Holocaust Insurance Claims Appeals Conclude; $300 Million Awarded to Survivors

March 20, 2007

  • March 20, 2007 at 4:24 am
    Anon says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If my math is correct that\’s an average of $6250 per claimant, right? While I understand that life insurance policies at the time were for substantially less than they are today, where\’s the calculation for the 60 years worth of interest gained on the original premium or potential payout? The companies (those still in business) have been allowed to collect 60 years worth of interest on the initial premium payments. Just another reason why case action suits end up being a waste.

  • March 21, 2007 at 10:30 am
    CJ says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I\’m pretty sure these are for property losses, not life insurance.

  • March 21, 2007 at 12:56 pm
    Kevin Raz says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Something is better than nothing but this is a joke.

    CJ, the majority of these claims are for life insurance policies.

    Soldiers in the US forces in WW2 could sign up for a $10,000 life policy. That was a lot of money then; let\’s figure an average life policy was $5,000.

    Using the CPI as a guide, $5,000 in 1940 is worth $69,600 in 2005. If you figure that by the 48,000 claimants you arrive at a figure in the billions of dollars.

    Incredible. Let all the beneficiaries die off and then pay a pittance. This is an insult to the descendants of Holocaust survivors and those who had the foresight to purchase life insurance before a dark period in history.

    Kevin Rasmussen

  • March 21, 2007 at 1:17 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It\’s being paid out to 48,000 survivors and their heirs. Why would survivors collect life insurance?

    50 million people died in WWII. I\’m tired of hearing about the woes of a few of them, aren\’t you?

  • March 21, 2007 at 1:30 am
    Kevin Rasmussen says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ellie, lets say you buy a life insurance policy for $100,000. You name a beneficiary – spouse, child, whatever.

    You die. A few months later, before they can even file a claim, your beneficiary dies in a tragic accident.

    That money is rightfully due to someone. You\’ve paid the premium and should collect. Would you not want this to be paid?

    Now extend that thought to the many, many people in Europe who saw war coming in the 1930\’s and bought life insurance. They had seen how many non combatants died in WW1 and wanted to be able to provide for a future for their descendants if they died. Jews especially knew that bad days were coming as it was pretty obvious what was going on.

    In one of the greatest injustices in human history the Jewish people were 1)murdered by the millions and 2)were denied rightful payment on life insurance for those slaughtered.

    We are not talking about war reparations here but about collecting on a paid for benefit. I think that if we as insurance people do not demand a rightful settlement of these claims our industry is (once again) cast in a bad light.

    Kevin Rasmussen

  • March 21, 2007 at 2:26 am
    JM says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    My mother-in-law was the only survivor of her extended family.Her father sold life insurence and there were several wealthy close family members who purchased policies. She received $1,000 which was an insult.It was donated to a charity of her chpoice. Non-profits that have nothing to do with legitmate survivors received millions that will fund their overhead. is this JUSTICE? How much was paid out to actual people who were survivors or their heirs.

    Given the present value of the money paid, the total payout is a minisuule portion of the earnings on the reserves that were set up with out even impacting the principal.

    The insurance commissioners threated to bar some of these companies from doing business in the U.S. and the companies threw back a few scraps to apease the commissioners. If there was any kind if victory claimed it was a phyric one and haw many of those can one sustain.

  • March 21, 2007 at 2:39 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wouldn\’t these life insurance policies have had a war exclusion that would limit or preclude benefits for holocaust victims?

  • March 21, 2007 at 2:44 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I don\’t know about the war exclusion. I\’m sure somebody can answer that. However there were a lot of people that were killed by the Germans before war was technically declared in 1939.

  • March 21, 2007 at 3:22 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I would hardly call 6 million people \”a few\”. In terms of insurance claims, Holocaust victims would have been the worst off. I\’m sure any fallen Allied soldiers that had policies through their government had their claims paid. I doubt any significant number of Russian or Chinese victims of the war had policies at all.

  • March 21, 2007 at 3:47 am
    Kevin Raz says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Generally war exclusions are not on life policies. This is handled on the underwriting side – a soldier can\’t get a standard life policy & life coverage in Iraq is hard to come by.

    Kevin Rasmussen

  • March 21, 2007 at 3:56 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I would also wonder if an act of Genocide would be considered in a war exclusion.

  • March 21, 2007 at 3:56 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The plaque outside of the Auschwitz camp used to say 4.2 million were killed there, until c. 1990 when it was changed to say 1.1 million. So shouldn\’t it now be three million rather than six?

