Celtic face threat of multimillion pound compensation claim(The Times)

Was discussing this with one of the them and they were adamant Celtic had insurance to cover this. I said what insurance company would cover you for covering up child abuse. He compared to it to car insurance. Where even if you are at fault for a accident even potentially killing someone then your insurance company would pay out to the other party? So Celtic may be at fault but there insurance company may have to pay out to the Anyone think he’s got a point or reasons why he’s not
 
ThomasMRFC said:
Was discussing this with one of the them and they were adamant Celtic had insurance to cover this. I said what insurance company would cover you for covering up child abuse. He compared to it to car insurance. Where even if you are at fault for a accident even potentially killing someone then your insurance company would pay out to the other party? So Celtic may be at fault but there insurance company may have to pay out to the Anyone think he’s got a point or reasons why he’s not
Click to expand...

eh an "accident" is just that, not something you meant to do

finding out about child abuse and then ignoring/covering it up is an offence
 
ThomasMRFC said:
Was discussing this with one of the them and they were adamant Celtic had insurance to cover this. I said what insurance company would cover you for covering up child abuse. He compared to it to car insurance. Where even if you are at fault for a accident even potentially killing someone then your insurance company would pay out to the other party? So Celtic may be at fault but there insurance company may have to pay out to the Anyone think he’s got a point or reasons why he’s not
Click to expand...
Insurance Co would possibly pay out if it was a one off event.
But to facilitate and cover up an actual paedo ring.... Nah
 
tintin69 said:
If press had knowledge of NDAs they would have reported it.
The Mail today was the best coverage yet. It was explosive.
Surely they would have uncovered the issue .
I have my suspision this may be a red herring.
If there was previous hush money paid out I think it would likely be the creeps Kelly and McGinn involved rsther than the wee Guy with the bunnet.
Click to expand...
You are wrong mate on so many levels
 
Cooper_11 said:
Ok mate, you obviously want to keep this totally hypothetical nonsense going. That’s your prerogative.
But please consider this. What fucking evidence would they have to pull us down. Absolutely none. Do you think with the spotlight on them they would not look like deranged fools throwing allegations at us ? And that’s all they would be. The world would see through it. Evidence is everything. They have none. End of story.
This hypothetical scenario is just getting ridiculous now.
As @simply_the_best so eloquently explained earlier, it’s pish :)
Click to expand...
I’ve lost where u are here.
My point was purely, if u throw sh.it enough times , it eventually sticks.

That was my point


Was just saying, when u said stick and stones means nothing. It doesnt. Sh.it sticks
 
ThomasMRFC said:
Was discussing this with one of the them and they were adamant Celtic had insurance to cover this. I said what insurance company would cover you for covering up child abuse. He compared to it to car insurance. Where even if you are at fault for a accident even potentially killing someone then your insurance company would pay out to the other party? So Celtic may be at fault but there insurance company may have to pay out to the Anyone think he’s got a point or reasons why he’s not
Click to expand...
No expert on these matters but if you accidentally killed somebody(no criminal intent) then I guess they would cover you.However, if you deliberately murdered someone or similar I would imagine the loss adjusters would have a field day with your claim.Convert that to knowingly allowing a perv back into your organisation to in effect continue where he left off,I'm not so sure they would wear that.
 
Harthill Bill said:
Erm....no. Can't say I felt the need.

Furthermore, as for being quiet about the whole affair, I think I may have posted more on this particular thread than anyone else?

Now off you pop. Adults are trying to speak here.
Click to expand...


I was supporting the Rangers when you were still snoking your snotters back up your nose. I have seen a lot of your posts, most of them downplaying these shocking revelations. Give us a break and either be quiet or join in the general disapprobation.
 
Stez64 said:
Insurance Co would possibly pay out if it was a one off event.
But to facilitate and cover up an actual paedo ring.... Nah
Click to expand...
thetoptier said:
eh an "accident" is just that, not something you meant to do

finding out about child abuse and then ignoring/covering it up is an offence
Click to expand...

Yeah but surely if you drove drunk then by that logic you negate any defence of it’s a accident. You would be liable the second you took the chance of getting behind a wheel when it’s illegal. But it doesn’t work that way.
 
