Simply cannot believe this

Source: Mr Tony Gutierrez - AP Photos

A week ago I commented that I love my job because you never stop learning, []. At the other end of the scale you also never stop being amazed.

Adam Matteson of Arch Underwriting at Lloyd’s shared this article with me that states that the Fertiliser/Chemical Company that had the catastrophic explosion in Texas only had only $1 million liability insurance. From what I have seen, the primary carriers [insurers] do only ?provide to what we in Australia and New Zealand what we would consider to be completely inadequate levels of coverage, however Umbrella Cover is readily available and is under-priced. Why on earth would any company, board, or management team run with such a low level of cover when the risk is so high?

This would have to be one of the worst cases of “it will never happen to me!” I have ever seen. Another case of a small business expense moving from a business risk to a personal risk for the board, directors, risk manager/insurance buyer and shareholders. 

Here is the full article:

Texas Plant That Blew Up Carried $1M Liability Policy

By Christopher Sherman May 6, 2013

The Texas fertilizer plant that exploded last month, killing 14 people, injuring more than 200 others and causing tens of millions of dollars in damage to the surrounding area had only $1 million in liability coverage, lawyers said.

Tyler lawyer Randy C. Roberts said he and other attorneys who have filed lawsuits against West Fertilizer’s owners were told that the plant carried only $1 million in liability insurance. Brook Laskey, an attorney hired by the plant’s insurer to represent West Fertilizer Co., confirmed the amount in an email to The Associated Press. According to the Dallas Morning News, which first reported the insurance figure, the amount was confirmed by an attorney for United States Fire Insurance Co. of Morristown, N.J.

“The bottom line is, this lack of insurance coverage is just consistent with the overall lack of responsibility we’ve seen from the fertilizer plant, starting from the fact that from day one they have yet to acknowledge responsibility,” Roberts said.

Roberts said he expects the plant’s owner to ask a judge to divide the $1 million in insurance money among the plaintiffs, several of whom he represents, and then file for bankruptcy.

He said he wasn’t surprised that the plant was carrying such a small policy.

“It’s rare for Texas to require insurance for any kind of hazardous activity,” he said. “We have very little oversight of hazardous activities and even less regulation.”

On April 17, a fire at the West Fertilizer Co. in West, a town 70 miles south of Dallas, was quickly followed by an earth-shaking explosion that left a 90-foot wide crater and damaged homes, schools and nursing home within a 37-block blast zone. Among those killed were 10 emergency responders.

State and federal investigators haven’t determined what caused the blast.

The plant had reported just months before the blast that it had the capacity to store 270 tons of ammonium nitrate, but it was unknown how much was there at the time of the explosion.

Roberts said that even without a conclusive cause, negligence lawsuits can proceed.

“The law allows courts to presume negligence when something happens that would not ordinarily occur but for negligence,” Roberts said. “A fire might be an unavoidable accident, but an explosion of this magnitude resulting from a fire is not an unavoidable accident.”

Lawyers will look for any other assets the company might have and search for other responsible parties, he said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *