Greed, thy name is Larry Silverstein - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

The_Jazz · 03-28-2008, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Larry A. Silverstein, who has won nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments to cover his losses and help him rebuild at the World Trade Center site, is seeking $12.3 billion in damages from airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack.

Mr. Silverstein, the developer of ground zero, sought the damages, whose amount was not previously known, in a claim filed in 2004, that says the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from hijacking the planes used to destroy the buildings.

His case was consolidated last week with similar, earlier lawsuits brought by families of some victims of the attack and by other property owners. But in seeking $12.3 billion, he is by far the biggest claimant in the litigation.

The size of Mr. Silverstein's claim was revealed last week at a status conference on the litigation in United States District Court in Manhattan.

The claims by the parties involved total about $23 billion, and Mr. Silverstein's claim for such a large chunk could jeopardize claims from other businesses and property owners, according to defense lawyers. A lawyer for the victims' families, Donald Migliori, said he was confident that their claims would not be affected because they would take priority over the property claims.

A lawyer for the airlines, Desmond Barry, said that if Mr. Silverstein won his claim, he could push the total claims beyond the amount of insurance that the airlines and security companies have available. ''There ain't that much insurance,'' Mr. Barry said.

The federal government has capped the liability at the amount of available insurance, to avoid bankrupting the airlines. The exact amount of insurance available is still being explored in the court proceedings.

Richard A. Williamson, a lawyer for Mr. Silverstein, said at the court conference on March 18 that Mr. Silverstein was seeking damages to compensate him for continuing losses at the site. Mr. Silverstein, through his company, World Trade Center Properties, has a 99-year lease, worth $3.2 billion, on four buildings at the site, including the fallen twin towers. He signed the lease in July 2001, just six weeks before the attack.

Since the attack, Mr. Silverstein has been paying rent to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey on towers that no longer exist, his lawyer told the judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein. Mr. Williamson said that his client had also lost rental income from about 400 tenants.

Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said that the $12.3 billion represented $8.4 billion for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings and $3.9 billion in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the Port Authority and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings.

Mr. Barry, speaking for the airlines, contended that Mr. Silverstein had been more than compensated by the nearly $4.6 billion insurance settlement, reached after almost six years of litigation. He argued that Mr. Silverstein was entitled to the market value of the property, which he said had been established by the $3.2 billion lease.

Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Mr. Silverstein's claim, and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just ''walking away.''

Turning to Mr. Williamson, Judge Hellerstein asked: ''What's the nature of your recovery?''

To which Mr. Williamson replied, ''For damages suffered by the events of 9/11, not value. Damages.''

Mr. Williamson said that the lease required Mr. Silverstein to rebuild and to continue paying rent.

''And so I'm putting to you if you walked away from the lease, you would lose the value of the lease,'' Judge Hellerstein said. ''Would you have a further obligation to pay money?''

Mr. Williamson replied, ''You have to examine that question. ''But to me that's not the test of what are our damages.''

Judge Hellerstein pressed Mr. Williamson to put a dollar figure on the damages. ''I don't think it's necessary to know the precise amount,'' the judge said. ''I think some order of magnitude would be appropriate.''

When Mr. Williamson balked, Mr. Barry jumped in.

''I think their claim is $12.3 billion,'' he said.

''Plus prejudgement interest,'' Mr. Williamson confirmed.

To which the judge tartly replied, ''We shouldn't forget that.''

Judge Hellerstein ordered Mr. Silverstein to provide more documentation of his claim, or risk losing it.

Mr. McQuillan, the spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said on Wednesday the developer felt both an obligation under his lease and a moral obligation to rebuild, rather than walk away. He said that the insurance companies who paid him would be repaid if he prevails.

Plaintiffs also revealed that after a spate of settlements, there are seven wrongful death cases and two injury cases remaining, out of more than 90 filed.

Those who sued represent just a small fraction of the casualties on Sept. 11. Most of the victims of the attack and their families chose to take the compensation offered through a federal fund, forgoing their right to sue.

Mr. Migliori, the lawyer for victims' survivors, said he believed that the claimants with property-damage claims -- including Mr. Silverstein and some insurance companies trying to recoup their payments -- would allow the death and injury cases to get priority in payment of damages.

The judge declined to set any trial date in the case, saying that it would be ''fictitious,'' but set a fact-finding deadline at the end of this year. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away.

I'd link to the story, but it's on one of my subscriptions to insurance stuff. I think it came from the New York Times, though, if anyone wants to try to find it there.

I've been watching the moves by Silverstein for the past 5 years as he's whined about the loss of the buildings. There was a huge case settled early last year over whether or not the planes hitting the building were one event or two. Two meant basically doubling his payout.

I am constantly amazed at what levels people will stoop to. This is one of them.

ngdawg · 03-28-2008, 05:26 AM

Not sure I agree with your cynicism. Business is business, after all. I'm sure Mr. Silverstein is not so cold-hearted as to forget the loss of life, but he has obligations and something of this magnitude is not something one can "walk away" from.
If your car caught fire in your garage, would you shrug it off or go after the car manufacturer to recover your losses?

Were the airlines remiss? Yes and no....following the attempted take down of the WTC in 1993, some security measures were put into place, but in the years after, it was becoming very lax. Hellbent of this destruction, these people took advantage of the laxity of airport security to get into position.
The funds set up thus far from 9/11 have compensated for loss of life or income.Now, people who worked at the site are falling ill and dying so this could go on for years. Conceivably, those who are now ill could also sue the airlines.

We are a country of litigation; the only thing we have to compensate with is money. Mr. Silverstein wants the WTC back in some form-how else will this happen?

The_Jazz · 03-28-2008, 05:46 AM

ng - he's already collected $4.3 BILLION. Now he wants another $12.3 BILLION. In your garage scenario, you decide to go after the car manufacturer after your homeowners insurance has already paid you back for your loss.

He can't build anything for $4,300,000,000? This is the line that set me off:

Quote:

Mr. McQuillan, the spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said on Wednesday the developer felt both an obligation under his lease and a moral obligation to rebuild, rather than walk away. He said that the insurance companies who paid him would be repaid if he prevails.

He's taking it upon himself to repay the insurance companies that he just fought tooth and nail to pay out? Somehow I doubt that.

Thankfully, those who were truly injured either in the collapse or in the clean up with be paid first since bodily injury claims almost always supercede property damage claims, so Silverstein is at the back of the line.

Willravel · 03-28-2008, 06:08 AM

The whole WTC cost like $335 million back in the 60s. That's MAYBE $2b today. $16.6b is 8 times what the WTC was worth.

03-28-2008, 05:26 AM	#2 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	Not sure I agree with your cynicism. Business is business, after all. I'm sure Mr. Silverstein is not so cold-hearted as to forget the loss of life, but he has obligations and something of this magnitude is not something one can "walk away" from. If your car caught fire in your garage, would you shrug it off or go after the car manufacturer to recover your losses? Were the airlines remiss? Yes and no....following the attempted take down of the WTC in 1993, some security measures were put into place, but in the years after, it was becoming very lax. Hellbent of this destruction, these people took advantage of the laxity of airport security to get into position. The funds set up thus far from 9/11 have compensated for loss of life or income.Now, people who worked at the site are falling ill and dying so this could go on for years. Conceivably, those who are now ill could also sue the airlines. We are a country of litigation; the only thing we have to compensate with is money. Mr. Silverstein wants the WTC back in some form-how else will this happen?

03-28-2008, 06:08 AM	#4 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	The whole WTC cost like $335 million back in the 60s. That's MAYBE $2b today. $16.6b is 8 times what the WTC was worth.