Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AdamRam

Emiliano Sala

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Wolfie20 said:

How can the agent be acting on behalf of Nantes when Sala was no longer their player. Had the flight been arranged to take the player to Cardiff to sign the contract then i could understand but from what I've read Sala (as a Cardiff player) had gone back to say his goodbyes with transport arranged by his agent.

Whatever the outcome, it's a really sad story but far too soon after the accident to be talking about money.

The article mentioned earlier in the post shed some light on how this transfer came about....it was the agent who approached Nantes and the player. The agent represented Nantes throughout and was the one who organised the plane, directly with the pilot. 

If there was anything ‘reckless’ about the plane or pilot, there is a potential breach of duty of care to the player and possibly Cardiff.  It would then need to be decided where the responsibility sits, the pilot, the agent their employer (Nantes)  or a combination. 

Share this post


Link to post

Glad he’s been found for the family,what a bloody tragedy.Hope they go back for the pilot.

I heard on the radio that there were 5 parties who needed paying out in connection with the transfer.

Nantes owner received 10% the agents and his son and 2 others.

They stated that the total contract was 30 million but that Cardiff would only be covered for the actual 15 million fee and would be 15 million down.

No idea if this is right,it was on TalkSPORT.

I can see this rumbling on for a while with no cause for the crash or way of proving it.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, RamNut said:

That could be the problem. The insurance company will want to find a way to avoid paying out.

I just realised that the english agent who arranged the flight had asked to mediate on behalf of the club i.e. nantes. 

Rightly so too. I would expect any insurance contract for a professional sportsman to have terms which prevent them from paying out if the insured person is injured or killed in certain circumstances.

It was well publicised that there was substantial pay outs for the injuries of bryson and hughes, but had they received the same injuries by doing a mate a favour and turning out for the local pubs sunday team then im sure the insurer would have something in the contract which meant they were not liable to pay out.

If the contract insists that air travel is by commercial flights etc then there could be an issue. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, BobbyD said:

Corporate legal advice to Cardiff fc would be not to pay a penny until all facts are considered - they have done the right thing. These are exceptional circumstances . 

Not saying they shouldn’t pay but they are right to wait until all circumstances are clear - it shows an interesting state of desperation from Nantes that they have decided to take this public approach . It makes one wonder why they have done this 

It is Cardiff who have taken this public. Cardiff's owner mentioned the first paid installment in an interview with L'Equipe and a "source" from Cardiff revealed the legal threat.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Paul71 said:

Rightly so too. I would expect any insurance contract for a professional sportsman to have terms which prevent them from paying out if the insured person is injured or killed in certain circumstances.

It was well publicised that there was substantial pay outs for the injuries of bryson and hughes, but had they received the same injuries by doing a mate a favour and turning out for the local pubs sunday team then im sure the insurer would have something in the contract which meant they were not liable to pay out.

If the contract insists that air travel is by commercial flights etc then there could be an issue. 

 

This ,standard life insurance terms is covered only as a fare paying passenger [usually commercial].

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Anon said:

It is Cardiff who have taken this public. Cardiff's owner mentioned the first paid installment in an interview with L'Equipe and a "source" from Cardiff revealed the legal threat.

https://tech2.org/bulgaria/cardiff-refuses-to-pay-the-missing-room/

the article is dated 27 Jan.  States that Cardiff have or will refuse to pay.  Let's look at it another way given there are 2 people who have actually died.  Say, at the end of the season, we sell Marriott to Leeds because they get promoted and we don't (very hypothetical) and he get's injured in a car crash a couple of days later, meaning he can never play again.  How many of us would agree that Leeds should not pay?  The guy is no longer our player and none of our insurance policies cover him.  We also owe Peterborough half the transfer fee and they are about to sue us.  Leeds must pay and so should Cardiff

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, King Kevin said:

This ,standard life insurance terms is covered only as a fare paying passenger [usually commercial].

True enough KK. Highly likely tho that this would be a specialist policy written through Lloyd's, rather than a general standard policy issued by a company.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see any legal precedent for Cardiff not having to pay, unless Nantes voluntarily waive the fee which I don't see happening.

If they refuse to pay, they'll be fully transfer embargoed (which is what happens when you refuse to pay a transfer fee, regardless of circumstance) until either they pay it in full or any legal action presented by Nantes culminates. Fairly confident that's how it'll go anyway.

 

I assume there'd be some life insurance in place, which will go to his family. And some professional insurance which should lessen the financial blow (very slightly) to Cardiff.

Obviously a disaster for everyone involved but you can't shy away from agreements.