Stez64 said:
Insurance Co would possibly pay out if it was a one off event.
But to facilitate and cover up an actual paedo ring.... Nah
Click to expand...

Also referenced schools insurance companies paying out of a pupil was abused by a teacher. But yeah I get the one off and several incidents thing
 
ThomasMRFC said:
Was discussing this with one of the them and they were adamant Celtic had insurance to cover this. I said what insurance company would cover you for covering up child abuse. He compared to it to car insurance. Where even if you are at fault for a accident even potentially killing someone then your insurance company would pay out to the other party? So Celtic may be at fault but there insurance company may have to pay out to the Anyone think he’s got a point or reasons why he’s not
Click to expand...

They may *think* their insurance will cover it. So did Manchester City when it came to setting up their compensation scheme. Turns out their insurers are refusing to meet the costs so City are having to fund it themselves, from club funds. They may then choose to sue their insurers to try and recover their cash.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...outs-Barry-Bennell-victims-cost-millions.html
 
thetoptier said:
how does having car insurance stop you going to jail if you drink drive?
Click to expand...

It doesn’t. I’m just looking at it from the civil side. The criminal side has mostly been done the abusers (known ones) are in jail and if any directors who covered it up or unknown abusers follow then justice might be closer but just looking at the civil side and payouts .
 
ThomasMRFC said:
Yeah but surely if you drove drunk then by that logic you negate any defence of it’s a accident. You would be liable the second you took the chance of getting behind a wheel when it’s illegal. But it doesn’t work that way.
Click to expand...

Let's scotch this one once and for all. Drink driving can invalidate your insurance.

"Insurance companies do remain obliged under the Road Traffic Act to meet the costs of any claim by a third party for injury or damage.
So the fact that you were drink driving will not invalidate claims made by anyone injured as a result.
But the insurers are entitled to claim these costs back from you. In reality, this does not frequently happen, but in some cases motorists have been billed for thousands of pounds that their insurance company had paid out to a third party." - Source: Car Insurance Myths, GoCompare.com
 
Last edited:
Mbear said:
I’ve lost where u are here.
My point was purely, if u throw sh.it enough times , it eventually sticks.

That was my point


Was just saying, when u said stick and stones means nothing. It doesnt. Sh.it sticks
Click to expand...

Not in Scotland, unless it involves one club.

Back in 2012, we were told to think of the children and how the wee mites lost out because of money we stole because of taxes.

In 2019 we are now being told fcu-k the children, it don't matter that that they were being sexually abused.

That thinking and ideology is going on at the higher echelons of the Scottish Parliament.
 
Chas said:
All things being equal, I would agree with you. But I think the information/facts on the big scoop are being controlled and drip fed by the victims legal team to the media, for maximum benefit of there clients.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this but another consequence of this drip feed approach is it raises awareness every day with more people coming forward and increasing any likely commission for the lawyers acting for victims
 
DSW said:
Even if the NDA’s are copied ready to print people have to take into account that the papers will

1. Look to build the biggest and most accurate story on the matter first and foremost.

2. Make sure they are legally water tight and backed by everyone who’s eyes come across it.

All this monumental progress is before a court case has even begun and the death by a thousand cuts approach is absolutely ruining them, their constant fear and lack of awareness on what’s coming next has caused their mistakes recently.

I thought the NDA’s were an accepted fact whether they are at the record or not?

The fact remains more is coming and they are terrified so let’s just calm it and get back to making a difference together.
Click to expand...

Good direction DSW. Commitment & patience.

And remember who the most important people are here. The victims.
 
The Double A Man said:
No expert on these matters but if you accidentally killed somebody(no criminal intent) then I guess they would cover you.However, if you deliberately murdered someone or similar I would imagine the loss adjusters would have a field day with your claim.Convert that to knowingly allowing a perv back into your organisation to in effect continue where he left off,I'm not so sure they would wear that.
Click to expand...

Like taking out a Life assurance policy on the wife doesn't mean you can push her down the stairs and go buy a boat.
 
Unless they had a policy in place at the time the weans were being abused no insurance company in the world is paying out. Why would it?

