 UP-DATE-Banner Settlement Deal In Question-Victims Ask HOW To Be Qualified-Guideline Details UnknownAttorneys touting the Banner Supply Settlement, have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar, by failing to document and detail how, and by specific means and methods, victims would be compensated, but clearly defined how they would be paid.
By: Michael S. Foreman June 29, 2011 - PRLog -- Our legal system has rules and codes, settling Class Action or MDL type cases, requiring specific qualifying guidelines and compensation details be clearly defined, and documented.
Banner Supply Settlement contains some very specific information, creating simple parameters that clearly disclose HOW many potential claimants, WHO has information to identify potential claimants, LOCATION of specific potential properties involved, QUANTITY of potential tainted corrosive boards delivered, WHO bought or ordered boards, specifically WHEN delivered and most likely NAME of delivery driver. Unsealed MDL Court documents and evidence (May 2010), between Banner Supply and Knauf-Tianjin (December 2006), provided not just a smoking gun, but written and notarized admission of guilt, clearly Banner and Knauf-Tianjin new of the problem, as early as 2006, resulting in what we now call ... the Banner Supply Settlement Offer ($54,475,558.00) http://www.constructionguru.com/ When settling Class Action or MDL cases, details and information are critical and very rarely available, clearly defined, and/or documented. Banner Supply Settlement Offer fails to clearly establish: 1) Critical qualification requirements, specifically who would be eligible, considering Banner Settlement, specifically and clearly covers 1.4 million Made in China boards. Clearly, based on simple math, and available general construction knowledge, over 7,000 potential claimants exist, based on conservative calculations. 2) Critical Banner Supply delivery ticket details, documented digitally and readily available from Banner Supply Distributors, based on standard Florida Lien Laws, would clearly provide a pool of potential claimants or more specifically, delivery addresses, quantities of materials delivered, who purchased, what driver delivered and specifically when. 3) NDE Analysis Protocol, based on simple visual signs and evidence of corrosion, currently CPSC and HUD acceptable, not to mention the obvious odor, Tainted Corrosive Chinese Drywall (TCDW) structures typically emit, could easily be employed to establish eligible claimants, from the pool of clearly documented delivery tickets. 4) Settlement documents touted as a major step in resolving consumer, victim, and claimant issues ... after close review ... provides less than 5% of actual known cost to correct and re-construct a typical CDW or TCDW structure, and clearly favors the PSC (Plaintiff Steering Committee) and other attorneys, even based on limited number of potential claimants (500 - 800), disclosed by the attorneys. 5) Settlement documents cover 1.4 million boards, including 47,956 boards, covering Knauf-Tianjin unsealed settlement deal with Banner, that replaced TCDW with Domestic / American Boards, stored in a warehouse with Knauf-Tianjin paying over $7,000.00 per month storage, per un-sealed secrete Knauf-Tianjin/ agreement document. Without being to detailed ... what became of these 47,956 warehoused boards ? Are they still in storage, or are these the boards we are finding out, were installed in Habitat For Humanity and the Musician's Village structures ? 6) Settlement Offer needs to address, controls or guidelines that settlement disbursement is used or applied towards corrective repairs, or will joint checks be issued to those with a mortgage, current delinquent mortgage, structures in foreclosure, or other similar circumstances, or will claimants, victims, and consumers have full and sole discretion on how to spend the disbursement ? Litigation lawyers or attorneys, have been disliked and shunned by other attorneys, based on history. Their professional imagine ... let's just say, has not been the best ... again came under fire this week when the specific details, facts, and actual settlement document clearly failed to detail specific or potential settlement amounts victims, consumers, or claimants would be eligible to receive, but clearly established specific payments, percentages, and terms attorneys would receive ... 32%. Judge Fallon has FINAL approval of this HOT POTATO, but I strongly feel, after all is said and done, Fallon will approve a revised settlement offer, that clearly answers all the above questions and favors the consumers, victims, and claimants and limits PSC and attorney fees to a reasonable and fair, not to exceed 15% - 20%. After all, remember the more clients the attorneys have, the bigger the check, or their fair and equitable share. Now, based on documented and validated Piers Reports and Charts, published February 2009, approx. 3,630,000 Tainted Corrosive Boards were imported to Florida and Banner Supply admits to importing 1,400,000 per Banner Supply Settlement Offer ... my calculator says ... 2,230,000 boards are still unaccounted for or unknown, at this time, or roughly 62% of the total imported Chinese boards in Florida alone are not accounted for or their location known. Open link below and scroll down ... http://www.constructionguru.com/ Thank you for your time and interest. Comments and opinions welcomed. Michael S. Foreman Forensic Construction Consultant http://www.ConstructionGuru.com # # # Foreman and Associates, a FULL service forensic construction consulting firm. Our firms Treatment Protocol for Tainted Corrosive Drywall commonly called Chinese Drywall has been validated, confirmed, tested, and documented as 100% successful. Our firms SNiPER® Treatment Application Protocol affords Consumers the option of a Chinese Drywall Specific Insurance Policy, covering any future issues associated with not only Chinese Drywall or Tainted Corrosive Drywall, but also the future unknown out-gassing vapor residual issues End
Page Updated Last on: Jun 30, 2011
|
Account Phone Number