N002166
Monday, January 21, 2002 12:37 PM
Comments
Mr. Feinberg, first I?d like to state that this fund is not a CHARITY to the victim?s family, but an OBLIGATION by the federal government to pay to each victim in exchange that his/her family will not sue the following agencies:
a.Government agencies that could not provide adequate
security to prevent mass destruction of property and
innocent lives.
b.Operators of the World trade center.
c.Operators of the airports
d.Manufacture of the airplains
e.Pertinent Airlines
f.City of New York
g.etc.
Second, the following has to be corrected.
If all other equal (salary and age) why the single decedent with no children receives about half of the one who is married with no children.
Since it is an obligation to pay to the victim, the single decedent should receive the same amount as married one( with no children).
Third, details should be provided of what is included in the cost of living calculation.
Projected future income SHOULD NOT be adjusted to account for taxes that would have been paid. Paying these taxes in the past did not protected victims of the WTC on September 11th and withholding these taxes from the projected income, will not protect them in the future.
Also, please include 2001 salary level in your calculation. I think, as everybody else, if salary
in 2000 and 1999 were higher than in 2001, then avarage may be the way to go. Otherwise only 2001 salary should be taken in considaration.
I also feel that the amount of the award should be known prior to waiving any rights to sue the airlines or anyone else deemed responsible. I don't think anyone should make a decision not knowing the full impact of that decision.
Thanks for you time and energy in regard to this matter. I do hope that you'll reconsider, Under the present arrangement, it forces families to enter into litigation against any and all responsible.
Individual Comment
New York