    If it can\’t even be determined how many were killed, or where, what good is an insurance claim on a sixty year-old policy? There are no records or who went to what kind of death in the camp, except at Auschwitz where records were kept of those who died if disease (78,000 names and causes of death are in the \”death books\”).

    And how does anyone know if his grandparents were shipped off to a camp or died under British bombing in their home? The Allies bombed French cities just to fill roads in them with rubble to impede the German retreat. Who can tell who died where?

  • March 21, 2007 at 4:06 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I\’m sure what you are saying is true in many cases, but there are also plenty of cases where people do know exactly what happened to their relatives. My grandmother knew exactly when, where and how her extended family was killed.

  • March 22, 2007 at 7:36 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Eye witness testimony and testimony from memory are two of the most unreliable forms of evidence, made the more problematic with each passing day.

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:00 am
    Kevin Raz says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ellie, I\’m not sure what you are getting at. Your responses are leading me to think that you are a Holocaust denier.

    If so there\’s not much I can do here to convince you otherwise. I hope this is not the case as overwhelming evidence exists that many millions of Jews and others were murdered by the Nazis. I\’ve met several survivors of Auschwitz.

    If you are disputing the payment of these claims consider this: these insurance companies have the log books of their sales – who bought what when, who the beneficiaries were, amounts paid, etc. What the beneficiaries did not have were the actual policies to turn in and in many, many cases death certificates were not available. The insurance companies refused to open their books effectively shutting out anyone who tried to make a claim wihtout a policy.

    Kevin Rasmussen

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:14 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What leads you to suggest that I am a \”holocaust denier\”? Al Sharpton calls everyone who disagrees with him a \”racist.\” Does that mean he wins the debate? Let\’s please keep name-calling on the sidelines.

    Forcing the companies to open their books is just an invitation for everyone who had a relative disapear during the war to go fishing. If they are found to have had a policy, all it proves is that there was a policy. With no way of knowing how someone died, or maybe escaped to Russia or America where many of them changed their names, what\’s that prove?

    When 50 million people die in a war, and one group is standing there with its hand out like they are the most agrieved, it just smacks of shamelessness to me.

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:29 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I don\’t think anyone was claiming that they were the most aggrieved or that they have suffered more than anyone else. At the most basic level without emotion this is a policy that was paid for and the insurance companies closed the books on and refused to pay. That\’s what\’s shameful. Not people collecting what they or their relatives paid for.

    I don\’t think Kevin was calling you a holocaust denier, I think he was saying that some of the things you have said might lead one to belive you are. Your reference to eye witness testimony and memory being unreliable is generally true in the case of bank robberies and such, however, I would tend to think that you would have a very clear memory of what happened when your entire family or town was killed.

    After reading your post I was wondering the same thing as Kevin. I\’m happy to read that you are not though.

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:50 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Kevin Raz-

    I enjoy reading your posts (well thought out and level headed). I often wonder how people can deny an event happened. I guess the signing of the Declaration of Independence never occurred either huh?

    \”Eye witness testimony and testimony from memory are two of the most unreliable forms of evidence, made the more problematic with each passing day.\”Ellie

    I find that post to be extremely hilarious (for lack of a better word). We are not talking about people who were robbed in a bank and identify the wrong perpetrator. We are talking about people\’s RELATIVES (loved ones) being killed. I know I would remember something that horrible and at least where it happened. Anyway, I am not sure of the point of that statement in this particular context. Maybe Ellie would care to explain.

    Thank you :)

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:51 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I really don\’t think that Holocaust survivors or victims\’ families are standing \”with their hands out\”, or that they have anything to be ashamed of. If the twenty million Russians who dies in the war had insurance policies, I\’m sure they would expect them to be paid. I\’m sure policies were not even available to most of them. Is it the Jews\’ fault that they had the foresight to buy life insurance? Furthermore, I\’m inclined to thing that any who are seeking payment are acting purely on principle, since nobody is going to retire to the bahamas on a $6,000 payout.

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:54 am
    Josh S (Disappointed) says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Good to see Jewel\’s got my back again. Thing \”Ellie\” is \”Mell\”? What\’s up with this board anyway?

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:55 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It took me so long to type that post (I got a phone call at work- imagine that!) that I didn\’t know \”B\” had already pointed out the \”eyewitness\” comment. I read your post \”B\” and I was like \”Exactly!\” So, please don\’t think I was trying to imitate what you had already posted. Ha, by the time I posted my comment, there were three more I had to read. That was an excellent post!

