Letter to the NY Times from Plaintiffs' Lawyers:
Mr. Nocera unfairly characterized the settlement agreement that BP entered into last year with the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, which represents individuals and businesses affected by the 2010 gulf oil spill. For more than two years BP negotiated, helped draft, agreed to and sought court approval of a settlement that provides compensation based on objective, transparent formulas. The agreement explicitly defined which losses were caused by the spill. To ensure fairness to all claimants, the settlement did not permit subjective review of the claims.
The court-supervised settlement program is operating exactly as intended — a position supported not only by independent BP-selected accountants, but also by the federal judge overseeing the case and by BP itself.
We vehemently dispute Mr. Nocera’s groundless disparagement of the judge, Carl Barbier, who was selected by an impartial panel of federal judges, and of the claims administrator, Patrick Juneau, a nationally respected mediator. Both are lawyers with reputations beyond reproach. Simply put, BP undervalued the settlement it agreed to and is now attempting to change the rules in an effort to save money.
The notion that BP somehow got “hosed” or “fleeced” is preposterous.
* * * * *
BTW: I think that those of us who comment on the case should indicate whether we are or have been paid consultants for anyone involved in the case. I have not and am not.