Recently, the operators of the Costa Concordia offered $14,500 to any passenger on board the ship when it capsized, even those who had not been injured, in exchange for an obligation to drop any future lawsuits against the company. The proposed settlement has raised questions for anyone involved in a mass accident or medical catastrophe: when is it a good idea to accept a settlement from a defendant, and when might it be smarter to "just say no."
Looking at recent history should help illustrate the direction in which potential plaintiffs should head. One of the largest and most well know examples of defendants preemptively offering settlements came in April of 2010, immediately following the disastrous BP accident and oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. As the oil began heading towards the Gulf shores, representatives from BP showed up in coastal towns, offering residents settlements of up to $5000. The catch? They had to waive their rights to sue BP down the road. To some individuals, it seemed like a great opportunity. Alabama Attorney General Troy King, however, felt differently. In May of 2010, less than one month after the explosion onboard the BP rig that started it all, King barred BP reps from circulating settlement agreements among coastal Alabamians. At the time, he was reported to have said, "People need to proceed with caution and understand the ramifications before signing" a settlement agreement that waives their right to file suit. Though he admitted that his position prohibited him from offering legal advice to private citizens, he did suggest that individuals should, "seek appropriate counsel to make sure their rights are protected," before signing any agreement with BP.
A similar type of offer was presented in August of 2010, when medical manufacturer DePuy announced a global hip replacement recall of two devices: its ASR Hip Resurfacing System and its ASR XL Acetabular System. In the wake of the recall, DePuy offered to pay for the revision surgeries of all patients affected by the faulty implants. If, of course, they waived their rights to sue in the future. To many patients, the offer seemed like it would cover their needs and adequately compensate them for their troubles. But what DePuy didn't explain when they offered the settlement was that having one revision surgery can lead to an increased likelihood of additional surgeries in the future. Patients who agreed to the settlement could never seek financial compensation for any further medical complications that might arise as a result of the faulty implant.
By examining just these two examples of mass settlement offers, the situation with the Costa Concordia victims becomes clearer. Most often, when a defendant facing numerous claims offers a blanket settlement in return for a waiver of future law suits, they are trying to protect themselves financially. They do not have the plaintiff's best interests in mind. The key to knowing the right choice is to carefully explore all possible options with a professional before making any decisions.
Kurt Arnold has stated: "We suggest that anyone who is being offered a settlement by a defendant at least speak with an attorney before agreeing to anything. At Arnold & Itkin, our attorneys offer free and confidential consultations to any individual looking to discuss a potential claim. Even if you decide to forego representation and take a settlement, you should at least be sure that you understand all your options."
Arnold & Itkin LLP is based in Houston, TX but represents clients all over the country. If you have been injured in the Costa Concordia accident or any other accident or medical recall, an offshore injury attorney at Arnold & Itkin will be happy to answer any questions you may have, free of charge.
Contact a personal injury lawyer from Arnold & Itkin today and make sure you understand the implications of your case before making any decisions.