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:57 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What can I say? Great minds think alike.
    :-)

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:57 am
    incred says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    From Ellie:

    > With no way of knowing how
    > someone died, or maybe escaped
    > to Russia or America where
    > many of them changed their
    > names, what\’s that prove?

    I agree with B that it seems unlikely that someone who survived WWII in Europe would not remember how a family member died.

    Documentation was limited precisely because it was war. This is a situation where normal rules regarding death certificates and other proof had to be set aside. Due to the sheer number of people affected by the Holocaust, it becomes unconscionable for a company to deny help to possible beneficiaries simply because there weren\’t a lot of documents.

    As for relatives escaping to other countries and changing their names, it seems unlikely that someone would do this without notifying a single other person first or trying to contact anyone afterward. It was difficult to arrange this kind of escape, and virtually impossible without the help of several other people.

    Also, it defies reason that someone would depart for another country and leave their own family behind in serious danger — without ever making an attempt to contact them again. Claims like these, if there are any at all, don\’t make up a significant number of the cases at issue here.

    > When 50 million people die
    > in a war, and one group is
    > standing there with its
    > hand out like they are
    > the most agrieved, it
    > just smacks of shamelessness
    > to me.

    Yes, human suffering on the scale of WWII is impossible to measure. Determining who was the \”most aggrieved\” would be futile.

    I don\’t think that the Holocaust survivors and family members in this case are making that claim. Due to the circumstances under which people died, they are simply having the hardest time resolving their insurance issues. Many, many people died in the war — but most didn\’t have families who had to spend 60+ years resolving benefits claims.

    The claimants in this case are not the only group of people in history who have faced this problem. Many Armenians whose family members were killed in the genocide in Turkey are still working on settling outstanding questions with insurers — and their conflict is older than WWII.

  • March 22, 2007 at 8:58 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I was being generous. There is also the problem of fraud. One problem with sixty year-old memories and eye-witness accounts is that there are few if any other witnesses to corrobotate or contradict the testimony of someone trying to get money out of an insurance company.

  • March 22, 2007 at 9:07 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I forget the exact year, but at one point during the war or immediately before, the US State Dept stopped recording that Jewish immigrants were Jews and recorded their nation of origin only. This was done to prevent any backlash against the spike in Jews entering the country, as they fled Nazi persecution. Therefore, we are not only ignorant of how many Jews came to the US but how many, and who, left their nations of origin.

    In the destruction, mass death, confusion and chaos of war it is highly likley that people don\’t know where relatives are, and therefore there are war exclusions in life insurance policies. If I waive life ins policies in your face and claim that my parents were both killed or shipped off in a boxcar somewhere, but have no proof whatsoever, and there\’s a war on, what are you going to do as a responsible adjuster?

  • March 22, 2007 at 9:12 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Why do you assume there is no proof for any of these \”Shamless\” old people with no memory?

    If there was no proof then why did the insurance company have to pay out anything?

  • March 22, 2007 at 9:26 am
    incred says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ellie said:

    > Therefore, we are not only
    > ignorant of how many Jews
    > came to the US but how many,
    > and who, left their nations
    > of origin.

    How would knowing the religious affiliation of someone entering the US help stop insurance fraud in Europe?

    > If I waive life ins policies
    > in your face and claim that
    > my parents were both killed
    > or shipped off in a boxcar
    > somewhere, but have no proof
    > whatsoever, and there\’s a war
    > on, what are you going to do
    > as a responsible adjuster?

    Presumably when the \”war was on,\” there wasn\’t a lot an adjuster could do.

    The war is no longer on and we have the objectivity that comes from being removed from the situation. A responsible adjuster would notice that more than one policyholder was talking about this and report it up. A responsible insurance company would join its peers in establishing a humanitarian fund to help deal with these claims.

    (A truly responsible insurance company would make sure that its payouts had some relationship to the current value of the policy after so many years of interest…but that\’s another matter.)

  • March 22, 2007 at 9:45 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    \’Why do you assume there is no proof for any of these \”Shamless\” old people with no memory?\’

    If there was irrefutable proof of valid claims, the claims might have been paid right off. In fact, many of them were not even filed until decades later. Only when political pressure was brought to bear on governments, and then on the companies, did the companies cave.

    \’If there was no proof then why did the insurance company have to pay out anything?\’

    Political pressure and public relations. At a certain point there\’s no sense in fighting it.

