Does the Notre Dame Cathedral have fire insurance and how much ? A lot of repairs coming, if not a total loss. Should have had better fire prevention equipment due to its difficult to get to location. Very sorry to see the pictures.
Sounds it’s likely a “total” loss but some of the art/relics were able to be saved.
It will be interesting from an insurance perspective if they do have some sort of policy in place, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the Holy See self insures. The loss truly is irreplaceable.
I wonder who the construction companies were and what kind of contract they had doing the renovations. Could be a huge claim there….
It appears that the government, not the Archdioceses of Paris, actually owns the Cathedral. The Archdiocese is supposed to be responsible for maintenance. The Cathedral has been in dire need of repairs and the government has contributed some funds for renovations but fundraising was ongoing. Have not had any luck yet reaching anyone with answers to potential insurance or liability questions.
Yes it must have been insured. But regardless of whether it is or isn’t I think it’s shameful of the Catholic Church to ask or expect the public to donate. The Catholic Church is one of the wealthiest corporations in the world if they just sell off one of their many London high end properties they could rebuild and build 5 more churches. But the point being they have billions of cash reserves and hundreds of billions of assets there is absolutely no need for the church to be greedy and ask the public to foot the bill. And it is nothing more than greed when they refuse to pay for it from their own stash of wealth
Please tell us exactly how much wealth they own in the UK…. within a few billion pounds sterling.
Then, tell us reasons for owning those properties and what would happen if they sold them to restore NDC.
Also, please tell us why the Catholic Church should pay to restore a building owned by the French Govt. Apparently, you didn’t read the prior comment by Andrew Simpson, above, on ownership. Thanks for pointing out your blind bias against the CC so succinctly.
Having been involved in public/govt risk management, most structures like this are uninsurable. There is no way to place a value on the building and no way to estimate replacement costs. Ordinary govt buildings are insurable. They are just office buildings with govt tenants. Historically significant buildings are self-insured by the govt entity. Example: capitol buildings. The taxpayers are the insurance company.
Agree that it’s impossible to place a value on buildings like these. However, it could potentially be insured on a first-loss basis, like many art collections are.
Since France is a secular state, maintenance and repair of its historic monuments including churches are the responsibility of the state. If such repair is agreed to be necessary, it may be allocated to the state, department, or commune/town in different proportions.
Quite why M. Macron should say that he would pledge to launch an international fundraising scheme for the reconstruction seems strange. If other countries wish to assist, that is up to them but the responsibility surely rests with the French Government who have clearly failed to maintain Notre Dame to adequate standards.
The same argument would, of course, apply to the fire at Windsor Castle in 1992 and should a similar fire occur at the Houses of Parliament which are now being renovated.
Historic public buildings are by their nature impossible to place a value on but, if they are to remain standing and safe, they need to have money spent on them. The Government needs to take the lead on, firstly, the allocation of responsibility for raising these funds and, secondly, ensuring they are raised. The French have sorted out the first of these but the second is, of course, a very different matter – both for the French and for us!
In Europe there is more culpability on individuals than in the USA. A culpable individual may very well go to prison over this, whereas in the USA it would mean a civil suit only.
In any event it is a calamity for an icon of the Nation of France and Western Civilization.
I am saddened by it.
Vox… A “culpable individual” in the United States would also go to prison if their actions were deemed to be criminal. I am not quite sure what legal distinction you are trying to make…
Although groups have vandalized Notre Dame for religious and political purposes over the centuries, I haven’t yet seen any indication that it suffered a major fire. If so, that’s remarkable for a building as old as Notre Dame is, existing for seven centuries with only open flames for its lighting during the dark hours of the day.
Many of Europe’s other great cathedrals suffered severe losses from catastrophes. Some collapsed entirely, as their builders failed to master the demands of “hanging” a structure from buttresses rather than supporting it with heavy walls.
Is it possible that Notre Dame’s good fortune over the centuries left her ill-prepared for yesterday’s inferno?
President Macron has vowed to rebuild Notre Dame which seems to this reader to be a no-brainer, why then the need to solicit funds from other countries ? Surely the country of France can pay for the rebuilding of one of their most notable landmarks ??
Of course, if they started tomorrow, without any of the hand wringing hysterics that we are certain to see, it will still take them 5 -10 years of continuous effort to restore the place.
Does the Notre Dame Cathedral have fire insurance and how much ? A lot of repairs coming, if not a total loss. Should have had better fire prevention equipment due to its difficult to get to location. Very sorry to see the pictures.