Edited by SaintRam

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Spanish said:

https://tech2.org/bulgaria/cardiff-refuses-to-pay-the-missing-room/

the article is dated 27 Jan.  States that Cardiff have or will refuse to pay.  Let's look at it another way given there are 2 people who have actually died.  Say, at the end of the season, we sell Marriott to Leeds because they get promoted and we don't (very hypothetical) and he get's injured in a car crash a couple of days later, meaning he can never play again.  How many of us would agree that Leeds should not pay?  The guy is no longer our player and none of our insurance policies cover him.  We also owe Peterborough half the transfer fee and they are about to sue us.  Leeds must pay and so should Cardiff

Obviously assuming all contracts have been signed etc, I totally agree that Cardiff "own" him, and should pay up (to Nantes).  Any insurance claims should be for Cardiff to sort, and that includes any possible future foul play/negligence issues that may or may not arise.

 

But then I got to thinking... Our (work) sales invoices state that the goods are to remain our property until they have been paid for in full.  I hasten to add, that is goods, not human beings!

Either way, it's a sorry state of affairs, and those involved should not forget there are two lives lost... one of them apparently still not found!

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, coneheadjohn said:

Glad he’s been found for the family,what a bloody tragedy.Hope they go back for the pilot.

I heard on the radio that there were 5 parties who needed paying out in connection with the transfer.

Nantes owner received 10% the agents and his son and 2 others.

They stated that the total contract was 30 million but that Cardiff would only be covered for the actual 15 million fee and would be 15 million down.

No idea if this is right,it was on TalkSPORT.

I can see this rumbling on for a while with no cause for the crash or way of proving it.

Seems almost certainly to just be an "act of god" for insurance purposes. The weather was terrible and the pilot had already radioed ahead asking to make an emergency landing. So that makes it even more contentious in terms of getting a payout

It would be horrible, given the outpouring of grief from Cardiff fans over a player they never saw play, if this just ended up in a nasty argument over money

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

Given it took two hours to find the plane on the seabed, it makes a bit of a mockery of the previous search efforts.

I don't see that at all. The initial search was by the coastguards looking for survivors on the surface of the sea.

After that the task was to commission highly specialised underwater search teams to find the wreckage and to direct them as accurately as possible to likely location. The fact that they found the plane so quickly is to their credit. It doesn't devalue the previous efforts of the coastguards to find survivors in the sea - especially as there probably weren't any.  There wasn't even any floating wreckage.

The only question is why the second search took two weeks. but maybe thats how long it takes to gather the evidence, define the task, procure the external contractors, and get to the scene. Maybe an expensive underwater search is not something that would even normally happen for a single light aircraft with two passengers. 

Mockery is a strong word though.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, RamNut said:

I don't see that at all. The initial search was by the coastguards looking for survivors on the surface of the sea.

After that the task was to commission highly specialised underwater search teams to find the wreckage and to direct them as accurately as possible to likely location. The fact that they found the plane so quickly is to their credit. It doesn't devalue the previous efforts of the coastguards to find survivors in the sea - especially as there probably weren't any.  There wasn't even any floating wreckage.

The only question is why the second search took two weeks. but maybe thats how long it takes to gather the evidence, define the task, procure the external contractors, and get to the scene. Maybe an expensive underwater search is not something that would even normally happen for a single light aircraft with two passengers. 

Mockery is a strong word though.

Just add more detail to this, the second search was conducted by a group of professional shipwreck hunters. They are your external contractors and they were indeed not remotely present at the time of the initial search.

There would usually be a search in other similar circumstances - but it's unlikely it would happen quite as quickly. Once you've determined you're searching for wreckage and not survivors, the urgency drops significantly, so the search happens when the necessary contractors are next available.

That could have even been the case with this search, they may have just happened to have been available.

 

Edited by SaintRam

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

Just add more detail to this, the second search was conducted by a group of professional shipwreck hunters. They are your external contractors and they were indeed not remotely present at the time of the initial search.

There would usually be a search in other similar circumstances - but it's unlikely it would happen quite as quickly. Once you've determined you're searching for wreckage and not survivors, the urgency drops significantly, so the search happens when the necessary contractors are next available.

That could have even been the case with this search, they may have just happened to have been available.

 

Plus the time it takes to narrow the search area down. Didn't the surface search cover 400 square miles? but by the time they started the underwater search, this had been reduced to 4. This would have taken time but also made the search by contractors much quicker.

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

Seems almost certainly to just be an "act of god" for insurance purposes. The weather was terrible and the pilot had already radioed ahead asking to make an emergency landing. So that makes it even more contentious in terms of getting a payout

It would be horrible, given the outpouring of grief from Cardiff fans over a player they never saw play, if this just ended up in a nasty argument over money

 

I hadn’t considered that.

I hate to say it but it just starting to seem like that.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.