Wouldn't be surprised but doubt it.Can you actually get an insurance policy that covers you for child abuse by your employees ?
It's not us thats handing it to them it is the sfaWe're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
Maybe with the help of sfa officials. That could be one reason why sfaspfl referees are ensuring we don't winWe're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
NoCan you actually get an insurance policy that covers you for child abuse by your employees ?
USAG paid $380m for the Nassar scandalWe're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
Mate cop yourself on ffsWe're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
We're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
Said likewise earlier.We're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
Torbett formed their Boys club in 1966, he was grooming from the get go and they knew he (and many others) were abusing kids, they let him go quietly then re-employed him, used his trophy centre company and made a pedophile a millionaire by bankrolling said company, he (Torbett) was even trusted to run/organise Tommy Burns and Sean Fallons Testimonials.They lost the 'evidence' they have that would seemingly cleared rhem of liability. No chance they have paperwork of who insurance was with all those years ago. Will have been shredded with all their other documents
What utter rubbishWe're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
Have they won the league? I must've missed that headline.We're handing them a £40 million windfall next season to cover any compensation they have to pay out, our incompetence will fund their survival and for those thinking they will go out of business, think again.
If you can't see that glaring elephant in the room then you are very niave, they will stockpile the champions league £40 million should we give them the free hit to pocket it.Mate cop yourself on ffs
A truly pathetic statement.
How can you get insurance for a separate entity?As we know Celtic announced sometime ago that they were conducting an internal investigation into the crescendo of child abuse allegations, I’m sure it was suggested this was to take the form of an assessment from their insurers over potential liabilities and then it all went very quiet.
I have some knowledge of commercial insurance and can see a huge number of pitfalls for them in the road ahead if they are expecting their liability insurers to meet their eventual compensation bill. Firstly they’ll need to trace who their insurers at the time of the occurrences were, this may not be easy and may involve more than one insurer if they changed provider regularly. If they successfully trace the insurer at the time, they’ll then need to establish if the policy included cover for abuse claims, again will not be easy tracing the extent of what cover was provided at the time (in modern policies you’d often expect this to be a buy back extension and not provided as standard).
If they do manage to trace the insurer and find the relevant wording, I would expect unless the wording is extremely clear that abuse cover is included (extremely unlikely) that the insurer will fiercely resist any claim which Celtic try to pass to them (given the precedent they could set for future claims).
In addition if the policy at the time was on a claims made wording it would render the cover at the time useless for claims made now, there is also the prospect of aggregate limitations on value of claims.
This may have also played into Dunlop’s comments around them not getting a fair trial because they didn’t have evidence of CBC being separate, well if they don’t have valid insurance in place they may have also tried to play this card that they wouldn’t get a fair trial.
I’d imagine they will be desperate to avoid a trial and see out of court settlement as best option, avoid the legal fees and the potential PR crisis of having a highly public court-case and all that could bring out, however, out of court settlements could easily open the floodgates for many others to come forward. Eifher way, this ruling is huge and they’re in a real spot now.
no but we're doing our level f*cking best to make it happen for them, 6 points ahead going into the winter break, 3 points behind , can't see out games, can't gain ground on them when they f*ck up and drop pointsHave they won the league? I must've missed that headline.
That's your opinion, i'm just stating the blatantly obvious, if they win this league we are handing them £40 million on a plate, A company heading into numerous court cases with huge implications for their financial stability and security getting a 40 million pound windfall?What utter rubbish
Can you actually get an insurance policy that covers you for child abuse by your employees ?
can they afford to make pay off's?. with the amount of victims who may still come forwardI have no doubt there will be a pay off, similar to prince Andrew, no liability admitted and the case goes away.
I really feel for the victims and completely understand that's number will be put in front of them that they can't refuse, I just hope they stand strong and get the club up admit and apologize for what they ran for decades.
Then the decision is the in the hands of the spfl/sfa on the correct and proper punishment for the club.
Not sure but they also have the prospect of lawsuits from the US following their infamous trip thereWe've handed them SFA as yet. What happened to 'the cry was no surrender'?
Is there a cap on liability / compensation in the UK from class action suits?
If this were in the USA, 400M wouldn't be enough to bail them out.
I don't have too much confidence that the Scottish judiciary will achieve an equitable settlement, although no amount of money will be enough to compensate for the crimes committed.
:shh:That's your opinion, i'm just stating the blatantly obvious, if they win this league we are handing them £40 million on a plate, A company heading into numerous court cases with huge implications for their financial stability and security getting a 40 million pound windfall?
This is why any of the kids who were abused on the infamous trip to Boston should look to taking their cases through the American courts, The Scottish courts will not sign off anywhere near the amounts that the American courts hand out.USAG paid $380m for the Nassar scandal
No, It is the UCL money they will get if we don’t manage to finish first.It's not us thats handing it to them it is the sfa
You forgot one key part; they knew about the abuse. They hired and rehired known abusers. Their insurers won’t touch this.As we know Celtic announced sometime ago that they were conducting an internal investigation into the crescendo of child abuse allegations, I’m sure it was suggested this was to take the form of an assessment from their insurers over potential liabilities and then it all went very quiet.