If I bump my car tonight can I go back to my insurers from 1989 and make a claim?
 
tintin69 said:
If press had knowledge of NDAs they would have reported it.
The Mail today was the best coverage yet. It was explosive.
Surely they would have uncovered the issue .
I have my suspision this may be a red herring.
If there was previous hush money paid out I think it would likely be the creeps Kelly and McGinn involved rsther than the wee Guy with the bunnet.
Click to expand...

Spot on mate.
 
Cooper_11 said:
I don’t know why we’re continuing to get bogged down with a completely hypothetical scenario. Mud sticks, evidence is everything. If and when scurrilous accusations are made against Rangers FC (hypothetically), we would expect to see evidence to back up the accusations. They mentally challengeds will have no evidence. They will not take us down with them. They will look like bitter, deranged fools.
Hypothetically, of course.
Click to expand...
Are made?
They’ve been getting made since before admin, bud.
We’re still being accused of tax evasion and conning the public.
Despite there being contradictory evidence proving otherwise.
The mud sticks bit is that every little tinpot shit football club in the country join in the demonisation of us.
 
ThomasMRFC said:
It doesn’t. I’m just looking at it from the civil side. The criminal side has mostly been done the abusers (known ones) are in jail and if any directors who covered it up or unknown abusers follow then justice might be closer but just looking at the civil side and payouts .
Click to expand...
Just a question. The insurance could be for something else. If directors were deemed to have been negligent, do they have personal liability? Possibly, yes??? If a criminal act was committed, yes. But to what length does the corporate veil protect board members? Does claiming they were acting in (what they believed to be) the best interests of the club give them civil protection through insurance? In any case, we might never know. Weren’t NDA’s alluded to in Lou Macari’s book?
 
Brother Crockett said:
Just a question. The insurance could be for something else. If directors were deemed to have been negligent, do they have personal liability? Possibly, yes??? If a criminal act was committed, yes. But to what length does the corporate veil protect board members? Does claiming they were acting in (what they believed to be) the best interests of the club give them civil protection through insurance? In any case, we might never know. Weren’t NDA’s alluded to in Lou Macari’s book?
Click to expand...
All very pertinent questions. Surely insurance policies would contain clauses that criminal offences would not be covered.
 
I have no proof of this ........

But my gut feel is that NDAs do exist and are probably linked to the Cairney trip to New Jersey and the "pact struck with Cairney at an airport cafe in Boston" (Daily Record 19/08/1996).

Worth considering that, at the time, any NDA would be with the parents, not the boy, and that nobody knew what the long-term consequences were going to be. It probably seemed like an elelgant way out of a hole for Celtic.

HB has every right to be sceptical. This thing has taken so long to play out and there have been too many false dawns. Personally, I think that Celtic are getting manoeuvred all over the place by some pretty clever tactics on the part of the lawyers who are being careful not to show their full hand. I hope I'm right.
 
ShawsyBear said:
I've also got family involved in this and they know absolutely nothing of NDA's.
Click to expand...

I’ve only heard reference to a single NDA. It could relate to a specific incident involving just one victim. There has also been reference to an affidavit - again, this could be specific to a single incident/victim. I don’t think anyone had suggested NDAs were being signed by multiple/all victims.
 
ShawsyBear said:
Love how you go around telling people they're wrong but can't back up your claims especially when you haven't seen the NDA's yourself.
Click to expand...
I go around telling people they are wrong really I think you will find out the last person I said to them they were wrong they were and No of course I haven't seen the NDA or the affidavit but the person who told me is very close to a family involved and I've yet to rubbish any of his claims
 
jf1960 said:
I go around telling people they are wrong really I think you will find out the last person I said to them they were wrong they were and No of course I haven't seen the NDA or the affidavit but the person who told me is very close to a family involved and I've yet to rubbish any of his claims
Click to expand...

So how many NDA's and affadavit's are out there?
 
tintin69 said:
Of course they can. Nothing is secret for Long in the industry. Would be madness to hold on to a massive story knowing another paper will get a 'splash" before you.
Click to expand...
Of course they can't if they are the only ones with it how hard is that to understand maybe they are being stopped of printing it other newspapers can't run with the story cause no other newspaper has it ffs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top