Oil Spill

BP Flooded with Settlement Demands Unrelated to Oil Spill

Everybody looking to cash in


Until this year, Tampa attorney Kevin McLean specialized in suing nursing homes for neglecting patients. In January he switched the focus of his practice to a fund BP established to compensate business losses from the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. In its attempt to dilute a legal and public-relations mess of epic proportions, BP began paying claims within weeks of the disaster and has so far spent more than $25 billion for cleanup and compensation. That hasn't stemmed demands for more. The installation last year of a particularly generous claims administrator prompted scores of additional plaintiffs' attorneys to swarm onto the scene, signing up a new wave of clients, many located far from the once-sullied shoreline. Just five months after his pivot, McLean's three-attorney firm has 260 clients with claims ranging from $20,000 to $4 million apiece. "The craziest thing about the settlement," he wrote in a solicitation letter, "is that you can be compensated for losses that are UNRELATED to the spill."

One of McLean's clients, a real estate agent in Brandon, Fla., an hour from the Gulf, wants $80,000 from BP, reflecting a revenue dip in 2010 that "had nothing to do with the spill," the attorney candidly admits. (The culprit was the bursting of the Florida real estate bubble.) Under the settlement, though, "that's a good claim," McLean says, "and we're going to get paid."

He has millions of reasons to be confident. A construction company in northern Alabama, 200 miles from the coast, was recently awarded $9.7 million, even though it does no work near the Gulf of Mexico, according to court records. Attorneys are submitting claims on their own behalf. A law office in central Louisiana that actually enjoyed improved profits in 2010 collected $3.3 million. The compensation process is confidential, so claimants' identities aren't a matter of public record, though the amounts are.

NEXT: Temp Agencies Stand to Benefit from ObamaCare Regulations

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Read the settlement agreement and BP’s official statements when they were arguing in favor of this program before the court. This is what they wanted. And then when the bill came in, they abruptly changed their mind. The Economic Loss Zones cover the entire states of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. Nobody forced BP to agree to that. They did it voluntarily. It therefore makes no difference where in the state the business is located. If it meets the objective criteria, then it’s eligible for a claim.

    Whether a loss is deemed related to the spill is based on objective financial criteria. That’s how BP and the plaintiffs wanted it and that’s what they got. The press really needs to actually read the settlement agreement and BP’s statements and emails before claiming that “everyone is looking to cash in from unrelated losses.”

    1. Nobody forced BP to agree to that.

      There was a substantial amount of political force, including actual threats and multiple laws suits, brought against BP. So you statement is almost farcical.

      1. So you’ve read the settlement agreement and pleadings like I have? You live on the Gulf Coast like I do? You believe political pressure is actual force? Do you realize BP is a convicted felon?

        Of course not. You’re just another ignorant person with an opinion.

  2. It’s a well known fact on the Gulf that the level of fraud being perpetrated against BP is at Katrina levels.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.