Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If BP was negligent, is it liable to all businesses that suffer losses because of the oil spill?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:36 PM
Original message
If BP was negligent, is it liable to all businesses that suffer losses because of the oil spill?
Perhaps this has already been discussed on another DU thread or other place so a link would be appreciated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. No. Economic damage suits are capped at 75 million total.
Edited on Tue May-04-10 07:39 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
Some economic claims may be able to be made against part of the eligible $1 billion in the oil-cleanup trust-fund, but I hink that will all be long gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Is that 75 million total or each? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I believe it is total.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Thanks. Perhaps someone can elaborate. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. added an article that might help
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Many, many thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. NYT article >
Edited on Tue May-04-10 07:42 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
"Under the law that established the reserve, called the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, the operators of the offshore rig face no more than $75 million in liability for the damages that might be claimed by individuals, companies or the government. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/us/02liability.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Thanks. "no more than $75 million in liability for the damages that might be claimed by individuals,
companies or the government" could mean each?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. The change in the law being proposed today is to raise the cap from $75 million to $10 billion.
Several Dem senators are outraged about the provision and want to change the law from $75 million to $10 billion. So it's safe to say it's total.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Thanks. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Why the hell is it capped?
Edited on Tue May-04-10 07:44 PM by DireStrike
Oh right, money shelters people from responsibility. Some rich fuck wrote the law.

Every last asset of BPs should be seized and distributed out to the people they fucked over. Then whoever is found to be responsible should be sold into slavery for the rest of their lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. "trade-off" for creating the post Exxon-Valdez industry funded clean-up fund
1990 law.

I guess $75 million sounded like a lot of money in 1990.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I'll have to read up on that
Amazing that we have to have a "Trade off" instead of arresting people and seizing their assets to pay for the damage they caused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:45 PM
Original message
Actually, $75m limit voted in in 1986. 1990 was authorizing the use & funding.z
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
18. Thanks. (I was reading the NYT litterally)
Edited on Tue May-04-10 07:47 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. It took some digging to flush it out. Lots of bad info out there yesterday
Here is a government site on it that cleared it all up: http://www.uscg.mil/npfc/About_NPFC/osltf.asp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Types of Claims suggests it could be $75 million per claim. see types from your link below
Claim Type
Natural Resource Damages (NRD)
Removal Costs
Property Damage
Boat Damage
Loss of Profits & Earning Capacity
Loss of Subsistence Use of Natural Resources
Loss of Government Revenue
Increased Public Services
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. Interesting! Thanks for adding another piece to the puzzle!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. 1986 under Reagan. DU discussion link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8263530

Funding/activating it took place in 1990 under Bush the Less Maniacal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Thanks -nt-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Thanks. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. Thanks for the DU link, it's a start on an issue that all citizens need to understand. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Several Senators started legislation yesterday to raise the $75mm to $10bn
I take issue with hard coding any dollar figure to this kind of thing.

I don't recall who is leading this, but if memory serves it is Menendez (NJ), Lautenberg (NJ) and Nelson (FL). If wrong, someone will be by shortly to correct me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Would that mony be paid by BP or we taxpayers? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. In all likelihood it will apply only to future incidents
Some think it can be retroactive but they are probably mistaken. IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. They are going to try for retroactive, but with our SCOTUS, it is unsure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. Both. The fund is funded on $0.08 a BARREL tax, which is passed onto us at the pump.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. As usual corporations reap profits from good and bad times. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. 'Xactly
Privatized profits, socialized downside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. How was the Valdez litigation handled?
Have the recovery laws changed since then? I know the Natives and other fisherfolks' case went on for a very long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
7. All Businesses? That Could Be Quite A List...
They've already closed the Southwest passage...a prime shipping canal into the Mississippi and may have to close others. This would shut down the port of New Orleans...the busiest in the country where the effects on the economy could ripple all over the place. Coffee, fruits, oil...a long list of goods travel through that port and having it shut down would definitely affect all of us. Now I wouldn't mind a check from BP cause I couldn't have a morning cup of java.

I'll bet the definition of liability will end up in the courts for years. There'll be some immediate payouts to people like the shrimpers and for clean-up crews but anyone else is gonna have to stand in a long, long line that will take years to move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
16. Every business and every individual in the country is going to lose one way or another no matter...
...who is formally held accountable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Agree and that's one reason I object to limited liability for corporations particularly when they
control congress.

Limited liability and caps encourage risk taking and cost cutting of safety measures that end up in disaster.

The game is Heads corporations make billions of dollars, Tails workers pay for corporate losses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
30. "If"? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
34. There has to be proximate cause
some losses that might be said to have been "caused" by the spill will be too remote (or "unforseeable") to recover as damages in a negligence action.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
35. Morally,, YES. But of course the law allows it to weasel out to paying for the
damage it has done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
36. Like Exxon was liable to the Prince William Sound fishermen?
Yeah, right...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 04:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC