lax regulations result in no drinking water for 300k. thanks Freedom Industries

Berniewood Hogan

IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
17,983
Reputation
6,880
Daps
88,330
Reppin
nWg
it add cost to doing business to those who have dont nothing wrong.
IF THESE OTHER BUSINESS ARE MAKING THE SAME SAFETY MISTAKES AS THE GUILTY COMPANY, THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG IF THEY DON'T COMPLY WITH NEW REGULATIONS THAT COUNTER THOSE MISTAKES, BROTHER! THIS IS BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS TO THOSE OF US WHO AREN'T TETHERED TO IDEOLOGY, DUDE!
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
89,208
Reputation
3,727
Daps
158,809
Reppin
Brooklyn
What Freedom Industries’ Bankruptcy Really Means For Those Harmed By The Chemical Spill
One of the largest environmental disasters in recent American history happened three days before Christmas in 2008, when more than 1 billion gallons of coal ash slurry spilled from a coal plant in Tennessee into a nearby river.

The Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA) plant at Kingston tainted drinking water with toxic metals, mercury, and arsenic for weeks. To clean up the mess, the Environmental Protection Agency ordered TVA to dredge the lake, and get rid of the remaining 1 million pounds of coal ash by transporting it to a 978-acre landfill in Uniontown, Alabama — a minority-heavy, low-income county nearly 350 miles away.

Storing the sludge in a faraway landfill on top of mounds of household trash, however, was far from a perfect solution. The coal ash from Tennessee’s disaster wound up blowing into Alabama’s air. Affected residents filed a notice to sue the landfill company and its permitee. In response, both entities declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

“Because the bankruptcy code forbids anyone from filing a lawsuit against someone who has filed for bankruptcy, we could not follow through with our lawsuit,” David Lutter, who represented the plaintiffs in Alabama, told ClimateProgress on Tuesday. “It’s essentially the same thing that’s happening in West Virginia.”

Indeed, the situation in West Virginia is similar. After contaminating the state’s drinking water with 7,500 gallons of a mysterious chemical called Crude MCHM (and possibly another chemical), the company responsible — Freedom Industries Inc. — has now declared bankruptcy, citing the combined pressure of demands for payments from creditors, and a pile of lawsuits over the spill.

The bankruptcy has many wondering what exactly this will mean for the more than 25 lawsuits that have been filed against the company, and for the people who have been harmed by Freedom Industries’ spill.

Those who claim injury from the spill are not just those who have drank, cooked or bathed in the water — not just those who have become nauseous, developed rashes, or gone to the emergency room. Business owners, too, have lost profits after being forced to close for days on end. Workers at those businesses have lost wages. And West Virginia’s capital city of Charleston has said it has lost more than $120,000 in tax revenue over the course of the week following the disaster.

In its bankruptcy filing, Freedom Industries listed a maximum of $10 million in liabilities, or potential debts. But that $10 million is dubious — the company’s debts already include $6 million in combined debts to both the IRS and other creditors, with no lawsuits mentioned.

Now that they’ve filed for bankruptcy, however, lawyers may begin dropping their lawsuits against Freedom, according to Lutter.

“The motivation for most lawyers to pursue somebody in court disintegrates once they’ve filed for bankruptcy,” said Lutter, who wound up dropping his case against the Alabama landfill owners once they declared bankruptcy. Like Freedom Industries, the owners — Perry-Uniontown Ventures I LLC and Perry County Associates LLC — immediately filed once they were threatened with lawsuits, and immediately sold their interests in the landfill to another company (Freedom has also attempted to sell itself to another company, though that is being met with objections).

At that point, the Alabama plaintiffs could no longer seek a court order to have the landfill clean up the mess they made, Lutter said. All they could seek was monetary damages, which the bankrupt landfill owners certainly did not have.

“Most attorneys are interested in collecting money, not changing things at a facility,” Lutter said. “If the company is in bankruptcy and going through reorganization, chances are very high that the bankruptcy court is going to basically liquidate all claims against the company so that it can come out of bankruptcy and start new, which means claims are going to be paid pennies on the dollar.”

So, instead of suing the landfill owners through the more drawn out and complicated adversary proceeding process in bankruptcy court, Lutter pursued regular litigation against the non-bankrupt landfill operator, Phillips & Jordan Inc. The plaintiffs wound up with a confidential settlement.

“That’s the big downside of bankruptcy law,” Lutter said. “It’s nice to give people a fresh start, but its hard to justify giving them a fresh start when they’ve harmed people.”

Lutter is not the only one who has theorized that Freedom Industries’ bankruptcy is an attempt to avoid having to pay claims from those its chemical spill has harmed. MSNBC’s Chris Hayes called the filing a “staggeringly brazen” attempt to avoid lawsuits, additionally reporting that the company Freedom has tapped to lend it money — Mountaineer Funding LLC — is controlled by Freedom’s owner, J. Clifford Forrest.

If the loan is approved, Hayes said, “Mountaineer [will] emerge from the ashes with the same assets, but without all that nasty legal baggage.”

Still, attorneys must pursue their main interest, which is getting money for their clients who were harmed by the spill. And if they can’t get it from Freedom, they will go down other roads to get it. Some already are.

“There’s not much point to having [Freedom Industries] in our lawsuit anymore,” said Kevin Thompson, an attorney who filed a class action lawsuit against Freedom and others in federal court last week. “There’s going to be no money left. There’s gonna be nothing left. The feds are going to have control of them. There’s nothing left to do over there.”

Thompson said he would voluntarily dismiss Freedom from his lawsuit, which among other things seeks a court-ordered medical monitoring program for anyone exposed to the chemical. Instead, he will continue to pursue Eastman Chemical Company — the company that supplied the crude MCHM to Freedom — and West Virginia American Water.