    \’How would knowing the religious affiliation of someone entering the US help stop insurance fraud in Europe?\’

    If we knew that Mrs. Rabinowitz\’ father Rueben had emmigrated to the US in 1939, then her claim that he was killed by the Nazis might have less crdibility.

    \’The war is no longer on and we have the objectivity that comes from being removed from the situation. A responsible adjuster would notice that more than one policyholder was talking about this and report it up.\’

    Okay. My cousin Joe and I were rear-ended by your insured sixty years ago. Pay up.

    \’A responsible insurance company would join its peers in establishing a humanitarian fund to help deal with these claims.\’

    A humanitarian fund is not necessary to pay claims. Reserves are used to pay claims. Is State Farm irresponsible for not just giving away money from a \”humanitarian fund\” to Katrina victims?

    Something is clouding your vision with regard to this topic, people.

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:04 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    ?

    Your position is that the insurance companies paid out $300 million because of political pressure and public relations?

    You\’re saying that they thought $300 million wasn\’t worth fighting for?

    I just wanted to make sure I understood you.

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:12 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I hope you don\’t mind, but I took the liberty…

    \”Something is clouding your vision with regard to this topic, people.\”

    OK, so on behalf of Josh S(Disappointed- hi! nice to see you on this thread), incred, B and others who feel this decision was fair (well, the payout portion, not that actual $ value) I pose these questions to you Ellie…

    Were the Nazis handing out death certificates to the survivors of those they killed? If they killed the WHOLE family, did they send the death certificates to the government? If your loved one died in the hospital (in this century) and no one would give you a death certificate, how would you prove they died?

    I guess you are the one whose judgement is clouded. If they had proof to give, I am sure they would do so. Shame on you!

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:20 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I found an interesting article on this subject. Thought you all might like to read it.

    http://www.modoracle.com/?page=http://www.modoracle.com/news/detail.h2f?id=12807

    Hopefully that pasted well.

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:31 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    \”Were the Nazis handing out death certificates to the survivors of those they killed?\”

    No, hence, exclusions for acts of war.

    \”If they killed the WHOLE family, did they send the death certificates to the government?\”

    They were the government. This is nonsensical.

    \”If your loved one died in the hospital (in this century) and no one would give you a death certificate, how would you prove they died?\”

    If clouds turned to rocks we\’d all have problems. Speculate all you want if you cannot address my points directly, but I\’m done with this discussion.

    If you were paying insurance claims based on your sympathy for claimants you might have a lot of happy claimants, but very few happy shareholders.

    And just for the record, my grandfather died at Dachau. He fell out of a guard tower.

    Have a nice day!

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:37 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Your Grandfather died at Dachau?

    How do you know?

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:40 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    \”And just for the record, my grandfather died at Dachau. He fell out of a guard tower.\”

    That explains it Ellie.

    \”No, hence, exclusions for acts of war.\”

    Sorry, I didn\’t know you read the policy. How do YOU know it had an exclusion?

    \”If clouds turned to rocks we\’d all have problems.\”

    Is that how you answer the last question I asked? Seems to me you realized that you were wrong. Because that response, my dear, is not a response at all. It\’s a way of trying to change the subject.

    \”They were the government. This is nonsensical.\”

    The Nazis were the government of the countries they invaded? Yeah, I am sure THAT makes sense.

    \”Speculate all you want if you cannot address my points directly, but I\’m done with this discussion.\”

    I did address one of your points directly. I didn\’t realize I had to address them all in order to make sense in your (distorted) point of view. I am glad you\’re done with this discussion because I would really hate to see you \”try\” and argue your way out of my questions again. Really, again, shame on you!

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:41 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ohmygosh! That was PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!!

    He probably got a death certificate since he was a Nazi and all.

    EXCELLENT POINT! (Not that it\’s a funny topic, but I did laugh when I read your post)

  • March 22, 2007 at 10:43 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Let me get this straight: YOUR grandfather was a Nazi, but something is clouding OUR vision on this topic? I think you\’ve got it backwards buddy.

  • March 22, 2007 at 11:33 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I think we won\’t be seeing Ellie around here anymore. She certainly put her foot in her mouth.

    I STILL love that post B…

    Oh Josh (Disappointed)… yeah, we might see Ellie back here under her alias \”Mell\”… If I was her, I wouldn\’t show my face (posts) around here anymore unless I was pretending to be someone else.

