Oil Spill

[DoingHomework]

...which so far would be $3,000 per claim on average.

Let's see, 50 days is 7 weeks. That's about $400 per week. That is tiny. That might be reasonable for an individual crew on a small fishing boat or that resort dishwasher who is not called into work that someone mentioned but it comes nowhere close to real reimbursement.

BP spilled into the Gulf and caused this loss. They need to pay freely and then it is up to them to recover what was fraudulently obtained. Of course I realize that is difficult. But they caused immense damage and should not be allowed to demand proof of loss at this point.

 

[Texas Proud]

Let's see, 50 days is 7 weeks. That's about $400 per week. That is tiny. That might be reasonable for an individual crew on a small fishing boat or that resort dishwasher who is not called into work that someone mentioned but it comes nowhere close to real reimbursement.

BP spilled into the Gulf and caused this loss. They need to pay freely and then it is up to them to recover what was fraudulently obtained. Of course I realize that is difficult. But they caused immense damage and should not be allowed to demand proof of loss at this point.

And I will disagree with you on that... I would think that anybody would want to have some kind of 'proof'.... if not, then I can put in a claim that I was going to be enjoying my summer vacation on that oily beach and the cost to move to someplace else cost me $1,000... pay up...

Now, we all know that this should not be paid at all... so paying it now and trying to get it back is stupid... because the cost of getting it back is a LOT more than what they paid...

I think there should be some more payments to legitimate claims... but a boat operator should not be able to say 'I rent my boat for $1,000 per day and I lost 50 days so far.... $50K'.... when if you look at their tax returns the past year or two and they have total rental income of $25K per year... nope, this is not something that people should be OVER compensated for either...

 

[DoingHomework]

And I will disagree with you on that...

BP is demanding that people with vacation homes rentals and small hotels that have lost bookings produce 5 years of tax returns and specific names and details of cancellations. There are many problems with this:
- A person's tax return is none of BP's business. Tax returns do nothing to prove this year's losses.
- Providing the information BP is demanding in some case is illegal (they want lots of details about the customer that violate's privacy laws)
- It does not account for lost bookings when people simply went elsewhere or decided not to visit the Gulf coast
- It adds additional delay and inconvenience to innocent victims while the guilty party (BP) sits on its cash and gets to decide people's fate.

I agree that paying up front and then getting the money back is difficult and costly. But so is rebuilding a business that BP has destroyed.
BP should be in no position to call the shots unless they are held accountable for additional damages resulting from their delay in payment.

The whole thing has been mishandled in my opinion. BP will end up putting hundreds or thousands of small businesses out of business. I am beginning to hope that BP is one of the companies liquidated.

Even the governments of several states are frustrated over BP's incompetence in paying out claims.

 

[lets-retire]

Here's another question that the news hasn't answered for me:

How much oil can one of those skimmer boats collect, how do they collect it, and what do they do with it? From the images I've seen, it seems pretty futile.

I had the same question so I searched. The answers are the Navy skimmers can handle up to 50400 gallons in 24 hours each. There are 21 of them. The ones Kevin Costner's company has can handle various amounts, up to 210,000 gallons per day. There are 4 of the big ones. I couldn't find figures for how much the converted shrimping vessels can handle. I figure it's probably because it depends on the size of the vessel and how large the oil absorbing booms are it is using.

 

[lets-retire]

BP is demanding that people with vacation homes rentals and small hotels that have lost bookings produce 5 years of tax returns and specific names and details of cancellations. There are many problems with this:
- A person's tax return is none of BP's business. Tax returns do nothing to prove this year's losses.
- Providing the information BP is demanding in some case is illegal (they want lots of details about the customer that violate's privacy laws)
- It does not account for lost bookings when people simply went elsewhere or decided not to visit the Gulf coast
- It adds additional delay and inconvenience to innocent victims while the guilty party (BP) sits on its cash and gets to decide people's fate.

Actually, I think, if BP were to be sued their lawyers would demand much of this information to prove the loss.

 

[DoingHomework]

Actually, I think, if BP were to be sued their lawyers would demand much of this information to prove the loss.

