dojW000556.xml

dojW000556.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2001-11-26

Monday, November 26, 2001 12:54 AM

Support of Victims/families of 9/11/01



Dear Ones,

I write today to urge you to support the requests below of family members
and loved ones of the September 11, 2001 tragedy. There is no monetary
compensation that can ever replace those lives lost. There can be a
compassionate compensation to allow families to survive and one day
hopefully liveagain with some degree of hope and happiness. I pray that you
will fully underwrite the requests and conditions asked by the families;
andI ask that you not delay, therefore causing more anguish.
I am writing on behalf of , who was a friend. He is survived
by his wife . They have a son , 2 and an unborn
child due in January 2002. He was employed by .
With thanks for your quick action on behalf of those who need our support on
all levels,



Individual Comment

Spokane, WA





>With heavy hearts we write this letter to you representing not only

>ourselves, but the hundreds of other families whose loved ones were either

>hurt or killed in the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

>

>On September 11th our lives spiraled out of control. Writing this letter to

>you in response to your request for comments about the Victims Compensation

>Fund is one step towards us regaining control over our new lives, and

>learning to have hope for tomorrow.

>

>The Victims Compensation Fund's intent is to attempt to make whole the

>families of the victims. While the fund is set up as a convenient, expedient

>process, we are concerned and do share some reservations about its ability to

>make us whole.

>

>ELIGIBILITY OF CLAIMANTS

>

>Although the statute indicates that the purpose of the fund is to make the

>victim and his or her family whole and to provide compensation for

>replacement services, loss of society and companionship, loss of consortium

>and non-economic damages of any kind or nature, we believe that the

>regulations should clearly delineate that the spouses and family members are

>to be compensated for their own independent losses of consortium, society,

>mental anguish, etc., in addition to the victim's.

>

>OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD

>

>We are concerned that we will not be given a complete and full opportunity to

>be heard, should we choose to do so. Each of us rightfully deserves the

>opportunity to be fairly heard before a hearing officer. We would like to

>have the occasion to present evidence through our own testimony and the

>testimony of expert witnesses. We would like for each of our cases to be

>considered on a case-by-case basis.

>

>Currently, most, if not all of us, are in financial distress. We do not have

>the economic means to hire the necessary experts for our particular cases.

>We do not want to be precluded from retaining the services of these expert

>witnesses simply because of our own financial inability to do so. Therefore,

>we believe that all expert fees should be paid directly out of the

>compensation fund by the Special Master, and that there should be no limit on

>garnering such fees.

>

>For many of us, being given the right to be heard is a crucial and extremely

>valuable part of our healing process; it could prove to be a very cathartic

>experience. Lack of economic means should not foreclose such an opportunity.

>We hope that you can understand this.

>

>

>RIGHT TO APPEAL AND FORM OF PAYMENT

>

>One of our largest concerns is that the current statutory schemes are

>removing our options; essentially, at this point with the passage of the most

>recent legislation removing all public entities from fault, we are left with

>one viable means of recovery-that of the compensation fund.

>

>Therefore, we are going to need to have a better sense of what kind of

>compensation we might expect as a floor, should we elect to enter the fund.

>Please understand, we are forfeiting our right to bring a third-party

>lawsuit. We are forfeiting our right to find actual fault against an

>entity(the federal government, the Port Authority, the airlines,

>etc.)--actual fault that would psychologically provide us with some kind of

>answers as to why this horrible event was even able to occur. In exchange

>for forfeiting these rights, we need to receive some things in return. One

>of the things we would like to receive is some kind of degree of certainty as

>to what we would recover should we elect to enter the fund. We will not

>enter this fund with blinders on; anyone expecting us to do so, is acting in

>an extremely unfair, and wholly unsympathetic posture.

>

>While we do understand that every case is unique and deserves individual

>treatment, we would like to know beforehand exactly how economic damages

>would be calculated for loss of earnings. This will, at least, provide us

>with a base from which we can begin to make a decision as to whether the fund

>will provide us with adequate compensation to survive.

>

>In addition, we would like to have the right to appeal.

>

>We would also request for the payment to be made in one lump sum, and to be

>paid out to the beneficiary, consistent with what our personal investment

>advisors recommend for each of our individual family circumstances. For

>example, any payment made to minor children should be in trust. In addition,

>the parent of said minor children should determine the date of vesting. The

>trust should not automatically vest at the age of 18, unless the parent

>determines that it is in the children's own best interests to do so.

>

>ECONOMIC LOSSES

>

>Of paramount importance to us, is the computation of economic losses. We are

>strongly against any cap being placed upon this portion of recovery. Simply

>put, no one should be penalized because their loved one worked long, hard

>hours and earned a "good salary".

