- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Transocean is attempting to limit liability to 26.7 million
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:09 pm
LINK
This is absurd. With more information being revealed about modifications that were made to the BOP by Transocean, that they could be limited to liability to 26.7 million.
quote:
U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison issued an order suspending the cases against Transocean at the company's request after it sought a $26.7 million limit to its liability in the lawsuits.
The law was passed in the mid-1800s to protect U.S. vessel owners, eliminate some risk in crisis situations and aid competition with foreign ships.
This is absurd. With more information being revealed about modifications that were made to the BOP by Transocean, that they could be limited to liability to 26.7 million.
4
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:27 pm to TigerFred
this is an old maritime rule that allows the owners to limit liability to their interest in the vessel if they can show that the management was not guilty of fault that contributes to the accident. (basically, the law was originally put in place to protect shoreside owners from extensive liability when crew errors at sea are well beyond the control of management). given the rumors out there about modification of the BOP and possible failed tests and other well problems before this explosion, it will be difficult for Transocean to show that any fault on its part was limited to the crew members on site with no fault from management. this is a remedy that is often sought by vessel owners but rarely granted. (i think Exxon tried to get it for the Valdez but lost because it came out that they were aware that the captain had a drinking problem).
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:29 pm to Pinetar
If these companies would like the pleasure of doing business in our great state, they'll back the eff off and admit their wrongdoings. At least that's the way it should work. I'm sick of this, "it ain't my fault" crap. It's time to play hardball.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:35 pm to Big McLargeHuge
quote:
If these companies would like the pleasure of doing business in our great state, they'll back the eff off and admit their wrongdoings. At least that's the way it should work. I'm sick of this, "it ain't my fault" crap. It's time to play hardball.
...they are paying hardball.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:41 pm to CharlesLSU
It seems to me that the biggest risk these companies face is turning the state the has been one of their best friends into their worst enemy. If that threat isn't real, they'll walk all over us. I'm just frustrated watching Fourchon and Venice like this while they try and use 19th century obscure laws to limit their liability. Tell us how you screwed up and pony up the cash or GTFO.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 1:18 pm to TigerFred
quote:
The law was passed in the mid-1800s to protect U.S. vessel owners, eliminate some risk in crisis situations and aid competition with foreign ships.
Only problem is The Transocean Deepwater Horizon was flagged in the Marshall Islands.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 1:23 pm to Oyster
The law is the law. 
Posted on 5/14/10 at 1:28 pm to bigwheel
And there is the fact that they were drilling in federal waters, not the state of Louisiana.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 1:35 pm to TigerFred
“What it does provide them is a central forum to slow down the cases and to try to leverage a global resolution,” Buzbee said.
It is a strategic legal move, they know that this will not work to limit their liability.
It is a strategic legal move, they know that this will not work to limit their liability.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 2:48 pm to ByDaBook
it won't work, going to Houston to hide in the court system won't work and they are seriously alienating themselves in this whole ordeal. They owned the rig and were the "drilling contractor"... they have a large responsibilty in this and they should mind there step. There are a ton of emotional people out there especially those affected by Katrina as well. Alot of folks are feeling pushed in the corner and that is not good. I am personally shocked they took this stance. Very dissapointing.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 2:57 pm to back9Tiger
Could BP halt all clean up attempts until court settlement?
Posted on 5/14/10 at 4:47 pm to Big McLargeHuge
quote:
If these companies would like the pleasure of doing business in our great state, they'll back the eff off and admit their wrongdoings. At least that's the way it should work. I'm sick of this, "it ain't my fault" crap. It's time to play hardball.
They were in Federal waters. Not state waters.
This post was edited on 5/14/10 at 4:49 pm
Posted on 5/14/10 at 5:01 pm to pochejp
Any truth to the rumor that Transocean sequestered their employees that were on the rig upon their return, and had them all sign releases BEFORE they let them seek medical attention or be reunited with their families?
Can anyone confirm or deny?
Can anyone confirm or deny?
This post was edited on 5/14/10 at 5:18 pm
Posted on 5/14/10 at 5:07 pm to RockChalkTiger
The only thing that I can confirm is that medical attention was not denied to anyone. All the personnel that were rescued were confined to the Damon Bankston supply vessel until a debriefing and drug screens could be administered.
Posted on 5/15/10 at 10:55 am to TigerFred
transocean pays no income taxes to any country in the world.
their HQ is in Switzerland, in ZUg. Zug only taxes income made in Switzerland.
Transoceans 1,300 employees work in Houston TX.
They have a dozen office workers in Zug.
their HQ is in Switzerland, in ZUg. Zug only taxes income made in Switzerland.
Transoceans 1,300 employees work in Houston TX.
They have a dozen office workers in Zug.
Posted on 5/15/10 at 10:56 am to ottothewise
Exxon tried to use the same law during the Valdez disaster. It was thrown out pretty quickly, just like Transocean's claim will.
This post was edited on 5/15/10 at 10:57 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News