    I didn\’t enjoy the topic of this thread, but i did enjoy the responses most people posted.

    Thank you!

  • March 22, 2007 at 11:48 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thanks Jewel.

    I just didn\’t understand what she was getting at.

    A. My grandfather was a prisoner and was thrown off the tower by nazi\’s.

    Ok. Then considering all of your other posts, how do you know?

    B. My grandfather was a nazi guard and fell off tower.

    And your point is……..?

    I can only assume she was trying to explain how she was raised? Which I guess would explain her posts.

  • March 22, 2007 at 11:51 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Still here, nothing\’s changed my mind.

    I just called Allstate and told them that their insured, Henry Ford, rear-ended me in 1922, and that they owe me a settlement with interest for damages to my Stutz Bearcat. They hung up.

    That was just a joke about my grandfather, BTW.

  • March 22, 2007 at 11:57 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I would probably go with the \”it was just a joke\” defense too since it blew all your arguments out of the water.

    I\’m going to assume that the rest of your points were jokes also.

  • March 22, 2007 at 12:38 pm
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Maybe back when the car accident happened you should have gotten the police involved. I am sure those who were killed would have liked for the police to come save them but they were probably too busy FIGHTING a war. Or, they were sent to concentration camps. So, that analogy doesn\’t really help your case. Two TOTALLY different situations during two TOTALLY different times.

    B-

    Again you had me in stitches. I will also assume her posts are jokes (People like her really exist?!?!?). Somehow though, they are not as funny as yours. :(

  • March 22, 2007 at 12:39 pm
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Maybe back when the car accident happened you should have gotten the police involved (Yes, I realize this statement was an actual \”joke\”). I am sure those who were killed would have liked for the police to come save them but they were probably too busy FIGHTING a war. Or, they were sent to concentration camps. So, that analogy doesn\’t really help your case. Two TOTALLY different situations during two TOTALLY different times.

    B-

    Again you had me in stitches. I will also assume her posts are jokes (People like her really exist?!?!?). Somehow though, they are not as funny as yours. :(

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:05 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    When the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims (ICHEIC) is done it will have spent one dollar on admin costs for every two dollars it paid out to survivors and their heirs.

    According to Pat Bowditch, ICHEIC\’s CFO, the ICHEIC\’s total operating budget since December 1998 is $95.8 million. Who ultimately bears those costs?

    All you have offered is sympathy for the victims, which we all have, but that is no basis for paying a claim, and no one has mentioned any precedent in the industry for all of this brouhaha to pay off decades old claims without death certificates.

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:11 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ellie, since you are quoting the ICHEIC, then I can only assume that you have read their website.

    So I\’m just curious. Is a death certificate the ONLY proof that they ask for or is there more?

    I know the answer. I just want to know if you have done your research or if you\’re just \”joking\” again.

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:29 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    No, because it isn\’t a serious insurance operation: but it is a political organization. What is its CR, given what I just posted?

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:42 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ah, I see. Your post made it sound as though they were the ones who were paying out insurance claims

    $1 dollar in admin costs for every $2 in insurance claims they pay out.

    Budget is something like $93 million but $300 million is what was paid out.

    So…..They\’re not actually paying the claims now?

    I\’m utterly confused by your postings. I don\’t know if you think they are or are not paying the claims.

    And if would please share where they are paying $1 in admin costs vs $2 that they are paying out (They are paying out right?…..or maybe not.) That would be swell.

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:46 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The admin costs represent nearly 30% of what is \”owed.\” What is so hard to understand? Why is anyone surprised that a sixty year-old claim filed on a loss during wartime in a war zone would be denied? I asked for the precedent and have received none. Until the issues I have asked for help in understanding are addressed, I feel no compunction to read or respond to any more posts.

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:54 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    ?

    But if you\’re not going to read our posts anymore how will you know when it\’s time to respond?

    Oh, wait. I guess I\’m just talking to myself now.

    I\’ll stop feeding the troll then.

  • March 22, 2007 at 1:58 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    There is no precedent and there doesn\’t need to be one. I\’m sure these claims are not being examined on an individual basis. I agree with Ellie that there is no way to know what happened to many or even most of the Holocaust-era policy holders. However, it is obvious that the insurers in question collected premium for policies which rightly should have been paid out, and would have if it had been possible for the policy holders or beneficiaries to submit individual claims with proof. Furthermore, I\’m sure some of these insurers, paricularly German based insurers, were complicit in bilking Jewish policy-holders (having no intention of paying out, and profiting from the Holocaust similar to the banking industry). We all know that these insurers would have and should have paid out long ago, we just don\’t know exactly who would have received these payments. I see no problem with splitting the payments up evenly. It is certainly better than paying out nothing.