Undoubtedly. But they can demand all they want. A judge would have to agree and then order the documentation turned over. That would both exonerate the small businesses from civil claims from their customers for releasing personal information and it would expose BP to liability if they mishandle the tax returns and other documents. Right now BP is making the rules with absolutely no authority.

 

[Rustic23]

Just north of Oakland CA, lies Richmond, CA. It is known amongst other things for it's oil refineries. Now every once in awhile there is some sort of accident at one of these. This occurred when I was working in SF. At that time I had an employee that lived in the Richmond area. She put in a 'Health claim' for her son, and he was awarded money I think $250 a month for some period of time. Only thing wrong with this story is he was in LA at the time of the leak. Chevron pays through the nose when ever there is a leak! It is cheaper to pay than investigate each claim and suffer the PR catastrophe.

I think BP should pay reasonable claims, however, if you want their money you should be willing to provide reasonable documentation. My guess the courts will decide the cases that are reasonable.

What kind of authority would you be looking for. It is BP's money and someone is making a claim against it. Seems to me they have every right to ask for what ever they want. If the claimant thinks he is getting screwed then the can go to court.

 

[ronocnikral]

Undoubtedly. But they can demand all they want. A judge would have to agree and then order the documentation turned over. That would both exonerate the small businesses from civil claims from their customers for releasing personal information and it would expose BP to liability if they mishandle the tax returns and other documents. Right now BP is making the rules with absolutely no authority.

are you suggesting BP has no authority to make decisions about how it operates it's own business? if the people down there don't like how they are being compensated, they can take legal action. i don't feel anything BP is doing in the compensation arena is wrong, legally or morally. In fact, they could just wait for people to sue them and put them out for years. futhermore, if BP has no hope of recovery, what would motivate them to continue remediating this incident? kind of like filing bankruptcy...

you should also hop in the car and take a little ride down the bayou. my guess would be at this point in time, most of the hotels are making more than usual b/c of all the media. you must be picturing some kind of paradise, but when i lived in new orleans (and worked offshore), anyone who wanted to go the beach didn't go to grand isle, they went to florida.

while acknowledging tourism outside of LA is being hurt, what's wrong with providing a little paperwork? what else are they doing besides anticipating oil making landfall?

 

[TromboneAl]

anyone who wanted to go the beach didn't go to grand isle, they went to florida.

I've been curious about this. How are the beaches different? Whiter sand? Bluer water? Are they naturally different, or is it related to industry near the Mississippi?

 

[lets-retire]

I've been curious about this. How are the beaches different? Whiter sand? Bluer water? Are they naturally different, or is it related to industry near the Mississippi?

The Mississippi Sound is dirty from the silt from the Mississippi river (from what I've been told). I can definitely say the beaches in Mississippi are not as nice as those in Florida, but they are better than the extensive one in Arizona.

 

[ronocnikral]

I've been curious about this. How are the beaches different? Whiter sand? Bluer water? Are they naturally different, or is it related to industry near the Mississippi?

one is swamp land, the other is...a beach. one has brown silty water from swamp and the mississippi (as pointed out) the other is clear water. one is a major port for industry, the other is for tourism. this might be hard to fathom, but it's worse than galveston. not to mention the butt end of the mississippi has worse than just silt.

another thought while pedaling home from work...with the secretary of the interior applying his boot to necks and the president kicking ass, who has anything to worry about?

 

[DoingHomework]

are you suggesting BP has no authority to make decisions about how it operates it's own business? if the people down there don't like how they are being compensated, they can take legal action...

When a person/company commits a crime they lose their freedom. If an individual had caused such a huge disaster they'd be arrested and their assets would be seized by now. So yes, I do think that BP should not have the authority to make decisions about how it operates it's own business at this point. Once they clean up the mess and serve their sentence then they should be set free. Of course they have not been convicted yet but we ought to subject them to the equivalent of arrest and asset seizure just like we would do to an individual. We can put their assets to work cleaning up the mess.

 

[lets-retire]

When a person/company commits a crime they lose their freedom. If an individual had caused such a huge disaster they'd be arrested and their assets would be seized by now. So yes, I do think that BP should not have the authority to make decisions about how it operates it's own business at this point. Once they clean up the mess and serve their sentence then they should be set free. Of course they have not been convicted yet but we ought to subject them to the equivalent of arrest and asset seizure just like we would do to an individual. We can put their assets to work cleaning up the mess.

