Am I Missing Something?

[weltschmerz]

Sure, it was a heinous act and very sad for the family.   It shouldn't have  happened.  But.....being awarded 7.4 BILLION dollars because granny got killed?  
Back in the 'good old days' the compensation was roughly equivalent for the amount the dead person would have earned for the remainder of their days.  The lady in question was 83 years old.
But 7.4 BILLION dollars?  That seems really excessive to me. Families may get a million or two when their teenager flies off a poorly-maintained amusement park ride, but $7.4 Billion?   
I've never heard of such a thing.

www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/spectrum-ordered-to-pay-7-4-billion-in-damages-after-technician-killed-irving-woman/3032007/

[haapai]

Ask swamp.  She knows more about punitive damages and the difference between criminal negligence and plain negligence.  I'm wondering whether this was a criminal suit instead of a civil one. 

This guy was the employee from hell and the company didn't do anything to protect their employees or their customers from him.  He definitely used his job, and company information, and a company vehicle to carry out this crime. 

[tskeeter]

One of theories of damage claims is related to company size.  The bigger the company, the bigger the claim.  The premise is the damages should be high enough that the damage award is a deterrent to the party who must pay the damage award.  So, for the same offense, a Mom and Pop business might have to pay $1,000 in damages while a big business, such as an Amazon, might have to pay hundreds of millions in damages.

I wonder how much the fact that cable companies are often considered the most despised companies in the country affected the juries’ findings.

In this case, the size of the damage award pretty much guarantees that the case will be appealed.

[finnime]

Part of it may be basic innumeracy. People have a weak grasp of the real magnitude of large numbers such as "Billion" which sounds like "Big Million". A million in itself is hard to fully comprehend. A million seconds is 12 days, which is conceivable. A billion seconds is 32 years. Much harder to to apprehend.

[billisonboard]

Jul 28, 2022 15:21:38 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Sure, it was a heinous act and very sad for the family.   It shouldn't have  happened.  But.....being awarded 7.4 BILLION dollars because granny got killed?  
Back in the 'good old days' the compensation was roughly equivalent for the amount the dead person would have earned for the remainder of their days.  The lady in question was 83 years old.
But 7.4 BILLION dollars?  That seems really excessive to me. Families may get a million or two when their teenager flies off a poorly-maintained amusement park ride, but $7.4 Billion?   
I've never heard of such a thing.

www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/spectrum-ordered-to-pay-7-4-billion-in-damages-after-technician-killed-irving-woman/3032007/

Here is what you appear to have missed from your link. First there is your 'good old days' compensation:

 Charter Communications was initially charged to pay 90% of a $375 million compensatory damages figure 

That one alone seems extremely high to me. Then there is this:

The punitive damages awarded by the jury are in addition to the compensatory damages.

Based on the general meaning of the words used and not a law school definition; The first simply makes up for what was lost and the second is punishment for doing something bad. Something along the lines of "You have to paint the wall you drew on and you are grounded for a month."

I don't like to question juries because they hear all the evidence while we get brief snippets at best but I am going to on this one. Was the company truly responsible for this murder? Seems iffy to me. That makes the dollar amounts even more difficult to accept as fair to me.

[raeoflyte]

The company keeps saying initial background checks were clear, but there is a small paragraph about the guy asking for loans and it sounds like he stole other women's credit cards too. I'm assuming the prosecution said the company should have picked up on a significant change in attitude/action and should have better security around vehicles.

[billisonboard]

Jul 29, 2022 8:11:40 GMT -5 raeoflyte said:

The company keeps saying initial background checks were clear, but there is a small paragraph about the guy asking for loans and it sounds like he stole other women's credit cards too. I'm assuming the prosecution said the company should have picked up on a significant change in attitude/action and should have better security around vehicles.

Counterpoint: "We have an employee who is going through a rough time." Should the response be, "We need to help him out" or "We need to fire him before he kills someone"? How many companies allow employees to drive vans home so they can go start to a job in the morning and even use them off duty so their name on the side has increased visibility? The credit card piece does concern me.

[happyhoix]

Jul 29, 2022 8:27:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jul 29, 2022 8:11:40 GMT -5 raeoflyte said:

The company keeps saying initial background checks were clear, but there is a small paragraph about the guy asking for loans and it sounds like he stole other women's credit cards too. I'm assuming the prosecution said the company should have picked up on a significant change in attitude/action and should have better security around vehicles.

Counterpoint: "We have an employee who is going through a rough time." Should the response be, "We need to help him out" or "We need to fire him before he kills someone"? How many companies allow employees to drive vans home so they can go start to a job in the morning and even use them off duty so their name on the side has increased visibility? The credit card piece does concern me.

He did take pictures of two elderly ladies credit cards and driver’s license with his phone and was caught doing it. Also asked their EAP for assistance (but I don’t know for what?) sounds to me like he should have been required to work at the office a couple weeks after that credit card issue. Maybe assigned to work with a partner.

