Any Update on Silverstein's Lawsuit?

[Thunder]

a) You can't own a bldg that hasn't, nor does it appear will ever be built. That would be 2,3, and 5, which Silverstein has scrapped plans for since he can't find enough tenants for WTC 7 and the PA can't fill 1WTC.

Oh boy. Did you read in your link where it said that the PA had assumed responsibility for the rebuilding of 5?

so..which is it?

is WTC 5 being rebuilt or not?

 

[Thunder]

a) You can't own a bldg that hasn't, nor does it appear will ever be built. That would be 2,3, and 5, which Silverstein has scrapped plans for since he can't find enough tenants for WTC 7 and the PA can't fill 1WTC.

again, WTC Towers 2,3,4 & 5 are being rebuilt. I think you need to use more recent sources. This is 2011...not 2009.

 

[DGM]

Well, that's the realm of semantics. If you think the courts awarded LS a combined 4.55 billion and he hasn't received it yet and has not sued everyone within striking distance, then there's nothing that will convince you that he has indeed received this money.

Receiving these funds would explain how he paid off and rebuilt WTC 7 and put 1B toward 1WTC, which I documented earlier in the thread.

I don't need to be convinced of anything. The courts told the insurance companies they were responsible for this amount. You are the one claiming they paid it out all at once and now he doesn't have to do part of what the settlement was for (pocketing the rest). I'm not saying they are not doling the money out (as they do as aspects are completed). Are you saying WTC7 is mortgage free? (another bit I've seen no source for)


How has he "made out like a bandit"?

 

[Thunder]

RedIbis-why did you earlier state that WTC 5 was not being rebuilt, than admit that it was being rebuilt? was this an error on your part?

RedIbis- you claimed that Silvermann made out like a bandit. How much will his final construction costs be once all is complete at GZ?

 

[LashL]

I can't find any update to this lawsuit that Silverstein is part of:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/nyregion/27rebuild.html

He's suing for $12.3 Billion.

I recall posting about this quite a while back when the aviation defendants brought a partial motion for summary judgment, to ask the judge to limit Mr. Silverstein's claims against them to the market value of Mr. Silverstein's leasehold interests in 1WTC, 2WTC, 4WTC and 5WTC, rather than the replacement cost of those buildings. The judge granted that motion and held that the aviation defendants could only be held liable for $2.805 billion back in December 2008 and they later addressed the future possibility of set-off etc., some time around September 2009, since other courts had determined that the multiple insurers were liable up to $4.55 billion.

I can't remember whether the December 2008 and September 2009 decisions were appealed or anything, but I thought that the litigation had since settled. I'm not entirely sure, though, so I'll look into it further.

I do know that of the 21 property damage plaintiffs (including, collectively, the WTCP plaintiffs - i.e., Mr. Silverstein's entities), 18 of them settled for $1.2 billion after mediation in late 2009 and the settlement was approved in July of 2010 (that's also in the link that AJM posted), which left just the WTCP plaintiffs, Cantor Fitzgerald, and a company called Cedar & Washington Associates that owned 130 Cedar Street. Cedar & Washington's claim was dismissed in September 2010, and Cantor Fitzgerald's claims were limited by another decision of Judge Hellerstein some time last year, and I think that's the only property damage claim against the aviation defendants that hasn't been resolved.

Rats.

Then there's nothing left to do but bow three times toward Toronto and perhaps the Goddess of Legaltainment™ will issue her ruling.

I'm not entirely sure (see above) but I'll see what more I can find out.

I don't need to be convinced of anything. The courts told the insurance companies they were responsible for this amount. You are the one claiming they paid it out all at once and now he doesn't have to do part of what the settlement was for (pocketing the rest). I'm not saying they are not doling the money out (as they do as aspects are completed). Are you saying WTC7 is mortgage free? (another bit I've seen no source for)


How has he "made out like a bandit"?

The courts did not "award" Mr. Silverstein $4.55 billion as RedIbis claims. Rather, the courts told the insurers that they were liable up to a maximum of $4.55 billion, subject as always to proper evidence of proof of insured losses in accordance with the terms of the insurance policies.

Those judicial decisions do not end the matter and certainly do not mean that the insurers all pulled out their chequebooks immediately to pay out their policy limits to Mr. Silverstein. As I recall, some of the smaller insurers paid out pretty quickly after the litigation was final because it was obvious that their policy limits were reached very quickly, but the actual payment of the totality of the insurance money is subject to all manner of conditions and evidence of actual insured losses and the happening of various events.

I haven't seen any evidence at all to support the allegation that Mr. Silverstein "made out like a bandit".

 

[dtugg]

And RedIbis has still not shown any proof that Larry Silverstein has "made out like a bandit." It has probably been at least a year since he first made the claim and still nothing. It is almost as if he just made the whole thing up.

Oh, and I would also like to know more about this property insurance where the insurance companies will cut checks without the property being rebuilt (yes I know they are but RedIbis has based his lies on the premise that they are not). Is this insurance available to anyone or just billionaire jooooooooos?

 

[Thunder]

In the case of Larry Silverstein, one can only argue that he has "made out like a bandit" if one can compare the final total of his collected insurance money to the final total of his construction costs + final total of lost income & leasing costs from the original WTC. The rebuilding of the WTC towers shall not be complete until 2014.

Therefore, any claim that Larry "made out like a bandit", is based on speculation of the future outcome, not current or earlier evidence.

Care to comment, RedIbis?

 

[DGM]

The courts did not "award" Mr. Silverstein $4.55 billion as RedIbis claims. Rather, the courts told the insurers that they were liable up to a maximum of $4.55 billion, subject as always to proper evidence of proof of insured losses in accordance with the terms of the insurance policies.