Sounds it’s likely a “total” loss but some of the art/relics were able to be saved.
It will be interesting from an insurance perspective if they do have some sort of policy in place, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the Holy See self insures. The loss truly is irreplaceable.
I wonder who the construction companies were and what kind of contract they had doing the renovations. Could be a huge claim there….
It appears that the government, not the Archdioceses of Paris, actually owns the Cathedral. The Archdiocese is supposed to be responsible for maintenance. The Cathedral has been in dire need of repairs and the government has contributed some funds for renovations but fundraising was ongoing. Have not had any luck yet reaching anyone with answers to potential insurance or liability questions.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/15/world/europe/paris-notre-dame-fire.html
sounds like a purposeful insurance claim to me, don’t you think “insurance journal?”
Insurance money anyone? That’s one way to restore it.
Yes it must have been insured. But regardless of whether it is or isn’t I think it’s shameful of the Catholic Church to ask or expect the public to donate. The Catholic Church is one of the wealthiest corporations in the world if they just sell off one of their many London high end properties they could rebuild and build 5 more churches. But the point being they have billions of cash reserves and hundreds of billions of assets there is absolutely no need for the church to be greedy and ask the public to foot the bill. And it is nothing more than greed when they refuse to pay for it from their own stash of wealth
Please tell us exactly how much wealth they own in the UK…. within a few billion pounds sterling.
Then, tell us reasons for owning those properties and what would happen if they sold them to restore NDC.
Also, please tell us why the Catholic Church should pay to restore a building owned by the French Govt. Apparently, you didn’t read the prior comment by Andrew Simpson, above, on ownership. Thanks for pointing out your blind bias against the CC so succinctly.
Hey Yogi,
We agree! Last time I checked, I can’t insure the home my neighbor owns. Pretty basic insurance 101 right there – insurable interest.
Having been involved in public/govt risk management, most structures like this are uninsurable. There is no way to place a value on the building and no way to estimate replacement costs. Ordinary govt buildings are insurable. They are just office buildings with govt tenants. Historically significant buildings are self-insured by the govt entity. Example: capitol buildings. The taxpayers are the insurance company.
Agree that it’s impossible to place a value on buildings like these. However, it could potentially be insured on a first-loss basis, like many art collections are.
Since France is a secular state, maintenance and repair of its historic monuments including churches are the responsibility of the state. If such repair is agreed to be necessary, it may be allocated to the state, department, or commune/town in different proportions.
Quite why M. Macron should say that he would pledge to launch an international fundraising scheme for the reconstruction seems strange. If other countries wish to assist, that is up to them but the responsibility surely rests with the French Government who have clearly failed to maintain Notre Dame to adequate standards.
The same argument would, of course, apply to the fire at Windsor Castle in 1992 and should a similar fire occur at the Houses of Parliament which are now being renovated.
Historic public buildings are by their nature impossible to place a value on but, if they are to remain standing and safe, they need to have money spent on them. The Government needs to take the lead on, firstly, the allocation of responsibility for raising these funds and, secondly, ensuring they are raised. The French have sorted out the first of these but the second is, of course, a very different matter – both for the French and for us!
In Europe there is more culpability on individuals than in the USA. A culpable individual may very well go to prison over this, whereas in the USA it would mean a civil suit only.
In any event it is a calamity for an icon of the Nation of France and Western Civilization.
I am saddened by it.
Vox… A “culpable individual” in the United States would also go to prison if their actions were deemed to be criminal. I am not quite sure what legal distinction you are trying to make…
Although groups have vandalized Notre Dame for religious and political purposes over the centuries, I haven’t yet seen any indication that it suffered a major fire. If so, that’s remarkable for a building as old as Notre Dame is, existing for seven centuries with only open flames for its lighting during the dark hours of the day.
Many of Europe’s other great cathedrals suffered severe losses from catastrophes. Some collapsed entirely, as their builders failed to master the demands of “hanging” a structure from buttresses rather than supporting it with heavy walls.
Is it possible that Notre Dame’s good fortune over the centuries left her ill-prepared for yesterday’s inferno?
President Macron has vowed to rebuild Notre Dame which seems to this reader to be a no-brainer, why then the need to solicit funds from other countries ? Surely the country of France can pay for the rebuilding of one of their most notable landmarks ??
Of course, if they started tomorrow, without any of the hand wringing hysterics that we are certain to see, it will still take them 5 -10 years of continuous effort to restore the place.
2 Corinthians 5:1