I read an article in the NY Times, and it struck me by surprise. http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/article/107188/aig-balks-at-Claims-from-jet-ditching-in-hudson
Basically, what it sounds like to me is that AIG isn’t going to cover this for the individuals that survived the crash. AIG has to find negligence and since Capt. Sully made the heroic effort, there was none to be found. On the surface it makes “letter of the law” sense, but at the same time it doesn’t make practical sense.
My first instinct is to say, “typical insurance company trying to get out of paying claims”. But in thinking about it, I’m not so sure. In this case, I may actually agree with AIG. With that said, is this a good idea for them to do? Afterall, they did receive American taxpayers dollars in terms of a two year loan up to $85 billion. So even though if AIG got sued and went to court over these claims, I think they stand a good chance of winning. But in the court of public opinion, it would be about the worst decision possible.
They should just pay the money and be done with it. The risk-reward factor in this situation when you factor in public opinion is too great.
Pay up and move on!
phil_ramirez2010@yahoo.com
Phil Ramirez's Blog 