Thompson did, however, say that he thinks the bankruptcy court will order Freedom to pay into a fund for site cleanup. So while money from the company probably won’t go to his clients, it will go somewhere.

“There won’t be money available to compensation, but in our view, and my clients view, its far better for that money to go to cleanup,” he said. “I’m completely thrilled that there are regulators in there and environmental professionals, and it appears that there’ll be a full blown cleanup. But if they don’t do that, then we’ll sue the Department of Environmental Protection. We’ll be there.”
 

DEAD7

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
50,972
Reputation
4,416
Daps
89,065
Reppin
Fresno, CA.
i cant believe people will make it seem like you have to choose between safe water and jobs. this country is becoming a crack house

regulation is not harming businesses, it is to make sure catastrophe is less likely to happen in the future. furthermore, the low execution of regulation in WV is causing job loss since "freedom industries" water company is going bankrupt due to the fact that it behaved in such a loose and reckless way that it created massive liability. regulation is like speed limits for some of these short sighted companies out here, it can keep them alive in spite of their natures
:merchant:


The point is to prevent stuff like this from happening in the first place. We can talk about lawsuits and punishments all day, but if there were better regulations then there's a good chance something like this would've never come to pass.

Regulations themselves have nothing to do with "punishing" businesses, but with public safety.
Better regulations?:what: Its against the law to spill chemicals... it financially ruins the corp. which based solely off of the post on this board, cannot be in the plans of any corp unless they are not the money hungry capitalist they are portrayed to be.
Accidents are going to happen, and every precaution is being taken to prevent them.
Where the idea that any "greedy capitalist" is risking his fortune by not taking safety precautions(on his own) comes from, I have no idea.

That said, tax payer money means little to the left, so you probably dont see any issue at all with lumping an endless stream of govt. onto private business's :yeshrug:



FALSE.

Thinking its cool to dump shyt like this is the problem and regulating it would PREVENT that.

We're not even talking about ADDING more regulations honestly but a few more rules wouldnt hurt to ensure what everyone has to enjoy.

No one thinks its cool, where did you get that?

"We're not even talking about ADDING more regulations honestly but a few more rules wouldnt hurt" :mindblown::mindblown::mindblown:

:camby: and regulations dont prevent the lower the chance of accidents, which right now is at about 3%:shaq2:

IF THESE OTHER BUSINESS ARE MAKING THE SAME SAFETY MISTAKES AS THE GUILTY COMPANY, THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG IF THEY DON'T COMPLY WITH NEW REGULATIONS THAT COUNTER THOSE MISTAKES, BROTHER! THIS IS BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS TO THOSE OF US WHO AREN'T TETHERED TO IDEOLOGY, DUDE!

If they are using say underground tanks, and some jack ass at this factory empties his tanks into the local water supply, then liberals fly in and make underground tanks illegal. They have been impacted, and have incurred cost, without having done anything wrong. If they cant afford to move their tanks, then they must close down...

Its so :demonic:





again I say make the punishment harsher to deter and leave it at that :manny: But there are votes to be won over so politicians will :cape: in order to appear for the people :comeon:
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,338
Reputation
6,850
Daps
90,886
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
surprised this story has hit HL yet, its over a week old ..... and the chemicals are supposedly making their way down the river toward Ohio if not there already....

I think we were all waiting for someone else to make the threadwell, at least us that care about the environment
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,338
Reputation
6,850
Daps
90,886
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
Lutter is not the only one who has theorized that Freedom Industries’ bankruptcy is an attempt to avoid having to pay claims from those its chemical spill has harmed. MSNBC’s Chris Hayes called the filing a “staggeringly brazen” attempt to avoid lawsuits, additionally reporting that the company Freedom has tapped to lend it money — Mountaineer Funding LLC — is controlled by Freedom’s owner, J. Clifford Forrest.

If the loan is approved, Hayes said, “Mountaineer [will] emerge from the ashes with the same assets, but without all that nasty legal baggage.”

amazing.

legal insurance fraud
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,338
Reputation
6,850
Daps
90,886
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
Govt. protecting business's :wow:

I think we are all against this.

you're dense

that's what you got out of it?

where did it state that the government was protecting the business? bankruptcy rules work the same way for corporations and individuals. bailouts are a moral hazard that represents the government protecting businesses. this situation is not it.

AND COULD YOU fukkN STOP using the word government without establishing whether or not you're talking about the state or federal level. Differentiating between the two establishes very different philosophies on government intervention.
 

Jhoon

Spontaneous Mishaps and Hijinks
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
16,518
Reputation
1,500
Daps
37,705
You have to be conservative to believe a company being ushered into bankruptcy because of gross negligence, is better than instituting rules that would hinder a company that would harm 1 person.
 

Brown_Pride

All Star
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
6,416
Reputation
785
Daps
7,887
Reppin
Atheist for Jesus
Obviously you dont see increasing the cost of doing business in response to misconduct as a punishment, and that fine. The real issue her eis how does that hurt or reprimand the guilty corp that is out of business?

it doesnt, it add cost to doing business to those who have dont nothing wrong.

If you were trying to have the owners of the factory that spilled flogged or something I'd be with you, it isnt about ignoring whats been done, as some have thoughtlessly suggested, its about going after the guilty party and them alone.
See Below
Why does it have to hurt or reprimand the guilty corp? Their punishment is a separate issue from trying to prevent further incidents. And adding costs to business is fine, if those costs are reasonable and help lower the risk of further incidents that might destroy those companies altogether, as this one was.
exactly. Regulations ARE NOT PUNISHMENT they are there to protect PEOPLE, nation, or sometimes industry. The additional regulations should be put up to help prevent FUTURE accidents from happening.
 
Top