Talk:Ron Sandler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] 'Educational Briefing'

Point in issue: I refer to this as a bribe and Kittybrewster refers to it as a 'reimbursement of legal fees'. It occasioned a Department of Justice investigation, which I'll try to find a reference for.--Major Bonkers (talk) 09:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Time magazine article: The Decline and Fall of Lloyd's of London; Insurance Journal: Fresh Allegations Surround Quackenbush, Lloyd's Payment. Will bash on later. --Major Bonkers (talk) 10:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Allegations??? Those articles also do not say "bribe". Is Sir David Rowland not more notable? Kittybrewster ☎ 11:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the money wasn't used for its stated purpose of 'educational briefings'. It wasn't even (all) used to reimburse legal costs (which had, in the first instance, been unlawfully removed from the assets of companies in run-off, apparently). Lloyd's had absolutely no obligation to pay these fees, which were not incurred by it, in a state in which it is not an admitted (re)insurer. See: The Los Angeles Times Quackenbush's Agency Hid Purpose of Insurer's Payment. As for Sir David, I must admit the oversight; after all, in general terms, what's the point of peculation from widows and orphans and grinding the faces of the poor if one's triumphant deeds are not recorded somewhere?! I suspect, however reluctantly, we may have to lose the word 'bribe'; not because that isn't what it was, but because it isn't 'verifiable' (= no newspaper was bold enough to call a spade a spade).--Major Bonkers (talk) 12:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)