In view of their destruction following the 9/11 attack.
2007-02-13 02:04:11 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Insurance
Even if the insurance company were in the twin towers their finances would heve been held "off site" as would have been a stipulation of their own re insurance.
2007-02-13 02:12:28 · update #1
You tend to find that you're not covered for terrorism. I'm sure it's in the small print.
2007-02-16 11:18:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is still up for debate. The debate is whether the attacks are considered 1 attack or 2 seperate attacks.
Basically, it works like this: Your insurance policy has 2 types of limits; agregate(or total amount) and per occurance. If you 3 seperate accidents with a $1,000 per occurance limit then you will get $3,000 even if your damages are over that amount because of your per occurance limit. But if your agregate limit is $2,000, then you will only get $2,000 for 3 accidents because the agregate is your policy maximum. I hope I haven't lost you.
The Twin Towers had adequate insurance. However, the insurance company is saying that the terrorists attacked with 2 planes, but it was 1 planned attack. Follow me so far? Therefore, the Twin Towers get reimbursed their per occurance amount.
The Twin Towers company is arguing that even though it was 1 plan, it was 2 seperate attacks. Therefore, they should get their per occurance limit twice.
Why is this a big argument? The Twin Towers per occurance limit was $3 BILLION! Their agregate? $7 BILLION!! That's a $4 BILLION difference!
Both sides are fighting tooth and nail to get a winning decision but the decision is still going through the courts.
Check out the link below for more information on it. I hope this helped!
2007-02-13 02:08:07 · answer #2 · answered by Drew P 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm able to allow you to be conscious of working for an coverage organization they do have the main suitable to try this. The 20% or so that they are not providing you with is accounted for fee inflations and a pair different issues that escaped my suggestions, in simple terms went interior the process the comparable element. If i cant undergo in suggestions the different reasons they try this sick actual positioned up them.
2016-12-17 09:01:18 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its a insurance companny.do you know of any insurance company that pay out with out a fight.thousands died in the towes
yet the insurance company will still haggle.over money.its the same with any insurance.you payand pay.then you make a
claim.and they wont pay.or if they do it will be a reduce payment.
2007-02-13 02:30:44 · answer #4 · answered by peter o 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually, that insurance company was located IN the twin towers.
2007-02-13 02:10:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
It still seems to be ongoing
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/september-eleven/insurance-scam.htm
Willis Group who handled the reinsurance is based in my home town and is restructuring so maybe they have been affected as well.
2007-02-13 05:46:03 · answer #6 · answered by Biz Guru 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know which ins. co it was. But most ins. co purchase insurance from larger insurance co. for coverage in case there is a huge payout, so I'm sure somebody paid for it
2007-02-13 02:09:27 · answer #7 · answered by spot 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Great Question
sorry i cant give an answer
but i would love to know the aswer
2007-02-13 02:14:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I commend you on a very good qwestion
2007-02-13 02:08:18 · answer #9 · answered by "THE WISE ONE" 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They tried to claim "fair wear and tear".
2007-02-13 02:14:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