The criminal investigation hasn't even been completed yet. We can't do anything until a trial is held. If BP is found guilty of a criminal act, then the criminal penalties can be applied, but not before. If BP is found to have complied with all criminal laws on the books then no criminal penalty can be levied. All of the money being paid out now is not a result of a criminal act it is a result civil liability. You do realize they are paying for the clean up, right? The government submitted a bill recently for reimbursement of everything already provided. BP is paying the private companies for their services on a pay as you go basis. When the job is done so is the paycheck from BP. They are not being the deadbeats people are accusing them of being.

 

[ronocnikral]

When a person/company commits a crime they lose their freedom. If an individual had caused such a huge disaster they'd be arrested and their assets would be seized by now. So yes, I do think that BP should not have the authority to make decisions about how it operates it's own business at this point. Once they clean up the mess and serve their sentence then they should be set free. Of course they have not been convicted yet but we ought to subject them to the equivalent of arrest and asset seizure just like we would do to an individual. We can put their assets to work cleaning up the mess.

so are you suggesting we throw them all in jail and have the gov't work it out? or do we need their expertise? you could seize all my assets, but when it comes to making me work, i'd let you pull the trigger if i had no livelihood left.

ironically, the fed gov't doesn't know their butt from a hole in the ground when it comes to this stuff.

and i agree with L-R. the investigation has yet to be done.

 

[Rustic23]

Heck, this is big OIL, they don't really have any constitutional rights!

 

[DoingHomework]

so are you suggesting we throw them all in jail and have the gov't work it out? or do we need their expertise? you could seize all my assets, but when it comes to making me work, i'd let you pull the trigger if i had no livelihood left.

ironically, the fed gov't doesn't know their butt from a hole in the ground when it comes to this stuff.

and i agree with L-R. the investigation has yet to be done.

If a police officer witnessed you selling drugs on a street corner...or dumping toxic waste in a pond...you could be arrested immediately. Your assets could be seized. That is BEFORE a trial. Those are not punitive actions. That is done to prevent you from fleeing, doing additional damage, or,in the case of financial crimes, from disposing of assets.

Dumping oil in the ocean is a crime. There might be a defense that it was unintentional. The equivalent CAN be done to BP for essentially the same reasons that an individual is arrested. Seize their US assets and put everything to work on the cleanup. If a BP ship comes into US waters with oil, seize the ship and sell the oil. If they are not convicted of a crime then use the proceeds to offset the cleanup costs and return any excess to the company in 50 years after the extent of the damage is truly quantified.

I would not put the government in charge of the cleanup per se. I'd let a bunch of experienced people, possibly like yourself, take over the effort under the direction of the military or CG - Thad Allen seems to be doing ok. Because I think the BP response has been nothing but pathetic. They have clearly been far more concerned with covering their ASSets than cleaning things up and making things right.

I completely understand that they are paying the bills and their duty is to their shareholders. But that is the problem. Cleaning up the mess trumps the shareholders' interests, morally and legally. It's pretty clear from their record and the statements being made from the rig workers that there was criminal negligence that led to the explosion, IMO.

I really do understand that accidents occur. I am not anti-oil-company. Heck, I owned stock in BP for many years and loved the money I made. I only sold years ago when it reached a high water mark. I do like my gas guzzling SUV and can make the obvious connection. But it is becoming increasingly clear to me that this company had behaved recklessly recently and their reckless actions have now led to consequences that I believe do cross the line into criminal behavior.

 

[ERD50]

If a police officer witnessed you selling drugs on a street corner.. you could be arrested immediately. Your assets could be seized. That is BEFORE a trial. Those are not punitive actions. That is done to prevent you from fleeing, doing additional damage, or,in the case of financial crimes, from disposing of assets.

OK, but the the next step is not to let every Tom, Dick and Henrietta demand money from the person with no proof of what/if they are owed.

You seem to be skipping an important step - the legal process. Though I am not a lawyer.