The company also sent her last bill to collections because she didn’t pay it (because she was dead) and tried to force her family to accept the arbitration clause in her contract that would have capped at $200. If the company had made an effort to settle on a reasonable amount they wouldn’t have gone to trial.

Unfortunately they probably got a jury of disgruntled cable customers (like me) who relished the opportunity to show them what they thought of them. It will end up getting reduced, but maybe this taught them a lesson.

[billisonboard]

Jul 29, 2022 13:16:37 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jul 29, 2022 8:27:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Counterpoint: "We have an employee who is going through a rough time." Should the response be, "We need to help him out" or "We need to fire him before he kills someone"? How many companies allow employees to drive vans home so they can go start to a job in the morning and even use them off duty so their name on the side has increased visibility? The credit card piece does concern me.

He did take pictures of two elderly ladies credit cards and driver’s license with his phone and was caught doing it. Also asked their EAP for assistance (but I don’t know for what?) sounds to me like he should have been required to work at the office a couple weeks after that credit card issue. Maybe assigned to work with a partner.

The company also sent her last bill to collections because she didn’t pay it (because she was dead) and tried to force her family to accept the arbitration clause in her contract that would have capped at $200. If the company had made an effort to settle on a reasonable amount they wouldn’t have gone to trial.

Unfortunately they probably got a jury of disgruntled cable customers (like me) who relished the opportunity to show them what they thought of them. It will end up getting reduced, but maybe this taught them a lesson.

Looks like you have more information than what is in that OP link. Still question the distance from credit card fraud to murder. So I can accept placing blame for financial issues but the murder? Why should they have seen that coming and what should they have done. He easily could have parked any vehicle in her driveway and said there wasn't a van available so he was using his personal car. As far as "settling", if you sincerely don't consider yourself guilty I don't think you should settle.

[happyhoix]

Jul 29, 2022 13:38:04 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jul 29, 2022 13:16:37 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

He did take pictures of two elderly ladies credit cards and driver’s license with his phone and was caught doing it. Also asked their EAP for assistance (but I don’t know for what?) sounds to me like he should have been required to work at the office a couple weeks after that credit card issue. Maybe assigned to work with a partner.

The company also sent her last bill to collections because she didn’t pay it (because she was dead) and tried to force her family to accept the arbitration clause in her contract that would have capped at $200. If the company had made an effort to settle on a reasonable amount they wouldn’t have gone to trial.

Unfortunately they probably got a jury of disgruntled cable customers (like me) who relished the opportunity to show them what they thought of them. It will end up getting reduced, but maybe this taught them a lesson.

Looks like you have more information than what is in that OP link. Still question the distance from credit card fraud to murder. So I can accept placing blame for financial issues but the murder? Why should they have seen that coming and what should they have done. He easily could have parked any vehicle in her driveway and said there wasn't a van available so he was using his personal car. As far as "settling", if you sincerely don't consider yourself guilty I don't think you should settle.

They knew he was taking advantage of elderly women. It seems he was using his job to look for prey. Possibly he came back to that woman’s house to simply rob her and she put up a fight and things escalated.

Yes I did read another article about it, can’t remember where.

Sometimes things aren’t black and white. No the company didn’t send this guy out there to murder women, but they knew he was robbing women. They had some culpability in allowing him to continue to make house calls, knowing what he was capable of. They could have reached an agreement where they accept some responsibility for failing to respond aggressively enough to this employee’s criminal activity and then promise to institute positive changes in their employee management.

Instead they tried to enforce their arbitration clause that would cap the recovery at $200 bucks.

I could see how that would rub a jury the wrong way.

It won’t stand, though. It will get reduced in appeals.

[billisonboard]

Jul 30, 2022 10:40:20 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jul 29, 2022 13:38:04 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Looks like you have more information than what is in that OP link. Still question the distance from credit card fraud to murder. So I can accept placing blame for financial issues but the murder? Why should they have seen that coming and what should they have done. He easily could have parked any vehicle in her driveway and said there wasn't a van available so he was using his personal car. As far as "settling", if you sincerely don't consider yourself guilty I don't think you should settle.

They knew he was taking advantage of elderly women. It seems he was using his job to look for prey. Possibly he came back to that woman’s house to simply rob her and she put up a fight and things escalated.

Yes I did read another article about it, can’t remember where.

Sometimes things aren’t black and white. No the company didn’t send this guy out there to murder women, but they knew he was robbing women. They had some culpability in allowing him to continue to make house calls, knowing what he was capable of. They could have reached an agreement where they accept some responsibility for failing to respond aggressively enough to this employee’s criminal activity and then promise to institute positive changes in their employee management.

Instead they tried to enforce their arbitration clause that would cap the recovery at $200 bucks.

I could see how that would rub a jury the wrong way.

It won’t stand, though. It will get reduced in appeals.

If they knew, I agree they had culpability.