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:02 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The Nazi\’s kept excellent records, recording the names, hometowns, families etc. Of the people they sent to the deathcamps. If they can match that information to what the insurance companies have on the books isn\’t that sufficient proof?

    Was that part of the problem all along is that the insurance companies refused to open their books?

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:22 am
    Kevin Raz says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Fascinating posts. I\’m glad to see that this has sparked a good discussion on the topic.

    May we never forget so that it never happens again.

    Kevin Rasmussen

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:24 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    OK, \”B\” you need to stop. Everytime I read one of your posts I laugh. You come up with the BEST rebuttals which Ellie ATTEMPTS to answer. I love how she hardly ever responds to my actual questions.

    Ellie already said once, now twice, that she will not be responding to any more posts \”until the issues I have asked for help in understanding are addressed.\” But, yet she refuses to understand. Oh, the irony.

    I love how Ellie keeps bringing up the death certificate angle. ***HOW WERE THEY SUPPOSED TO GET DEATH CERTIFICATES?*** (maybe this way she will see my question- I wish I could make the letters red!) Why don\’t you answer that for us Ellie? Oh yeah, you\’re not posting because you\’re mad that we have made valid points that you can\’t break down.

    Ouch!

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:25 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    They kept excellent records? Then why did the death toll on the plaque at the Auschwitz camp change c. 1990 from saying that 4.2 million people were killed there, to saying that 1.1 million were killed there? On what records were either figure based? Does it make me a \”holocaust denier\” to mention this fact and wonder about it? I think that it is germaine, and illustrates the kind of problems inherent in the very unusual case at hand.

    Also, no one has seriously addressed my point that Jews emmigrated from Europe to the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Russia and so on. Many who were supposed to have been killed were in fact just lost to the chaos of war. If there is no record of a death, we can forgive the insurers for being wary of paying a claim. That\’s all I am saying. I guess for this I will get more ridicule.

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:34 am
    Joe says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Is everyone missing the point? What right do the insurers have to name themselves the benificiaries and keep the money? Has the tort of conversion been removed from the equasion?

    If a bank has unclaimed funds they are segregated and transferred to the state to be held in trust. If there are unclaimed tax refunds, are not those funds segrgated as well and held in trust.

    The Nazi\’s kept detailed records of those they murdered in the camps and the insurers had detailed records that could identify their policy holders and be matched up with the Nazi records. The insureres chose to keep the money and make theselves the benificiaries by stonewalling the world for sixty years. Even with the settlment, the only thing they are giving up is a small fraction of the earning on the principal.

    If an agent converted clients funds they would be put out of business, If an insurer here intentionally converted clients funds they would have their charter pulled and people would go to jail.Why are things differnent for the European Insurers(Big Money Talks?)?

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:35 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    \”I think that it is germaine.\”

    Ger·maine [jer-meyn; Fr. zher-men]
    a female given name.
    first/full cousin
    a son or daughter of one\’s uncle or aunt

    So, not sure what you\’re trying to say about someone\’s relative. Ha ha

    Also, you still have not answered my question on what YOU would do if you were not given a death certificate for the death of YOUR loved one. Maybe that is why you are being \”ridiculed\”.

    \”If there is no record of a death, we can forgive the insurers for being wary of paying a claim.\” It\’s understandable for them to be wary. But now, let\’s put on our thinking caps. Anyone old enough to have bought insurance WAY back then is MOST likely deceased now. ***And remember, the Nazis weren\’t passing out death certificates.*** How many times do I have to remind you of that Ellie? So, now that most everyone is deceased, can we please pay up?

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:39 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hey. You peeked.

    Yes, the Nazi\’s did in fact keep excellent records. That\’s just simply a fact of history whether or not you choose to believe it.

    As for you being a holocaust denier.

    \”Deniers often use the \’Four Million Variant\’ as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can\’t keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead. In short, all of the denier\’s blustering about the \’Four Million Variant\’ is a specious attempt to envelope the reader into their web of deceit, and it can be discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories.\”

    I don\’t know. Are you?

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:46 am
    Ellie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I keep hearing that the Nazis kept excellent records, and that they kept no records. If you want to go by the Auschwitz records, there were only 70,000+ that died there, all from disease or natural causes!