-ERD50

 

[Westernskies]

If a police officer witnessed you selling drugs on a street corner...or dumping toxic waste in a pond...you could be arrested immediately. Your assets could be seized. That is BEFORE a trial. Those are not punitive actions. That is done to prevent you from fleeing, doing additional damage, or,in the case of financial crimes, from disposing of assets.

Dumping oil in the ocean is a crime. There might be a defense that it was unintentional. The equivalent CAN be done to BP for essentially the same reasons that an individual is arrested. Seize their US assets and put everything to work on the cleanup. If a BP ship comes into US waters with oil, seize the ship and sell the oil. If they are not convicted of a crime then use the proceeds to offset the cleanup costs and return any excess to the company in 50 years after the extent of the damage is truly quantified.

I would not put the government in charge of the cleanup per se. I'd let a bunch of experienced people, possibly like yourself, take over the effort under the direction of the military or CG - Thad Allen seems to be doing ok. Because I think the BP response has been nothing but pathetic. They have clearly been far more concerned with covering their ASSets than cleaning things up and making things right.

I completely understand that they are paying the bills and their duty is to their shareholders. But that is the problem. Cleaning up the mess trumps the shareholders' interests, morally and legally. It's pretty clear from their record and the statements being made from the rig workers that there was criminal negligence that led to the explosion, IMO.

I really do understand that accidents occur. I am not anti-oil-company. Heck, I owned stock in BP for many years and loved the money I made. I only sold years ago when it reached a high water mark. I do like my gas guzzling SUV and can make the obvious connection. But it is becoming increasingly clear to me that this company had behaved recklessly recently and their reckless actions have now led to consequences that I believe do cross the line into criminal behavior.

We don't need to wait for the facts, ladies and gentlemen, we have a self-appointed judge, jury and [-]executioner[/-] executor, all rolled into one. Seize BP's assets and hand them out to every Tom Dick, and Harriet who feels like filing a claim, no proof of loss required! That'll show 'em! What's next, privatize all the BP filling stations and turn them over to Greenpeace to run? BP is responding appropriately IMO, and will continue to do so- because they are in the business of extracting, refining and distributing oil- and their livelihood depends on them being able to continue doing it. Legitimate claims need to be paid, unsubstantiated claims denied, and fraudulent claim prosecuted. I agree that this is a tragedy, but disagree that it is criminal behavior- it wasn't premeditated, it wasn't planned, it wasn't prolonged, there was no conspiracy to cover it up. This was was an accident- remember those, from the good old days before the contingency-fee lawyers were allowed to buy the back page of the phone book? Oil comes from wells. Wells are drilled by man. No one is perfect. Accidents happen. They will continue to happen. We need to do what we can to minimize the severity and frequency, and mitigate damage when it does occur.

Maybe if BP were drilling onshore (ANWR) instead of being forced into 5000' of water to feed the fuel demand for your gas-guzzler SUV this would have been wrapped up by now...

 

[haha]

And the longer all of this goes on and the more extensive the drilling moratorium and the more expensive the incremental permit/regulatory requirements, the more upward pressure there will be on oil and gas prices.

It's an ill wind that blows no one any good.

Ha

 

[haha]

I do like my gas guzzling SUV and can make the obvious connection.

Well that's encouraging anyway.

 

[Leonidas]

It's an ill wind that blows no one any good.

Some shenanigans is being perpetrated methinks.

When the Deepwater Horizon exploded and started spewing millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama gave the U.S. Department of the Interior 30 days to come up with a report detailing how the government could prevent this from happening again. In turn, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar turned to the top minds in petroleum engineering for help in compiling the report.

Sounds okay so far, I mean you get the top boffins to give you the skinny on what the situation is and how to fix it. Good plan, so far.

"There was a major problem with this well," Houston engineer Ken Arnold said. "It cannot be brushed under the rug. We have to address it. We have to face it straight up and down."

No argument from me, and I'm a shareholder of BP. Somebody out there screwed the pooch, no doubt about it.

Arnold said he was the last person to review the report before it was sent to the Obama Administration.Arnold said after the report was submitted, he and his colleagues were blindsided by the inclusion of a broad moratorium in the Department of Interior's report entitled, "Increased Safety Measures For Energy Development On The Outer Continental Shelf."

What would the motivation for the addition be, especially since it was appended after the experts had completed, or though they had completed, their report?

