omg Lloyd, you write this policy and ask yourself “what’s the worst that can happen?” Of course, the frickin platform could explode and oil could spew out for months. The huge policy limit – 700 million dollars – is proof that you understand the worst case scenario. And ya, I get it…there may be outstanding circumstances, there may be a viable argument for why you’re not on the hook, there may be some ways to limit your coverage. But you knew exactly what oyu were getting into, and now you’re swimming in it. LOL
Can’t get an accurate impression from this. If the policy contract specifically excludes enviromental damages caused by leakage from the well regardless of the proximate cause of that leakage, then I could see Lloyd’s position clearly. Without knowing the exact policy language though I can’t comment on Lloyd’s actions one way or the other.
Lloyds of London settles claim according to what their policies say..not what a US Court or Attorney “thinks” they meant. They pay claims without question that they are obligated to pay….back to the Titanic and as recent at the World Trade Center losses..Kudo’s to them for sticking to their policy wording.
I have to say I agree. During the LA wildfires tons of homeowners were arguing with their insurance companies. The Lloyds adjuster for my insured came out to the site and two days later wrote a check for the full policy limit no questions asked….while other standard carriers were still fighting with their insureds over the amount to be paid. Lloyds has a strong tradition of paying out when they are obligated
It may come as a rude “surprise” to the Underwriters, but how much you wanna bet this will be adjudicated and settled with an eye to the politics of it all and they will end up paying for something they never intended to insure? Happens all the time here in the US of A when the damages or injuries are catastrophic.
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.
omg Lloyd, you write this policy and ask yourself “what’s the worst that can happen?” Of course, the frickin platform could explode and oil could spew out for months. The huge policy limit – 700 million dollars – is proof that you understand the worst case scenario. And ya, I get it…there may be outstanding circumstances, there may be a viable argument for why you’re not on the hook, there may be some ways to limit your coverage. But you knew exactly what oyu were getting into, and now you’re swimming in it. LOL
Can’t get an accurate impression from this. If the policy contract specifically excludes enviromental damages caused by leakage from the well regardless of the proximate cause of that leakage, then I could see Lloyd’s position clearly. Without knowing the exact policy language though I can’t comment on Lloyd’s actions one way or the other.
Lloyds of London settles claim according to what their policies say..not what a US Court or Attorney “thinks” they meant. They pay claims without question that they are obligated to pay….back to the Titanic and as recent at the World Trade Center losses..Kudo’s to them for sticking to their policy wording.
I have to say I agree. During the LA wildfires tons of homeowners were arguing with their insurance companies. The Lloyds adjuster for my insured came out to the site and two days later wrote a check for the full policy limit no questions asked….while other standard carriers were still fighting with their insureds over the amount to be paid. Lloyds has a strong tradition of paying out when they are obligated
It may come as a rude “surprise” to the Underwriters, but how much you wanna bet this will be adjudicated and settled with an eye to the politics of it all and they will end up paying for something they never intended to insure? Happens all the time here in the US of A when the damages or injuries are catastrophic.
Please provide the docket number so we can look at the filings. There are so many actions filed involving BP and Transocean.
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London v. BP Plc, 4:10-cv-01823
They are not liable. Period. Another underhanded tactic by BP to try to cut cost. They have learned nothing.