SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6488 posts, RR: 41 Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 12689 times:
Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 1): What is missing from the article is whether or not Waterway was paid by US for their expenses. The company should be able to present a bill for its services.
It's not stated, but it's implied that US has not offered them anything. This is just stupid; paying them for their expenses would be far cheaper than paying compensation for even one passenger fatality. I have no sympathy for passengers that are suing; but New York Waterway should be compensated. If US won't do so voluntarily then they have to sue.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
Frequentflykid From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1204 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 12563 times:
I am far from the litigious type, however if US Airways won't even discuss some type of compensation with New York Waterway they should first off be ashamed of themselves and should be sued. The company being in financial distress is an easy target of criticism, however they provided service above and beyond being a Good Samaritan. I did find it interesting that in the response to the potential lawsuit that US Airways still doesn't refer to New York Waterway by name, but only to address all the "first responders."
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9205 posts, RR: 52 Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 12539 times:
Well because of US Airways, parts of the waterway were shut down for 2 days significantly impacting their business. I think they probably can get some money out of US.
As far as a high profile lawsuit though, I think it might do more harm than good. But for a company on the verge of bankruptcy that has been heavily impacted by the recession, I'm not surprised they are looking for help anywhere they can get it.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Frequentflykid From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1204 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 12435 times:
I would typically agree with you OHLHD, however this case is more complex than just stopping at a car accident. The unique nature of the accident and the ensuing interuption of New York Waterway's services constitute a different situation.
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10807 posts, RR: 52 Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 12216 times:
Quoting Frequentflykid (Reply 6): I am far from the litigious type, however if US Airways won't even discuss some type of compensation with New York Waterway they should first off be ashamed of themselves and should be sued.
I don't know because it also doesn't appear that New York Waterway even approached US Airways about helping them financially for plucking their passengers out of the water. You should always ask nicely before you file a law suit.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21320 posts, RR: 60 Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11992 times:
Quoting Eastern747 (Reply 10): Correct me if I'm wrong, but once that aircraft hit the water it became the property of the insurance company.
Exactly. This is a matter for the insurance companies. Those companies will want to pay zero, and NY, US, etc. will want them to pay a lot, and there will be an agreement at some point. Lawsuits are just part of the process. Both sides have lawyers who have to prove they are worth retaining and paying...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Rampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3018 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11982 times:
Quoting Eastern747 (Reply 10): Correct me if I'm wrong, but once that aircraft hit the water it became the property of the insurance company.
If an airplane crashed into an office building, I am assuming that an airline's insurance would pay for the building and some compensation for the businesses who are put out of work. Similar here. NY Waterway's place of work was out of business for some time.
Now, insurance companies what they are, it would not surprise me if they were "forgetting" about this compensation or finding a way around it. I mean, is my little automobile insurance company any different than an underwriter for an airline?
Quoting D L X (Reply 12): You should always ask nicely before you file a law suit.
It would also not surprise me if NYWW took out the big guns first, speaking legal action, since that is sometimes the only thing that will get an insurance company to notice. Why mince words when you can get to the inevitable quicker? (that's a typical New York MO, in my observation, god bless them)
Rampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3018 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 11667 times:
Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 18):
No profitable business risks going out of business because of 2 days of lost revenue.
Water taxi is one notch higher than public transportation, and they're trying to do is as for-profit. You think there's a lot of profit margin there? They're razor thin normally, 2 days lost revenue may well be the straw that broke the camel's back; their ridership has been decreasing consistent with decrease in ridership in MTA and other public transportation due to so many lost jobs. More power to them for diminishing the automobile density in Manhattan and taking advantage of a far more sensible way to cross the river (than an umpteen-billion $ new tunnel).
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6924 posts, RR: 11 Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11497 times:
Quoting OHLHD (Reply 11): Very true, but I would consider it extraordinary circumstances. I do not know how it is in the US but in Europe you can be convicted for not helping at an accident.
Same here. It is a requirement when doing a simple recreational boaters license up to a 100 ton master's; it is known that when possible, and you don't endanger yourself/boat/passengers, you must render assistance to operators in distress.
I'm sure there is more to this story as I haven't read the article but just giving you the U.S. take.
TVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2283 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 11400 times:
Quoting D L X (Reply 12): don't know because it also doesn't appear that New York Waterway even approached US Airways about helping them financially for plucking their passengers out of the water. You should always ask nicely before you file a law suit.
Yes, Waterway should have sent a bill. But, if you take the "Good Samaritan" argument, US should have sent the check without asking.
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 16): It is. They should be filing a claim to the insurance company,
No, they should file the claim with the airline. The airline should deal with the insurance company. Waterway should not have work to be paid their expenses.
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6924 posts, RR: 11 Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 11335 times:
Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 23): No, they should file the claim with the airline. The airline should deal with the insurance company. Waterway should not have work to be paid their expenses.
My car was hit by a marked police car about two years ago. The officer was clearly in the wrong and police report turned out to be so. I didn't hunt donw to find out what insurance company handled the state's claims. I went directly to the post commander and it trickled down through admin and an adjuster came to my house about two weeks later...
Mascmo From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 93 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 11029 times:
Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 1): What is missing from the article is whether or not Waterway was paid by US for their expenses. The company should be able to present a bill for its services
What ever happened to doing things because it's the right thing to do? Present a bill to US? That just amazes me. Maybe next time a plane crashes in the Hudson the ferry operators should just keep going business as usual instead of doing the right thing and helping your fellow American out who is in need.
