries and changing their names, it seems unlikely that someone would do this without notifying a single other person first or trying to contact anyone afterward. It was difficult to arrange this kind of escape, and virtually impossible without the help of several other people.
Also, it defies reason that someone would depart for another country and leave their own family behind in serious danger — without ever making an attempt to contact them again. Claims like these, if there are any at all, don\’t make up a significant number of the cases at issue here.
> When 50 million people die
> in a war, and one group is
> standing there with its
> hand out like they are
> the most agrieved, it
> just smacks of shamelessness
> to me.
Yes, human suffering on the scale of WWII is impossible to measure. Determining who was the \”most aggrieved\” would be futile.
I don\’t think that the Holocaust survivors and family members in this case are making that claim. Due to the circumstances under which people died, they are simply having the hardest time resolving their insurance issues. Many, many people died in the war — but most didn\’t have families who had to spend 60+ years resolving benefits claims.
The claimants in this case are not the only group of people in history who have faced this problem. Many Armenians whose family members were killed in the genocide in Turkey are still working on settling outstanding questions with insurers — and their conflict is older than WWII.
I was being generous. There is also the problem of fraud. One problem with sixty year-old memories and eye-witness accounts is that there are few if any other witnesses to corrobotate or contradict the testimony of someone trying to get money out of an insurance company.
I forget the exact year, but at one point during the war or immediately before, the US State Dept stopped recording that Jewish immigrants were Jews and recorded their nation of origin only. This was done to prevent any backlash against the spike in Jews entering the country, as they fled Nazi persecution. Therefore, we are not only ignorant of how many Jews came to the US but how many, and who, left their nations of origin.
In the destruction, mass death, confusion and chaos of war it is highly likley that people don\’t know where relatives are, and therefore there are war exclusions in life insurance policies. If I waive life ins policies in your face and claim that my parents were both killed or shipped off in a boxcar somewhere, but have no proof whatsoever, and there\’s a war on, what are you going to do as a responsible adjuster?
> Therefore, we are not only
> ignorant of how many Jews
> came to the US but how many,
> and who, left their nations
> of origin.
How would knowing the religious affiliation of someone entering the US help stop insurance fraud in Europe?
> If I waive life ins policies
> in your face and claim that
> my parents were both killed
> or shipped off in a boxcar
> somewhere, but have no proof
> whatsoever, and there\’s a war
> on, what are you going to do
> as a responsible adjuster?
Presumably when the \”war was on,\” there wasn\’t a lot an adjuster could do.
The war is no longer on and we have the objectivity that comes from being removed from the situation. A responsible adjuster would notice that more than one policyholder was talking about this and report it up. A responsible insurance company would join its peers in establishing a humanitarian fund to help deal with these claims.
(A truly responsible insurance company would make sure that its payouts had some relationship to the current value of the policy after so many years of interest…but that\’s another matter.)
\’Why do you assume there is no proof for any of these \”Shamless\” old people with no memory?\’
If there was irrefutable proof of valid claims, the claims might have been paid right off. In fact, many of them were not even filed until decades later. Only when political pressure was brought to bear on governments, and then on the companies, did the companies cave.
\’If there was no proof then why did the insurance company have to pay out anything?\’
Political pressure and public relations. At a certain point there\’s no sense in fighting it.
\’How would knowing the religious affiliation of someone entering the US help stop insurance fraud in Europe?\’
If we knew that Mrs. Rabinowitz\’ father Rueben had emmigrated to the US in 1939, then her claim that he was killed by the Nazis might have less crdibility.
\’The war is no longer on and we have the objectivity that comes from being removed from the situation. A responsible adjuster would notice that more than one policyholder was talking about this and report it up.\’
Okay. My cousin Joe and I were rear-ended by your insured sixty years ago. Pay up.
\’A responsible insurance company would join its peers in establishing a humanitarian fund to help deal with these claims.\’
A humanitarian fund is not necessary to pay claims. Reserves are used to pay claims. Is State Farm irresponsible for not just giving away money from a \”humanitarian fund\” to Katrina victims?
Something is clouding your vision with regard to this topic, people.
\”Something is clouding your vision with regard to this topic, people.\”
OK, so on behalf of Josh S(Disappointed- hi! nice to see you on this thread), incred, B and others who feel this decision was fair (well, the payout portion, not that actual $ value) I pose these questions to you Ellie…
Were the Nazis handing out death certificates to the survivors of those they killed? If they killed the WHOLE family, did they send the death certificates to the government? If your loved one died in the hospital (in this century) and no one would give you a death certificate, how would you prove they died?
I guess you are the one whose judgement is clouded. If they had proof to give, I am sure they would do so. Shame on you!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
It took me so long to type that post (I got a phone call at work- imagine that!) that I didn\’t know \”B\” had already pointed out the \”eyewitness\” comment. I read your post \”B\” and I was like \”Exactly!\” So, please don\’t think I was trying to imitate what you had already posted. Ha, by the time I posted my comment, there were three more I had to read. That was an excellent post!
What can I say? Great minds think alike.
:-)
From Ellie:
> With no way of knowing how
> someone died, or maybe escaped
> to Russia or America where
> many of them changed their
> names, what\’s that prove?
I agree with B that it seems unlikely that someone who survived WWII in Europe would not remember how a family member died.