>

>We would request an approach similar to what is used in personal injury

>actions; however, we would fully expect that neither age nor marital status

>would be a discriminatory factor. Retirement should be set at age 68. The

>decedent's income should be averaged over the past 3 working years. The

>decedent's age should be subtracted from 68. Those two numbers should be

>multiplied together, thereby gleaning a starting point for computation. From

>this base point, other factors such as inflation, wage-increases, merit,

>likely bonuses and advancement, and any other benefits should be considered.

>

>For many, the lost income streams may be contingent, variable, or

>unpredictable. We do not believe that our families should be penalized

>because of this. The hearing officers should be permitted to consider the

>testimony of experts concerning such things as the likelihood of advancement,

>the bonus scheme unique to each company and each department in each company,

>economic cycles, performance reviews, as well as, how the compensation of

>other co-workers progressed during the course of their working lives. In

>those cases where the compensation is extremely variable and dependant upon

>commissions, as a base, we believe that the hearing officer should consider

>the average of the best three out of five years of employment.

>

>NON-ECONOMIC LOSSES

>

>With regard to the non-economic losses of the fund, there should be

>absolutely no cap on this amount. Each person's circumstances must be

>evaluated individually. Each case should take into account the age of the

>decedent, the marital status of the decedent, and the amount and age of the

>decedent's children. Moreover, the severity of pain and suffering (both

>mental and physical) of not only the decedent, but also the spouse, children,

>parents, and next of kin of the decedent should also be evaluated.

>

>Non-economic losses should be calculated similar to that in personal injury

>actions. But, again, neither age, marital status, nor dependency status

>should be a detriment. Special consideration must be given to the fact that

>eyewitness testimony concerning the horrific pain and suffering endured by

>our loved ones may be impossible to elicit. Thus, the hearing officer should

>consider the reports and/or testimony of expert witnesses who may describe

>based upon their training and experiences what the decedent went through both

>mentally and physically prior to his or her own death. Hearsay testimony

>should be permitted.

>

>Moreover, we do not believe that there should be a limitation on the types of

>injuries to be compensated. We are concerned that we may suffer from real

>and devastating emotional harm not immediately apparent after the attack;

>harm for which we should be compensated. In addition to personal injury, we

>may suffer the loss of the ability to earn an income, we may incur large

>medical bills, etc. All of these things should be compensated for by the

>fund.

>

>Compensation for non-economic losses is a crucial to the survival of some

>families like the firemen and policemen's. Many of those families are

>economically better off at this point in time. Those families will need a

>substantial amount of money to be offered in this section to entice them to

>enter the fund. Likewise, any family who has a considerable amount of

>coverage in life insurance will need some incentive to enter the fund, since

>life insurance proceeds are currently scheduled to be deducted from any

>recovery.

>

>Certainly, we would expect any non-economic recovery from this fund to be

>generous in light of the terrible circumstances of September 11th.

>

>COLLATERAL SOURCES

>

>Finally, with regard to collateral sources, we are very concerned about their

>use to offset any amount recovered from the fund. Life insurance should not

>be deducted from fund payments. Simply put, life insurance is not taxed by

>the IRS for one reason-it encourages people to plan for their heirs. To

>deduct any life insurance from fund payments would penalize those who were

>merely responsible estate planners. The decedents sacrificed and saved

>hard-earned money to pay for such plans; they are already victims once, do

>not make them victim's twice.

>

>Moreover, pension funds, IRAs, and 401k plans should not be deducted from the

>fund's recovery amount. These plans were responsibly sacrificed and saved

>for by our loved ones. Essentially, they are savings accounts, and they

>should not be deducted from the fund.

>

>There should be no deductions from any fund recovery for any "in kind"

>contributions made to our families. In addition, all potential future

>collateral source payments should similarly be excluded from consideration as

>deductions from any compensation recovery.

>

>With regard to charity, Americans across this country donated their

>hard-earned money as a symbol of their patriotism, and our brotherhood as a

>nation. To deduct this charity money from any final payment would, in our

>opinion, be wrong. Donations made to families like us were generously and

>selflessly given to us as a form of healing for both donor and recipient.

>Every single dollar donated and received gives each one of us a hope for

>tomorrow and a belief in our country as a united whole. Please do not

>denigrate this beautiful symbol of our nation standing together as one.

>

>In closing, we would like to sincerely thank you for asking us for our

>comments. We are all struggling through extremely difficult times. Your

>asking for our input about the Victims Compensation Fund--something that will

>have an enormous and tremendous bearing on the rest of our lives-truly and

>honestly gives us a small bit of peace in our restless minds. We can only ask

>you to please keep our children and ourselves in your hearts during the weeks

>ahead.

>

>

>Sincerely,

>


Individual Comment

Spokane, WA

2001-11-26