Exactly, Considering Mr. Silverstein did not actually own the towers, I would find it hard to believe the insurers would pay off if he was not required to replace the asset as insured. If the square footage required (by the lease) to be replaced was down-graded, so would his pay-out.

 

[RedIbis]

so..which is it?

is WTC 5 being rebuilt or not?

Not by LS.

 

[RedIbis]

I recall posting about this quite a while back when the aviation defendants brought a partial motion for summary judgment, to ask the judge to limit Mr. Silverstein's claims against them to the market value of Mr. Silverstein's leasehold interests in 1WTC, 2WTC, 4WTC and 5WTC, rather than the replacement cost of those buildings. The judge granted that motion and held that the aviation defendants could only be held liable for $2.805 billion back in December 2008 and they later addressed the future possibility of set-off etc., some time around September 2009, since other courts had determined that the multiple insurers were liable up to $4.55 billion.

I can't remember whether the December 2008 and September 2009 decisions were appealed or anything, but I thought that the litigation had since settled. I'm not entirely sure, though, so I'll look into it further.

I do know that of the 21 property damage plaintiffs (including, collectively, the WTCP plaintiffs - i.e., Mr. Silverstein's entities), 18 of them settled for $1.2 billion after mediation in late 2009 and the settlement was approved in July of 2010 (that's also in the link that AJM posted), which left just the WTCP plaintiffs, Cantor Fitzgerald, and a company called Cedar & Washington Associates that owned 130 Cedar Street. Cedar & Washington's claim was dismissed in September 2010, and Cantor Fitzgerald's claims were limited by another decision of Judge Hellerstein some time last year, and I think that's the only property damage claim against the aviation defendants that hasn't been resolved.





I'm not entirely sure (see above) but I'll see what more I can find out.




The courts did not "award" Mr. Silverstein $4.55 billion as RedIbis claims. Rather, the courts told the insurers that they were liable up to a maximum of $4.55 billion, subject as always to proper evidence of proof of insured losses in accordance with the terms of the insurance policies.

Those judicial decisions do not end the matter and certainly do not mean that the insurers all pulled out their chequebooks immediately to pay out their policy limits to Mr. Silverstein. As I recall, some of the smaller insurers paid out pretty quickly after the litigation was final because it was obvious that their policy limits were reached very quickly, but the actual payment of the totality of the insurance money is subject to all manner of conditions and evidence of actual insured losses and the happening of various events.

I haven't seen any evidence at all to support the allegation that Mr. Silverstein "made out like a bandit".

Thank goodness for semantics, huh Lash?

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.

 

[dtugg]

Still no evidence whatsoever for the libelous claim that Silverstein "made out like a bandit". Huge shocker.

 

[DGM]

Thank goodness for semantics, huh Lash?

Sure. It's how you plan to duck out of your claim he "made out like a bandit".

Still got nothing I see. You would think after a year + you would at least try to support your claim.

 

[Thunder]

Not by LS.

so when you said yesterday that WTC 2,3,4,and 5 were NOT being built, this was a mistake?

its ok, we all make mistakes.

oh, and according to this article, Silverstein is rebuilding 2,3, and 4....not the Port Authority. The Port Authority has tower 1 and 5.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein#Rebuilding

 

[dtugg]

Let me help you out RedIbis. In order to determine if he "made out like a bandit," you will need to show that insurance payouts received - (insurance money used to rebuild+lease payments+mortgage payments+lost revenue) is at least a positive number. Now that you know what you have to do, I am sure such a calculation, with sources, is forthcoming.

 

[TexasJack]

You're asking a lot. Truthers are allergic to math.

 

[Thunder]

how about this?

RedIbis- as of 5/21/11.....how much money has Silverstein received in insurance payments?

how much money has he spent in construction costs?

how much money has he paid for leasing the space in the WTC since 9/11/01?

 

[1337m4n]

Red, why do you have such a vehement hatred for Silverstein?

 

[Oystein]

Thank goodness for semantics, huh Lash?

You quoted LashL thusly:

The courts did not "award" Mr. Silverstein $4.55 billion as RedIbis claims. Rather, the courts told the insurers that they were liable up to a maximum of $4.55 billion, subject as always to proper evidence of proof of insured losses in accordance with the terms of the insurance policies.

And against that, you set the interpretation of a journalist.

Now I think you need to show evidence that LashL is wrong, and the journalist was right, and that Silverstein actually got paid 4.6 billion by the insurances.
So RedIbis, where is your evidence?

You know, you must tally all actual income against all actual losses and liabilities, and do the sums.
Oh, and source them all, of course.

Alternatively, you could finally admit that you made that "made out like a bandit" up, pulling it out of your arse without evidence.

 

[Travis]

Unless my information is outdated buildings 2 & 3 are not going to be built as of this time. They are currently building their foundations because the PATH hub is dependent on them structurally. So those buildings are going to be built to street level and any construction upwards from there will be dependent on financing. Now, note, that even what they are doing now is not cheap. Just bringing these two buildings to street level has cost billions itself.

 

[Muadib]

The main point behind an insurance contract is that you cannot "win" from it. Amount received must be equal to a correct estimate of the loss: market value of the building, replacement cost or actualized expected income for example. And you must pay the corresponding premium for this. Non-Life insurance contract only have a risk transfer aspect.

So, if Silverstein properties replacement cost = 1 dollar in 2001, before the 9/11. He will receive 1 dollar (adjusted for inflation, of course). Nothing less. Nothing more.

RedIbis's claims are absurd.