The Archdiocese of Miami needs to be clear and explicit in telling its parishioners where the funds are coming from to pay the settlements of the sexual abuse claims asserted against the Archdiocese of Miami. There are realistically only two potential sources.
The first source is from the proceeds of policies of liability insurance issued to the Archdiocese of Miami by independent insurance companies. There are a number of insurance companies who have denied coverage to other archdioceses
throughout the United States for claims arising from the sexual abuse by priests of minor children. The basic reason for this denial of coverage is that policies of insurance generally only cover liability arising from accidents. They generally do not
provide coverage for claims arising from intentional acts, which the molestation, rape, or other sexual abuse of a minor child would include. This is especially true if the archbishop or his management team is ever legally determined to have had knowledge that a priest committed a prior act of sexual abuse against a minor child and they allowed that priest to continue in ministry, where he proceeds to commit further acts of sexual abuse against minor children; or, if they knew of the sexual
abuse incident and failed to timely disclose it to the parents of the minor child, resulting in the minor child failing to promptly receive the necessary medical and psychological treatment. We would also expect that some insurance policies may
specifically exclude coverage for the payment of any claims involving sexual abuse.
It is unclear at this time whether the Archdiocese has any insurance coverage to protect it against its liability for the payment of damages arising from sexual abuse claims. The Archdiocese has already acknowledged that certain unidentified independent insurance companies only contributed a certain portion of the amount necessary to settle certain of the sexual abuse claims asserted against the Archdiocese of Miami.
In that regard, we understand that the Archdiocese of Miami is self-insured up to a certain amount. What this means is that
even if the Archdiocese of Miami has insurance to cover it against liability arising from the claims of sexual abuse, the Archdiocese must first pay a certain amount towards the settlement of that claim before the insurance company is obligated
to pay any amount. We could expect that this amount could range anywhere from $500,000 to $1,000,000, or even more. In addition, even if there is coverage under the liability policy, we would expect the insurance policy would have a limit on the
amount of money required to be paid under the policy for each sexual abuse claim, as well as an aggregate limit on the total amount required to be paid in any one year for all claims of sexual abuse arising during that year.
Absent an independent insurance company contributing under its policy to the payment of the sexual abuse claims, the only remaining source of funds for the payment of the claims would be from the assets of the Archdiocese, regardless of whether
the spokesperson for the Archdiocese wants to conceal this fact by categorizing these funds as coming from the Archdiocese's self-insurance fund. The Archdiocese's self-insurance fund is funded either from monies paid by Parishes, priests or other employees of the Archdiocese whose salaries are paid by funds received from parishioners, or by the sale of assets of the Archdiocese.
If the Archdiocese does not have sufficient liquid funds to pay for the settlement of the sexual abuse claims, then it must
dispose of other assets that is owns, such as real property, stocks or bonds. Presumably, the Archdiocese makes a profit
from the sale of these assets, especially if they have been held for any length of time. However, these assets would have originally been purchased with funds obtained in the past from parishioners, or from the profits obtained from the sale of
other assets of the Archdiocese that were initially purchased with funds from parishioners.
Of course, if we are incorrect and the Archdiocese settles the claims of sexual abuse victims with funds obtained from sources other than parishioners, the assets of the Archdiocese, or independent insurance companies, then such other sources should
be identified. Under no circumstances, however, should the Archdiocese of Miami continue to cloud the issue by claiming that
the funds are coming from the Archdioceses self-insurance fund, without also telling us that this self-insurance fund is
financed by monies or assets that would ultimately be traced back to funds initially contributed by parishioners throughout the years. For the Archdiocese to claim otherwise is disingenuous.
|