    What would I do without a death certificate if my loved one disappeared and I couldn\’t prove a death? I would rely on whatever provisions exist for such cases. I have no idea what the insurance laws were in Begium or whatever in 1939.

    One thing we can be sure of though is that all of the insureds are dead now, or in their mid-100\’s, so the companies involved should just pay the benefits.

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:53 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wasn\’t that the whole point of this article Ellie? (to pay the claims?) Yet, you argued against it this whole time. Is this even Ellie?

    Oh yeah, I already posted that the insureds are most likely dead (although I am sure some are still alive if they were in their teens during WWII) but you might not have read that before you posted.

    If you are Ellie, thanks for finally answering my questions regarding the death certificates. And, I am sure the heirs of those killed also relied on whatever provisions existed for this \”case\”.

    However, now I am not sure what your point was this whole time. Since, you just did a 180.

  • March 22, 2007 at 2:59 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You are referring to the original Auschwitz camp which served as the administrative center for the whole complex. Yes, it is true that in that camp they recorded about 70,000 deaths.

    However, the other Auschwitz camp in Birkenau was the extermination camp where millions died.

    There was also a third Auschwitz camp in Monowitz which was used as a labor camp.

    So you see, you are attempting to be misleading by your posts by saying only 70,000 people died at Auschwitz.

    If you want people to take you seriously and not ridiclue you then you need to put all of the facts in there, not just the ones that back up your argument. Or maybe you were just ignorant of the facts. In that case I suggest you brush up on your reading.

    Rudolph Hoss who was the camp commandent testified at Nuremburg that approx 3 million people had died there. Quite a strange thing to say when they\’re all on trial. Why in the world would he lie and say 3 million when the number (as you keep insisting) was only 70,000?

    Again, to being a holocaust denier.

    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…….

  • March 22, 2007 at 3:00 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    \”I keep hearing that the Nazis kept excellent records, and that they kept no records. If you want to go by the Auschwitz records, there were only 70,000+ that died there, all from disease or natural causes!\” – posted by Ellie

    Yes, in searching for Auschwitz that is what I found. I also found mention of Auschwitz II. Oh and don\’t forget Dachau, where Ellie\’s grandfather fell from a guard tower! There wasn\’t just one (or two or three) concentration camps.

    \”Auschwitz I, the original concentration camp which served as the administrative center for the whole complex, and was the site of the deaths of roughly 70,000 people, mostly Poles and Soviet prisoners of war.
    Auschwitz II (Birkenau), an extermination camp, where at least 1.1 million Jews, 75,000 Polish people, and some 19,000 Roma (Gypsies) were killed.\” – from Wikipedia.org

    Time to leave work! Have a great evening!

  • March 23, 2007 at 9:26 am
    Bill Reed says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I am not an anti-semite but enough is enough. It seems the Jews can\’t \”move-on\” from the holocaust, and take every opportunity to dwell on it. This insurance debacle is no exception. The $300M settlement nets out to $6,250 per claimant. I can\’t tell it that\’s before or after attorney fees. Think of all the time, human costs and expenses, and lack of focus on other things that have been spent on this mess and to what end? Proving a point? Do you see any other nationalities going back and \”re-tilling the same old soil\”? When will the Jews stop whining about the holocaust? I found it interesting that all the famous \”Nazi hunters\” didn\’t emerge until decades after the holocause and when all the participants were old men. It\’s always too little too late. Yes, the holocaust was horrific, but it\’s over. There are more current abominations going on in the world right now. Why don\’t the Jews focus on using their substantial resources to help them?

  • March 23, 2007 at 9:59 am
    Josh S says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Bill, no other nationality, except perhaps the Armenians, have similar \”soil\” to \”retill\”. The Holocaust is unique in history as a systematic attempt to wipe an entire nationality off the face of the Earth.

    I can see two reasons why the Jews won\’t \”move on\” and \”stop whining\”(your choice of words reveals your bias). 1) The Holocaust is not a distant historical memory; there are many survivors still living and the next generation was deeply affected as well. 2) Jews have a legitimate reason to fear that history could repeat itself. Historically speaking, anti-semitism never goes away, it just fades into the background temporarily only to return when times are tough and people need a scapegoat. More specifically, and contemporaneously, you have people like Ahmadinejad threatening to wipe Israel off the map.

    With that in mind, what you call \”whining\” is really vigilance in the service of self-preservation.