25 OA260: Very true. Ever watched Judge Judy? I used to think it was made up . Honest its not. Some people would sue their dying Grandmother. I dont think this
26 L1011buff: As a former Volunteer fireman, and currently a nurse, I would never, EVER think to charge something or expect anything in return for helping someone i
27 Breaker1011: Yet another reason to find that green Kryptonite crystal that can build a new continent just off the east coast of the US. Let's all find it, throw it
28 LU9092: I find the back and forth in this thread about which company is "doing the right thing" sort of amusing. We aren't talking about individual human bein
29 D L X: There's no way that US could know ahead of time what costs were incurred by third parties. AND, US should not be on the hook for the government's shu
30 Wjcandee: All the first responders did a great job, but... We've all seen the video. If NY Waterway hadn't been there, there would have been deaths. Probably ma
31 Wjcandee: US's accident caused a shutdown of some of NY Waterway's service. US's accident caused a shutdown of the waterway itself. If US landed in a national
32 LU9092: Why would he have? He is an individual, not a corporation. He made a decision in an emergency to do what a mariner should do if they see people in di
33 Hamad: i am not intending to generalize, and i am sorry to say this, but why is it always in the USA? it just sounds ridiculous, US airways did not ask the f
34 Lufthansa411: Why? The ferries were not required to respond to the scene of the crash the way they did, the ferry operators made the decision to come rescue, not U
35 Rampart: Sanest comment on this thread. If anything, we're seeing, by way of a hot news story, some rather typical negotiations between insurance companies. -
36 BlueFlyer: Typically, the carrier's. I believe the leaseholder's insurance is usually intended to cover for hull losses or damages that are not covered by anoth
37 NorthstarBoy: I can only hope that NYWW gets shamed by the NY media into dropping this case. A good samaritan should neither demand compensation, nor be comfortable
38 Bralo20: I do disagree with the nature of Americans for filing lawsuits for every single thing that could be wrong or could go wrong... Thank God i'm living i
39 NCB: Yes but US accident was caused by birds, so maybe birds should pay too, by letting themselves be slaughtered and land on luxurious restaurant dishes.
40 BMIFlyer: This is completely, utterly, ridiculous
41 SKAirbus: Of course US Airways should offer some sort of gesture for what happened but what happened to people helping other people out of the goodness of their
42 LTBEWR: I believe NYWW got compensated for transporting people in the hours and several days after 9/11 as the bridges, tunnels, trans-river trains (Amtrak, N
43 JBirdAV8r: OK.... Now let's think, was that REALLY necessary to say?
44 SKAirbus: I think so yes.... Personally when looking at the situation and the fact that peoples' lives were at stake (freezing cold waters, dangerous currents
45 Burkhard: AFAIK, here in Germany you are obliged to rescue whoever is in danger, but the costs have to be covered by whovever caused them. So somebody is injure
46 Masped: Airlines are usually insured by a number of different insurers, however AIG write quite a bit of airline cover so I wouldn't be at all surprised if A
47 Bralo20: Isn't it the hard truth? Like I said before. I really love the US of A. If find it an amazing country and it's one of the countries where I would lik
48 OyKIE: I would be careful to make this statements, without knowing the common practice in the rest of the world. In Norway if a boat is in danger and sends
49 D L X: That's not the legally significant event though. The plane itself in the water took up just as much space as any other boat in the water. Surely anot
50 EWRkid1990: People need to stop trying to take advantage of accidents. NYWW needs to figure it out and realize that this was not a planned interruption of their s
51 Jcf5002: I can't believe some of you folks. If you witness a car accident and help rescue the passengers of the cars from the wreckage, but end up missing work
52 Zeke: That would imply that a contract was in place between them. My observation was the ferries basically volunteered, the crew of those boats took it und
53 Bralo20: That's correct, but I don't think the rescue itself was the big deal (however in those days of recession you never know) but the aftermath of the inc
54 Hangarrat: From the WSJ blog post, it seems that NY Waterways is feeling a bit put upon that everytime there's a crisis in Manhattan, it comes to the rescue like
55 Contrails: It was a great humanitarian gesture to rescue the pax and crew. Why can't they leave it that way? How much money did it take to sail up the river a li
56 Manfredj: The reason the NY waterway system, and the transportation system as a whole is in the (financially strapped) position they are in is largely due to in
57 Zeke: I disagree, they were not contracted to do the work, they did the work of their own initiative, like the people who was the windscreens at traffic li
58 AT: Well, let's say for argument's sake that the ferry companies decided that it would take too much effort and money, and decided NOT to help with the e
59 AT: Also, could someone clarify what the laws are here in the US regarding assisting in an emergency? I know in many european nations you can be prosecute
60 AF340: see http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/4353714/ RE: Good Samaritan Laws Liam
61 HangarRat: If I, as a private citizen, run into my neighbor's burning house to save her child and I'm injured in the process, am I not entitled to compensation f
62 AirframeAS: As others have stated, that is incorrect. Once the plane hit that water, it became the property of the insurance company, whoever that was. US no lon
63 LU9092: I think it is wrong to equate the lawsuit in question with the kinds of frivolous or vengeful lawsuits that individuals - perhaps most prominently Am