US investors sue Grenfell cladding makers.

[Tommy Tainant]

US judge allows lawsuit against Grenfell Tower cladding firm

American shareholders get go-ahead after witnesses allege Arconic managers knew cladding was unsafe

www.theguardian.com

This is really confusing. The owners of the company who made the killer cladding should not rank ahead of the people who actually suffered from their criminality.

I hope that this isnt what it means.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Oh, but ain't that America
For you and me
Ain't that America
Something to see, baby
Ain't that America
Home of the free, yeah
Little pink houses
For you and me
Oooh, yeah
For you and me

 

[Dekster]

US judge allows lawsuit against Grenfell Tower cladding firm

American shareholders get go-ahead after witnesses allege Arconic managers knew cladding was unsafe

www.theguardian.com

This is really confusing. The owners of the company who made the killer cladding should not rank ahead of the people who actually suffered from their criminality.

I hope that this isnt what it means.

Arconic is a publically traded company. It is an off-shoot of a company called Alcoa that is fairly well known in the US because of its former sponsorship of NFL football games and an ad program at every two minute warning to the end of games that replayed great football moments. Anyway, they went public in 2016, the year before the fire. The lawsuit alleges that managers knew this product wasn't safe but continued to sell it up until right after the fire. Since the stock value took a big hit after the fire due to them making the product, the investors are suing to recover their losses under the argument that the company's management failed to disclose the risk of loss to the investors. The managers seem to be arguing that they didn't know and even if they did know it is not their responsibility as long as building codes allowed its use. I have read that there are 6 emails involving managers of the company that makes it clear that they very much knew this product was unsafe for building cladding prior to the fire and them taking it off the market. Now in theory, they could recover these losses from the managers or their insurance companies if they have E & O policies, but ultamately the only people who really make money off these type suits are the class-action lawyers.

Now all that said, there is a separate wrongful death lawsuit against 3 US companies filed in Philadelphia related to the fire---GE whose appliance short-circuited and started the fire, Arconic for making the cladding, and Celotex who made the highly flammable insulation under the cladding. Even if any 1 or 2 o fthe companies went other (which they won't), the third could still be held liable for the full damages.

 

[Grumblenuts]

ultamately the only people who really make money off these type suits are the class-action lawyers.

Bingo.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Arconic is a publically traded company. It is an off-shoot of a company called Alcoa that is fairly well known in the US because of its former sponsorship of NFL football games and an ad program at every two minute warning to the end of games that replayed great football moments. Anyway, they went public in 2016, the year before the fire. The lawsuit alleges that managers knew this product wasn't safe but continued to sell it up until right after the fire. Since the stock value took a big hit after the fire due to them making the product, the investors are suing to recover their losses under the argument that the company's management failed to disclose the risk of loss to the investors. The managers seem to be arguing that they didn't know and even if they did know it is not their responsibility as long as building codes allowed its use. I have read that there are 6 emails involving managers of the company that makes it clear that they very much knew this product was unsafe for building cladding prior to the fire and them taking it off the market. Now in theory, they could recover these losses from the managers or their insurance companies if they have E & O policies, but ultamately the only people who really make money off these type suits are the class-action lawyers.

Now all that said, there is a separate wrongful death lawsuit against 3 US companies filed in Philadelphia related to the fire---GE whose appliance short-circuited and started the fire, Arconic for making the cladding, and Celotex who made the highly flammable insulation under the cladding. Even if any 1 or 2 o fthe companies went other (which they won't), the third could still be held liable for the full damages.

Over here it is mired in a public hearing designed to protect the tory council.
My main point is that shareholders should rank behind victims when it comes to paying out.

 

[struth]

US judge allows lawsuit against Grenfell Tower cladding firm

American shareholders get go-ahead after witnesses allege Arconic managers knew cladding was unsafe

www.theguardian.com

This is really confusing. The owners of the company who made the killer cladding should not rank ahead of the people who actually suffered from their criminality.

I hope that this isnt what it means.

why shouldn't the investors be able to try and get their investment back, if they were mislead?

If other people suffered, they are free to file a lawsuit as well.

As far as criminality, I don't see that mentioned in the article, but that is something completely different.

 

[odanny]

I just watched a great hour long documentary on Amazon Prime about Grenfell, it was actually a series of six episodes about various disasters, including the bridge collapse in Italy, but I only watched the one on Grenfell. The towers stated policy, even on signs around the building, was in case of fire, stay indoors until the fire department can rescue you. When the place was becoming a torch, operators on the phone told the residents to stay and wait for the fire department.

 

[Dekster]

Over here it is mired in a public hearing designed to protect the tory council.
My main point is that shareholders should rank behind victims when it comes to paying out.

Shareholder lawsuits are largely nuisance lawsuits in the US our our laws prioritize their duty to protect investors above all else. Companies and executives get hit with them all the time which is why some of these people have separate insurances to wade through the legal nonsense. The real meat here will be taken off the bones of the insulation manufacturer. The only real legal issue appears to be whether the case against them should be held in the US or in London or elsewhere since it was an overseas subsidiary corporation that manufactured and sold the reportedly highly flammable product .