    You mention the Jews \”substantial resources\” and imply that Jews do not contribute to humanitarian causes. I assume you are referring to the gold and diamonds you think all Jews hoard under the floor-boards in their homes, or perhaps the profit from the usury they practice when not making bread from the blood of Christian babies.

    Did you know that Israel was one of the first countries to send aid and rescue workers to Indonesia after the Tsunami a few years ago? All the Muslim nations of the Middle East dragged their feet or completely ignored the situation, but Israel reached out to help the largest Muslim nation in the world. Unfortunately the Israeli aid was turned down and the rescue workers sent back, because the Indonesians are anti-semites…like you.

  • March 23, 2007 at 10:00 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Interesting thoughts ellie…I mean bill.

    Getting the money wasn\’t to prove a point. It was getting what was owed to them what the insurance companies decided to keep for themselves.

    They owed it. They tried to keep it. They were forced to pay a very small portion of what they owed. It\’s not very difficult.

    And I always love it when people say \”I don\’t hate….\” and proceed to slam on whatever they just said they don\’t hate.

    Let me guess. Some of your best friends are jews right?

  • March 23, 2007 at 10:23 am
    Joe says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    YOU DO NOT GET IT.

    Enough is not enough and never will be enough.

    This has been going on since 1945 and is not just about Jews but about justice. It includes Jews who have been seeking justice for past wongs inlicted on Jews but these same people have championed the civil rights causes here and been at its forefront with American blacks, they have championed other human rights causes around the world involving non-jews and given of their time and,assets and prestigue to try to stop injustice and atrocities.

    It is an abomination that should never be forgotten just as there are other abominations that should never be forgotten(Armenian Genocide, Darfour, South American death squads, Apartheid, racial violence and atrocities between Hindus and Moslems in India and Packistan, etc)

    Many of the individuals who perpertrated the wrongs may be dead but instutions, hate, and movements that they perpertrated and suported live on and bad people are profiting from this.

    We should not forget any of this , the people who profit from it should not be imune from being brought to justice,and then maybe less of similar events will hapen in the future.

  • March 26, 2007 at 8:42 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    \”Do you see any other nationalities going back and \”re-tilling the same old soil\”?\”

    If you were to search this site, there was a thread awhile back about slaves. The ancestors of these slaves wanted money. So, that answers that question. Yes, yes I do see other nationalities \”re-tilling* the same old soil\”. The difference is they didn\’t have insurance policies they didn\’t pay out (or at least the story didn\’t mention that).

    I like all nationalities; I just don\’t like mean people. Stupid people, sure… mean people, not so much. So, no need for anyone to call me racist. Thanks.

    *not an actual word

  • March 27, 2007 at 8:53 am
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That cracked me up.

  • March 27, 2007 at 12:47 pm
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That is just payback for all the times you made me laugh so hard I cried. Not as funny as your comments, but I thank you. :)

    I kind of miss Ellie. Don\’t get me wrong, I think she was a few sandwiches short of a picnic, but she made for great entertainment.

  • March 27, 2007 at 12:59 pm
    B says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I know what you mean. It certainly made the day go faster. And I learned a lot more interesting things about the Holocaust

    Entertainment + Learning = A good day.

  • April 5, 2007 at 3:27 am
    Jewish Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ellie is just angry because she can\’t collect on Adolph\’s, her long lost great granddaddy\’s, policy because there was a suicide exclusion!

  • April 5, 2007 at 4:10 am
    Jewish Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Probably noone will ever read this because it is a few days after showing up on the internet, but I must unload my rage towards this cold-hearted beast (I was going to call her a woman, but she doesn\’t even deserve that). I didn\’t read all of her comments before I posted the previous remark, then I came across her remark saying that she had a relative that was a victim of the holocaust! My heart sunk, and I was ready to appologize. However, I read all of her comments and lo and behold later she admitted she was joking!!! YOU DON\’T JOKE ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST, especially when there is a serious issue on the table. The only thing I can say is that what goes around comes around. Mend your ways and attitude, before its too late…

  • April 10, 2007 at 3:58 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I read your comments.

    Ellie was saying her grandfather fell out of the watch tower at Dachau. She realized she had put her foot in her mouth so she said it was a joke. I can\’t explain it in words, you\’d have to read the posts.

    Anyway, she\’s ignorant. Haven\’t seen her around lately (but I bet she has just changed her posting name)



Add a Comment

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

*