I have some knowledge of commercial insurance and can see a huge number of pitfalls for them in the road ahead if they are expecting their liability insurers to meet their eventual compensation bill. Firstly they’ll need to trace who their insurers at the time of the occurrences were, this may not be easy and may involve more than one insurer if they changed provider regularly. If they successfully trace the insurer at the time, they’ll then need to establish if the policy included cover for abuse claims, again will not be easy tracing the extent of what cover was provided at the time (in modern policies you’d often expect this to be a buy back extension and not provided as standard).
If they do manage to trace the insurer and find the relevant wording, I would expect unless the wording is extremely clear that abuse cover is included (extremely unlikely) that the insurer will fiercely resist any claim which Celtic try to pass to them (given the precedent they could set for future claims).
In addition if the policy at the time was on a claims made wording it would render the cover at the time useless for claims made now, there is also the prospect of aggregate limitations on value of claims.
This may have also played into Dunlop’s comments around them not getting a fair trial because they didn’t have evidence of CBC being separate, well if they don’t have valid insurance in place they may have also tried to play this card that they wouldn’t get a fair trial.
I’d imagine they will be desperate to avoid a trial and see out of court settlement as best option, avoid the legal fees and the potential PR crisis of having a highly public court-case and all that could bring out, however, out of court settlements could easily open the floodgates for many others to come forward. Eifher way, this ruling is huge and they’re in a real spot now.
Ffs mate how crass can you get. Football doesn’t really matter in this instance.No, It is the UCL money they will get if we don’t manage to finish first.
We are handing them the compensation payouts by being inept on the football field and having signed players in the January window who have done absolutely nothing.
Schools, institutions, clubs etc can buy cover but generally granted subject to disclosures and it wouldn‘t be retroactive before any date agreed by insurerYou can in the US for youth and recreational sports organisations, albeit I've only noticed it in the last few years. No idea in the UK and I wouldn't imagine it would be retroactive.
It'll also be a significant point as to the name of the insured. If it's 'Celtic Football Club', for example, then they can hardly claim separate entity.
Yip the motivations of those involved in the class action will be key to what happens next, do they want their day in court or do they want to be compensated. Either way i admire their guts and resolve and hope they get some closure.I have no doubt there will be a pay off, similar to prince Andrew, no liability admitted and the case goes away.
I really feel for the victims and completely understand that's number will be put in front of them that they can't refuse, I just hope they stand strong and get the club up admit and apologize for what they ran for decades.
Then the decision is the in the hands of the spfl/sfa on the correct and proper punishment for the club.
Mate I just remember helicopter Sunday,that'll always keep me believing we can win the league until mathematically impossible.no but we're doing our level f*cking best to make it happen for them, 6 points ahead going into the winter break, 3 points behind , can't see out games, can't gain ground on them when they f*ck up and drop points
Sorry to hear that.The whole subject makes me sick to my stomach, I’ve experienced what these kids went through and not even death and a horrible one at that is enough for these Evil people.
Insurance won’t pay out if you deliberately cause a scenario
One or two criminal acts, potentially they would pay out
To reemploy the criminal to continue the acts? That’s your problem
I’d imagine they will be desperate to avoid a trial and see out of court settlement as best option, avoid the legal fees and the potential PR crisis of having a highly public court-case and all that could bring out, however, out of court settlements could easily open the floodgates for many others to come forward. Eifher way, this ruling is huge and they’re in a real spot now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can reasure you that there will be no out of court settlements.
No, but there is public liability insurance.There’s no such thing as Paedo insurance.
They are rooked
Their claim of "separate entity" officially died on Tuesday, with the court ruling. The name of the insured will be Celtic Football Club, and I would imagine that their insurers, rather than cough up millions, either (a) will have suggested that, as some form of defence, they pursue the "separate entity" line, and now that that is closed off, will be seeking to deny their liability to pay a claim as Celtic, by their actions, eg re-hiring Torbett for one, did nothing to minimise their liability.You can in the US for youth and recreational sports organisations, albeit I've only noticed it in the last few years. No idea in the UK and I wouldn't imagine it would be retroactive.
It'll also be a significant point as to the name of the insured. If it's 'Celtic Football Club', for example, then they can hardly claim separate entity.
The more stalling, the more chance of the perpetrators and their protectors dying.Frankly, I find it utterly despicable that Celtic even tried the "separate entity" route, as it was never going to succeed. All it did, was extend the agony of the victims, as it stalled the forthcoming litigation for years.
There actually is.To address the OP's thread theme....there is not an insurance policy available anywhere in the UK which would cover a businesses unexpected financial outgoings of compensating victims of serious crimes committed 40/50 years ago by club employees. Public liability doesn't even come close. Employees liability insurance may be relevant but there is no compulsion on businesses to have this. And its quite a novel product so unlikely they had one in place so long ago. The timescales involved here as well would almost certainly be fatal in allowing CFC to recover any liabilities from insurers even if they had a current ELI policy. I'm unsure of any time limitations in place but the fact Celtic have dragged this out for so long would suggest they have no such fallback. Look at it this way. When you insure yourselves as an individual or business imagine having to ask for a clause which would cover any liabilities such as this. You'd get chased out the office in jig time!
And a final point...why do you think Celtic have been stockpiling cash for the last decade? They knew this day was coming - just not quite when.
Problem with policies like that (despite they wouldn’t have been around in the 70’s-90’s I suspect) is that they would have very strict rules in place.There actually is.
You can actually buy Sexual Molestation and Abuse policies.
Not saying they have something like that or whether it would actually cover them for the cover up and apparent ‘ring’, but you can buy such protection.
It was discussed a little more in the thread from earlier today.