Can someone please explain why PSU was responsible for paying this $93 million? For what exactly was PSU's liability?
Penn State must be guilty. $93 million paid to Jerry's victims by PSU.
- Thread starter LealandLoyal
- Start date
Don't worry. Since Sandusky found victims via the Second Mile, that organization is shelling out money too.
I was almost able to type that without a disgusted laugh. It's really hard to tell what the extent of the TSM involvement was. The shredder truck visit to their former offices took care of that.
I was almost able to type that without a disgusted laugh. It's really hard to tell what the extent of the TSM involvement was. The shredder truck visit to their former offices took care of that.
These payouts are blackmail and they reinforce the notion that C/S/S and JoePa did something wrong. Completely negligent to pay one red cent to anyone. The only victims were the Paterno's, the fans, the players, the local businesses, the truth, due process and the students.
I have been hesitant to post this in all these years. I am an insurance expert in higher education and worked on some catholic diocese accounts . We provided Educators legal liability to many colleges and diocese.this included sexual issues. A couple things to consider.
It's obvious why the university is paying this money just like the church.
The reinsurance companies are undoubtedly leading this as we are probably in thier pocket now?
Many people knew about Sandusky even though they did not literally see him molest these kids.
I am personally very very close to a person who covered this case from day one and as a Joe and PSU loyalist I still have trouble believing it.but he says take the blinders off!
I spoke with several letterman who knew Sandusky was inappropriate to say the least with the young boys.
Strong speculation Joe knew of this behavior thus didn't want him as his predecessor? Joe was simply not himself as he aged to deal with it.thus the board knowing the above wanted him out but he would not leave
It breaks my heart to say the above and I hope to God I am wrong but no matter even with the trials we will never know.
I said before I will never move on but insurance "experts" in these cases usually know the truth . They do not throw 33million around to settle a case unless they are sure!
BS. Insurance wasn't even consulted in any of the settlements. The rest of your post is also BS.
How the hell do you know. That is ridiculous . they have a captive and underlying claims are always reviewed ! Do you know what that is . 91 What else is BS.
Sorry to disappoint, but you're wrong. Bot has admitted insurance wasn't consulted, and the insurance is currently fighting paying in court. Oops, what's your insurance background tell you now? You haven't even addressed why insurance would 'volunteer' to pay such outrageous premiums.
Name one ! I can prove what I know . What's nonsense Joe did not know anything about Sandusky but a low level BS grad heard all the rumors and if the are false praise The Lord!
Now you believe the BOT what a hypocrite !!
background
40 years in insurance
President of a top 5 major) broker.
Higher Ed practice group leader
Clients SMU, UT, university of CO, Wyoming,numerous others and community colleges,etc.
Expert witness
Come on 91 and it's not premium it's claims.
Also know I know many of PSU risk managers. (That's insurance guys91)
Know you can tell me with all this PSU never notified their reinsurers .
100percentsure that's not true
Now give me your background 91
This is why I stayed out of this fight because you guys cannot handle it .
Still waiting for the other guy to tell me what else is nonsense?
Remember I am on your your side prove me wrong.?
A well orchestrated conspiracy to frame
There was no shower "incident" nor were there any 'victims'. Study the FACTS and educate yourself otherwise you won't last here very long. Read why Ziggy has written on this subject. The entire case consisted of 'witnesses' being coached up/pressured by the OAG and their acolytes.
Me thinks you need to learn the difference between a "premium" and a "claim" before you go spouting off.
Lol, you haven't been paying attention. Week after Freeh report comes out insurance company says its all speculative and not worth squat. First batch of settlement approvals at the bot meeting the bot states they will submit the claims, not that they have been approved. Insurance company currently fighting claims. Yeah, they were consulted. The insurance company no doubt approved record premiums for the settlements (that means over and above). Dear lord, you need more honest friends.
Who else has paid out $93 million in a molestation case? I think the question is: where does $93 million in liability come from? It seems like a ridiculous number to me.....especially given that this is probably not the last of it.
Let me be perfectly blunt, you would not approve reimbursement of these claims, let alone the way they were handled, and definitely not for the massive premiums that were paid out. You're the expert, what's the going settlement rate for a victim not molested onsite, not affiliated with the school, and by someone who doesn't work for the school? I looked it up, the catholic church who had actual priests molest parisheners, and who had assets that dwarf Penn States, paid a fraction of what PSU paid out. I don't doubt your expertise, that's why I want to hear it. Please, feel free to provide the relevant criteria you would typically use.
First batch of settlements averaged ~$3MM. Second batch averaged ~5.5MM. I can't wait to hear the expert's rationale for those amounts, let alone the criteria he would use to pay out even the most basic of settlements. I also have one more question for him that we haven't discussed - when would an insurance company typically reimburse a company for settlements that they were consulted on and previously approved? I have a new follow up question- would they then typically fight payment in court?
I don't care who you are, you don't know what you're talking about.
Penn State's insurer the a refusing to pay Sandusky claims and its in litigation. Personally, I don't blame the insurer for not paying.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2013/03/06/283862.htm
Insurance agents have a long and illustrious history of posting on this forum. Welcome.
Have no idea. Ask one of the 11/09/11 members of the BoT; they are passing out the money as quickly as they can print it!
Between the attorneys and now the insurers, are any of the bot members actually doing their fiduciary duties and leading Penn State? This comes from their supposed friends. Geesh.
No, I was asking epradelli. He implied that reinsurers are behind the big payouts. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me on a number of levels.
The insurance companies are denying coverage on the grounds that Penn State failed to report the '98 and '01 incidents.
Otherwise, your post is gibberish.
You can't compare Penn State to the Catholic Church cases. The Archdiocese have relatively limited funds and they always take bankruptcy. Then you have something like 200 claimants chasing $30 million dollars, so the average settlement is only $150,000, for example.
The big money is with the Vatican, but nobody has successfully sued them for a multitude of reasons, not the least of which is that the Vatican is a country.
Penn State has ample assets to pay the claims and taking bankruptcy would make no sense.
His buddy that works presumably in the Office of Risk Management that "identifies and manages potential risks throughout the University relating to financial, physical and reputational loss" pins it on the football coach. That's a shocker, right?
You just completely confirmed away I said .particularly the last sentence in the articl
You just confirmed.what I
Was saying. Denying the claims often happens in these cases but many
Times they end up paying something.
Read the last sentence in the article by Penn State " working with the
other insurers in an effort to
obtain their constructive participation"
PMA is in this and so
Are "other insurers". That's what I said!
We call it " the path of least resistance"
And PSU wants to
Avoid more bad publicity so
Settle whether it is PSU or probably
both.
I was just trying to answer a posters question.
I am moving on to football which you can say I do not know much about unlike insurance and risk management
My last reply on this
However I did know Donavan seemed over his head?