"The decision on the moratorium is a political decision," said Arnold. "I don't think it's warranted. Not only that, I think it has long-term implications the government may not have fully understood."Arnold said the original report he and his colleagues reviewed and sent to the Obama administration called for changes in safety, training and government oversight. Arnold said the original report only called for a six-month moratorium on issuing new permits for exploratory wells drilled by floating rigs in water depths greater than 1,000 feet.Arnold said the report also called for a "temporary pause" to those rigs already drilling in deepwater until critical safety devices were inspected and recertified."That subsequently was changed after we had seen it," said Arnold.

Full story here Expert: Our Names Used To Justify Drilling Ban - Houston News Story - KPRC Houston

 

[Trek]

This isn't the only leaking well in the gulf apparently.

Another Gulf oil spill: Well near Deepwater Horizon has leaked since at least April 30 | al.com

 

[brewer12345]

It's an ill wind that blows no one any good.

Ha

Oh, I don't know about that. Makes onshore nat gas, crude tankers, and possibly even product tankers look pretty good to me.

 

[DoingHomework]

We don't need to wait for the facts, ladies and gentlemen, we have a self-appointed judge, jury and [-]executioner[/-] executor, all rolled into one. Seize BP's assets and hand them out to every Tom Dick, and Harriet who feels like filing a claim, no proof of loss required! That'll show 'em! What's next, privatize all the BP filling stations and turn them over to Greenpeace to run? BP is responding appropriately IMO, and will continue to do so- because they are in the business of extracting, refining and distributing oil- and their livelihood depends on them being able to continue doing it. Legitimate claims need to be paid, unsubstantiated claims denied, and fraudulent claim prosecuted. I agree that this is a tragedy, but disagree that it is criminal behavior- it wasn't premeditated, it wasn't planned, it wasn't prolonged, there was no conspiracy to cover it up. This was was an accident- remember those, from the good old days before the contingency-fee lawyers were allowed to buy the back page of the phone book? Oil comes from wells. Wells are drilled by man. No one is perfect. Accidents happen. They will continue to happen. We need to do what we can to minimize the severity and frequency, and mitigate damage when it does occur.

Maybe if BP were drilling onshore (ANWR) instead of being forced into 5000' of water to feed the fuel demand for your gas-guzzler SUV this would have been wrapped up by now...

It's not that we don't need to wait for the facts. We have SOME facts. BP spilled oil into the Gulf (no one has suggested it is anything but accidental). The spill has caused many businesses and individuals to lose money. I don't think it is a stretch to say that there is "probable cause" to "arrest" BP until the legal process can run its course. The alternative is to allow them to construct a legal and financial firewall that delays payment and potentially makes it impossible to collect. (They have publicly announced their intention to form a separate company to insulate BP from the cleanup process and future liability and they have announced their intent to give away billions of dollars to shareholders that may rightfully belong to the harmed parties. Did we allow Bernie Madoff to oversee the forensic accounting while he was only accused? I don't see much difference here.

It's apparent that some in power and more familiar with the situation agree with me. Several states are demanding BP fix the claims process, the feds are demanding BP state their criteria and streamline things, and they now have a deadline to get moving or have the feds take over.

BP has withheld information and disseminated disinformation from the start. That fits in the definition of conspiracy after the fact. So, the fact is they have engaged in conspiracy. If the statements from surviving crew are true, which I agree we need to wait before judging, BP and many company officials could be guilty of homicide.

The point is, the evidence of actions that do cross the line into criminal behavior is overwhelming. If it were you or I we would not be allowed to control the crime scene and decide how victims are compensated. I am not suggesting they be "convicted" without a trial, only that they be treated like any other accused criminal.

 

[Emeritus]

The point is, the evidence of actions that do cross the line into criminal behavior is overwhelming. If it were you or I we would not be allowed to control the crime scene and decide how victims are compensated. I am not suggesting they be "convicted" without a trial, only that they be treated like any other accused criminal.

The criminal law is not the issue. What is suitable is a "receivership" i.e. you appoint a trustee to supervise the firm make sure that the company pays its obligations and does what it is supposed to do. After the Hartford Circus fire the circus was in receivership for 5 years to pay its obligations and operate safely