Non-concurrent policy forms in different layers, underinsured by 50% (that would have been Silverstein\’s decision, making the assumption that they would never lose more than 1 building).
I wonder if the broker even questioned the insured values or, as so many do, just rolling over Marsh\’s old values.
I am puzzled by Silverstein\’s apparent lack of interest in pursuing Willis for some relief. They allowed him to underinsure the buildings with the blanket deal, the forms issues look pretty dodgy and some of the deposition info that hit the press indicated the Willis folks didn\’t have all the apps submitted and had to back into some of the coverage (I guess it was a relatively new account). By all rights, this should be the largest broker E&O case (against Willis) in history…but not a single word about it in the press-isn\’t that strange?
who knows, poorly written article, I thought the TIV was 3.55 billion with 1 occurrence, double that with 2 but one company of many was smart & wrote the policy binder to limit it to 1 occurrence, this happened in 2001 if they paid 4.6 billion total does that include interest? WHo knows?
I guess the writer wasn\’t really concerned with the facts or numbers, what\’s a few billion anyway?
The settlement is bogus, they blew hundreds of millions on litigation before they came to a settlement?
That stinks, this case should have been decided by one court within 1 month of the occurrence(s) without spending hundreds of millions on litigation, this was sloppy and lame, Spitzer deserves no credit for anything except blurring the issue with indecision.
I don\’t see any payment by the Willis E&O carrier. I remember reading that the broker admitted in court that he made no notes of his discussions with insurance carriers as to which form was being bound. IE: no documentation in file. Hmmm??
According to a synopsis of a Wall Street Journal article, the settlement was actually negotiated by the state insurance superintendent and Spitzer only recently joined the nedotiations.
Take a look at the source of this article to see why no one but Spitzer is mentioned.
P.S. the $2 billion is included in the $4.68 billion figure mentioned in this article.
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.
Really sloppy brokering.
Non-concurrent policy forms in different layers, underinsured by 50% (that would have been Silverstein\’s decision, making the assumption that they would never lose more than 1 building).
I wonder if the broker even questioned the insured values or, as so many do, just rolling over Marsh\’s old values.
That\’s a relief! Now he can go back to attacking Hal.
I am puzzled by Silverstein\’s apparent lack of interest in pursuing Willis for some relief. They allowed him to underinsure the buildings with the blanket deal, the forms issues look pretty dodgy and some of the deposition info that hit the press indicated the Willis folks didn\’t have all the apps submitted and had to back into some of the coverage (I guess it was a relatively new account). By all rights, this should be the largest broker E&O case (against Willis) in history…but not a single word about it in the press-isn\’t that strange?
Don\’t worry Greenberg, Spitz will be the US AG in a couple years, and will have bigger fish to fry.
So what was the ultimate payout?
4.68 billion + 2 billion?
— or —
2.34 billion + 2 billion?
One occurrence, right?
who knows, poorly written article, I thought the TIV was 3.55 billion with 1 occurrence, double that with 2 but one company of many was smart & wrote the policy binder to limit it to 1 occurrence, this happened in 2001 if they paid 4.6 billion total does that include interest? WHo knows?
I guess the writer wasn\’t really concerned with the facts or numbers, what\’s a few billion anyway?
The settlement is bogus, they blew hundreds of millions on litigation before they came to a settlement?
That stinks, this case should have been decided by one court within 1 month of the occurrence(s) without spending hundreds of millions on litigation, this was sloppy and lame, Spitzer deserves no credit for anything except blurring the issue with indecision.
Just rack it up to biz as usual. Spitzer grandstanding,looking for another step on the ladder to the top.
Billions of dollars, litigation, loss of lives, Iraq. Are 9/11 ramifications going to really end?
I don\’t see any payment by the Willis E&O carrier. I remember reading that the broker admitted in court that he made no notes of his discussions with insurance carriers as to which form was being bound. IE: no documentation in file. Hmmm??
According to a synopsis of a Wall Street Journal article, the settlement was actually negotiated by the state insurance superintendent and Spitzer only recently joined the nedotiations.
Take a look at the source of this article to see why no one but Spitzer is mentioned.
P.S. the $2 billion is included in the $4.68 billion figure mentioned in this article.