Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Aviation Mishaps' started by jallen0, Jan 26, 2020.
If they told you that they could handle it, took your money, and then ****ed it up, yes. 100%.
I fully expect a jury to rule against the company. They probably do too since they shut down operations immediately.
But what assets do they have? 10m in airplanes that might have already been sold to pay legal bills? Probably less because they’re selling under distress.
it is quite possible all the aircraft are now being flown under a different name. All the pilots have another job or might be on CV furlough. All the mechanics are working elsewhere.
Nothing has changed except the marquee.
They don't strike me as a company that would own their fleet free and clear. Odds are the airframes have been returned to a gaggle of lessors or they have notes on them that eat most of the book value.
Interesting. Sounds like sour grapes for some reason, and that you have a big ax to grind. I have a very different view. I know the owner, and have for 25-ish years. Straight shooter. Honest. Doesn't cut corners. Were mistakes made here? That's for a jury to decide, but it sure sounds like it. But my experience is far different from yours. I hope the insurance carriers give the Bryant and other families the policy limits, and everyone moves on from this horrific situation.
You mean there's hardly any money? I'm shocked I tell you.
Wow. A rotary wing aircraft does not qualify as an aircraft under the non-owned clause for a helicopter charter company's policy? There are some agents/brokers who should notify their E&O carriers...
There's money. There's almost ALWAYS money.
Yeah I’d love to see how the lawyers parsed the language in the policy to reach that conclusion.
It's all in the details. As reported, OC Helicopters only owned single-engine helicopters which is what their policy was written for. Enter Island Express helicopters who were contracted through OC for the Kobe twin-engine helicopter flights. This arrangement between OC and Island, as reported, goes back to 2015. So if OC only had single-engine coverage then it appears the Endurance attorney earned his keep with this motion to included reimbursement for previous defense costs. It's OC's stand they were merely a charter broker and had no operational control over the Island Express flights. Time will tell.
It doesn't say that rotary wing aircraft don't qualify as an aircraft, just that they don't qualify as a covered type under the policy coverage for aircraft they operated but did not own.
Yeah, if you have non-owned coverage through your C150, a borrowed Baron may not be covered.
I'm in the insurance industry and there is significantly more insurance money for this loss. It is understood that the policy limits have been or will be offered. We're talking 10s of millions. Still, it won't be enough because Kobe's net worth, and the other passengers who never get talked about. They need to be settled out as well, and that won't happen if Vanessa is sucking up all the money. In theory the other pax can go after Kobe's estate since he arranged the flight so it behooves Vanessa to let the other victims' families take the insurance money and she can have whatever is left over, plus the assets of the company. She doesn't really NEED the money.
Defendants get murky because there are multiple entities involved in the helo operations and Vanessa is going after everyone. But as far as I know, there is a sizable primary and excess policy that will respond to this loss. Again, adequate for you and me, but not Kobe plus 5 or 6 others including children.
That is what is considered a bailment under the common law, and different rules apply to that situation. (Sorry for the necro post.)
Perhaps more charitably, it might be her attempt to establish some control over a situation in which she really has none. Anger is understandably there, too.
All of the above.
Yes. I am a jaded prick sometimes and assume things not in evidence.
Agreed. My firm was involved in the defense of a mid-air collision in which we were able to have a significant apportionment of the fault allocated to the FAA controllers. It's certainly not impossible, depending on the facts.
In fairness, there is no evidence that you are wrong, either. (I mean, about your perceptions of Mrs. Bryant. I am not suggesting anything negative about your character.)
Yes. You on the other hand never never miss the opportunity
Not too surprising, but the media are reporting that the parties have reached a settlement, subject to court approval.