Vem? Silverstein eller de som lånade ut pengarna och satte villkoren för hur stor försäkring han måste teckna?
2003:
2002:
Citat:
Jag är skeptisk till att någon beskyllde honom för att ha underförsäkrat.
Eller att Larry skulle försökt få ner beloppet.
Eller att Larry skulle försökt få ner beloppet.
2003:
Swiss Re, the reinsurance company that is leading the legal case against Mr Silverstein, said it had uncovered new evidence showing Silverstein Properties decided to buy less cover for the World Trade Centre than would be required to rebuild them because it wanted to cut costs.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...18004.html?amp
Jacques Dubois, the chief executive of Swiss Re's American arm, said: "In our view, Silverstein Properties knowingly and deliberately underinsured the WTC complex. We believe the record establishes that in order to save on premium dollars, Silverstein intentionally refused to insure against the risk of loss in excess of $3.5bn."
2002:
At 7:53 p.m. on July 12 of last year, Timothy Boyd, an insurance broker working for developer Larry Silverstein, e-mailed a memo to a colleague. At the time, Mr. Silverstein was racing to close a $3.2 billion deal to lease the World Trade Center. Mr. Boyd was assembling a cartel of companies to insure the massive investment.https://observer.com/2002/02/at-trad...insurance/amp/
Mr. Silverstein was wrangling with the banks backing his bid, Mr. Boyd explained in the memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Observer . The banks wanted $5 billion in coverage. Mr. Silverstein’s team, which then valued the complex at $3.9 billion, argued that a total catastrophe was “outside the realm of possibility.” Mr. Silverstein himself had dismissed the cost of such insurance-$25 million a year-as “far too expensive,” the memo said.
Ultimately the banks settled for less, $3.5 billion in coverage. Twelve days later, Mr. Silverstein closed the deal.
