Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Katie Hopkins

I also think that even if she had dfamatioon insurance, she would have threatened its validity when she didn't mitigate her error by apologising or anything close to it.
 
She 100% will be insured. She's 1 person from a pool of thousands of PI policies that will be packed together and placed as 1 risk with premiums running into the £££££ millions. £107k is peanuts. No one insurance company will assume the entire risk. Everyone else is paying for her stupidity.
 
ffsear said:
She 100% will be insured. She's 1 person from a pool of thousands of PI policies that will be packed together and placed as 1 risk with premiums running into the £££££ millions. £107k is peanuts. No one insurance company will assume the entire risk. Everyone else is paying for her stupidity.
Click to expand...
If there's one thing that is a given with insurers, it is that they don't blindly put themselves on risk without having some way of mitigating that risk. And you don't insure a gobby hatemonger with a track record of losing court cases without making sure there are Ts & Cs which reduce the risk of an open-ended liability.

Interesting, too, that you seem happy to work with the ultra-conservative estimate of her likely liability for costs, too - one might almost begin to suspect an undeclared agenda.
 
existentialist said:
If there's one thing that is a given with insurers, it is that they don't blindly put themselves on risk without having some way of mitigating that risk. And you don't insure a gobby hatemonger with a track record of losing court cases without making sure there are Ts & Cs which reduce the risk of an open-ended liability.
Click to expand...
The thing is though, a lot of these policies are packaged. Our company insurance includes employers liability, professional indemnity, VAT investigation, and loads of other stuff. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that she could have some level of defamation insurance included in a general 'industry package' but it would be subject to all sorts of terms and conditions.
 
Last edited:
existentialist said:
If there's one thing that is a given with insurers, it is that they don't blindly put themselves on risk without having some way of mitigating that risk. And you don't insure a gobby hatemonger with a track record of losing court cases without making sure there are Ts & Cs which reduce the risk of an open-ended liability.
.
Click to expand...

No one said it won't be. Her premium will be sky high no doubt while all insurance polices have limits. There is no such thing as open ended liability.
 
ffsear said:
No one said it won't be. Her premium will be sky high no doubt while all insurance polices have limits. There is no such thing as open ended liability.
Click to expand...

If you insured Kate Hopkins for Libel, you'd find that in the dictionary under "examples of open-ended liability", and "what the fuck were you thinking, you dozy fucking twat?!?!"
 
I doubt very much that shitkins would have an OTC PI policy, give the profile and history. Anyone who placed this will have had to be satisfied that there are all manner of escape clauses that can be invoked if she gets a bit naughty. If this was placed as part of a generic PI tranche - just like CDO's were a decade ago , then Lloyds deserve to go under
 
Spymaster said:
The thing is though, a lot of these policies are packaged. Our company insurance includes employers liability, professional indemnity, VAT investigation, and loads of other stuff. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that she could have some level of defamation insurance included in a general 'industry package' but it would be subject to all sorts of terms and conditions.
Click to expand...
Yes - I did a little nose around, and it looks like this kind of action would be covered by a "media liability" policy (or element of an overall policy). But I also noticed that a lot of these liability policies are written around the notion of "errors and omissions"; I'd be astonished if a policy, especially a general one, would even begin to cover a situation where someone had made a false (and fairly serious) allegation against someone and then refused to retract it.

Which doesn't mean such a policy doesn't exist, and I'm well aware that we're all speculating like crazy here...and it will be unlikely that we'll know unless Hopkins files for bankruptcy or something.

In any event, there's always that question on policy renewal forms about previous claims, so I suspect that even if Hopkins did have insurance to cover her, and even if it pays out, she might find herself with some special terms at renewal *cough*
 
ffsear said:
No one said it won't be. Her premium will be sky high no doubt while all insurance polices have limits. There is no such thing as open ended liability.
Click to expand...
That was probably a poor choice of words on my part - I meant it more in terms of an insurance company putting themselves on risk for someone doing something that they a) could have avoided doing in the first place, and b) could have mitigated given that they had.
 
I wonder if there's an excess on this insurance of hers... If so, I hope she went for a high excess in order to keep the premium costs down (in the mistaken belief she would win a libel trial) :D
 
ffsear said:
Have worked in insurance for 12 years. ACII qualified.
Click to expand...
Please stop raining on our parade though. We're all hoping Hopkins will have to pay in full and it will all but destroy her. In these very dark and depressing times, allow us to have a ray of sunshine.
 
ffsear said:
Have worked in insurance for 12 years. ACII qualified.
Click to expand...

Having worked in Broadcasting, TV News, Current Affairs and a variety of other kinds of media, I've never once encountered the kind of liability insurance you're talking about, but I know plenty of times were if it was available it would have been taken and used.
 
8den said:
None of them cover the kind of libel or defamation we're talking about.
Click to expand...
I just Googled "defamation insurance" and they were the first results. It's very well known and has been a thing for as long as I can remember.

What kind of defamation are we talking about then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

likesfish
katy hopkins fails at tweeting
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
maomao
maomao
Back
Top Bottom