Documentation was limited precisely because it was war. This is a situation where normal rules regarding death certificates and other proof had to be set aside. Due to the sheer number of people affected by the Holocaust, it becomes unconscionable for a company to deny help to possible beneficiaries simply because there weren\’t a lot of documents.
As for relatives escaping to other countries and changing their names, it seems unlikely that someone would do this without notifying a single other person first or trying to contact anyone afterward. It was difficult to arrange this kind of escape, and virtually impossible without the help of several other people.
Also, it defies reason that someone would depart for another country and leave their own family behind in serious danger — without ever making an attempt to contact them again. Claims like these, if there are any at all, don\’t make up a significant number of the cases at issue here.
> When 50 million people die
> in a war, and one group is
> standing there with its
> hand out like they are
> the most agrieved, it
> just smacks of shamelessness
> to me.
Yes, human suffering on the scale of WWII is impossible to measure. Determining who was the \”most aggrieved\” would be futile.
I don\’t think that the Holocaust survivors and family members in this case are making that claim. Due to the circumstances under which people died, they are simply having the hardest time resolving their insurance issues. Many, many people died in the war — but most didn\’t have families who had to spend 60+ years resolving benefits claims.
The claimants in this case are not the only group of people in history who have faced this problem. Many Armenians whose family members were killed in the genocide in Turkey are still working on settling outstanding questions with insurers — and their conflict is older than WWII.
I was being generous. There is also the problem of fraud. One problem with sixty year-old memories and eye-witness accounts is that there are few if any other witnesses to corrobotate or contradict the testimony of someone trying to get money out of an insurance company.
I forget the exact year, but at one point during the war or immediately before, the US State Dept stopped recording that Jewish immigrants were Jews and recorded their nation of origin only. This was done to prevent any backlash against the spike in Jews entering the country, as they fled Nazi persecution. Therefore, we are not only ignorant of how many Jews came to the US but how many, and who, left their nations of origin.
In the destruction, mass death, confusion and chaos of war it is highly likley that people don\’t know where relatives are, and therefore there are war exclusions in life insurance policies. If I waive life ins policies in your face and claim that my parents were both killed or shipped off in a boxcar somewhere, but have no proof whatsoever, and there\’s a war on, what are you going to do as a responsible adjuster?
Why do you assume there is no proof for any of these \”Shamless\” old people with no memory?
If there was no proof then why did the insurance company have to pay out anything?
Ellie said:
> Therefore, we are not only
> ignorant of how many Jews
> came to the US but how many,
> and who, left their nations
> of origin.
How would knowing the religious affiliation of someone entering the US help stop insurance fraud in Europe?
> If I waive life ins policies
> in your face and claim that
> my parents were both killed
> or shipped off in a boxcar
> somewhere, but have no proof
> whatsoever, and there\’s a war
> on, what are you going to do
> as a responsible adjuster?
Presumably when the \”war was on,\” there wasn\’t a lot an adjuster could do.
The war is no longer on and we have the objectivity that comes from being removed from the situation. A responsible adjuster would notice that more than one policyholder was talking about this and report it up. A responsible insurance company would join its peers in establishing a humanitarian fund to help deal with these claims.
(A truly responsible insurance company would make sure that its payouts had some relationship to the current value of the policy after so many years of interest…but that\’s another matter.)
\’Why do you assume there is no proof for any of these \”Shamless\” old people with no memory?\’
If there was irrefutable proof of valid claims, the claims might have been paid right off. In fact, many of them were not even filed until decades later. Only when political pressure was brought to bear on governments, and then on the companies, did the companies cave.
\’If there was no proof then why did the insurance company have to pay out anything?\’
Political pressure and public relations. At a certain point there\’s no sense in fighting it.
\’How would knowing the religious affiliation of someone entering the US help stop insurance fraud in Europe?\’
If we knew that Mrs. Rabinowitz\’ father Rueben had emmigrated to the US in 1939, then her claim that he was killed by the Nazis might have less crdibility.
\’The war is no longer on and we have the objectivity that comes from being removed from the situation. A responsible adjuster would notice that more than one policyholder was talking about this and report it up.\’
Okay. My cousin Joe and I were rear-ended by your insured sixty years ago. Pay up.
\’A responsible insurance company would join its peers in establishing a humanitarian fund to help deal with these claims.\’
A humanitarian fund is not necessary to pay claims. Reserves are used to pay claims. Is State Farm irresponsible for not just giving away money from a \”humanitarian fund\” to Katrina victims?
Something is clouding your vision with regard to this topic, people.
?
Your position is that the insurance companies paid out $300 million because of political pressure and public relations?
You\’re saying that they thought $300 million wasn\’t worth fighting for?
I just wanted to make sure I understood you.
I hope you don\’t mind, but I took the liberty…
\”Something is clouding your vision with regard to this topic, people.\”
OK, so on behalf of Josh S(Disappointed- hi! nice to see you on this thread), incred, B and others who feel this decision was fair (well, the payout portion, not that actual $ value) I pose these questions to you Ellie…
Were the Nazis handing out death certificates to the survivors of those they killed? If they killed the WHOLE family, did they send the death certificates to the government? If your loved one died in the hospital (in this century) and no one would give you a death certificate, how would you prove they died?
I guess you are the one whose judgement is clouded. If they had proof to give, I am sure they would do so. Shame on you!