LIPS / API CLAIM DENIED
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions for David
Hello Everyone.
This is David with API. I’m new to this, but I’ve been with EK for over 10 years. If you ever have any questions, concerns, or want clarification on anything (rumour or otherwise) you’ve read or heard about API, feel free to PM me, or just ask me here. I’ll do my best to answer quickly and accurately. Thank you.
This is David with API. I’m new to this, but I’ve been with EK for over 10 years. If you ever have any questions, concerns, or want clarification on anything (rumour or otherwise) you’ve read or heard about API, feel free to PM me, or just ask me here. I’ll do my best to answer quickly and accurately. Thank you.
Hello David, your answers to the questions below in utmost good faith are required:
as an aide memoir
The Doctrine Of Utmost Good Faith, also known as uberrimae fidei, is the minimum standard requiring transacting parties to act honestly and not mislead or withhold critical information from one another. The doctrine of utmost good faith applies to many everyday financial transactions and is one of the most fundamental doctrines in insurance law.
1. Is it true that Aircrew Protection International are about to attempt to defend a major lawsuit in the Channel Islands using the pilot fund to finance same ?
2 .How much is the plaintiffs claim against the API fund ?
3.How much will the defense of the lawsuit cost the pilot fund ?
4 What if any are the statute of limitations on spending limits Sovereign Trust place on decisions made by the API board with regard to legal expenditure defending Harvey Watt & Co opinions when those opinions are legally challenged ?
5.Who exactly are the registered Owners/ managers/ shareholders listed under “private” in the aircrew protection international British Virgin Islands limited company incorporation /registration documentation in BVI as registered by agent Sovereign Corporate (BVI) Limited ? Stephen Hare as Sovereign API Trustee manager holds a Fiduciary duty of utmost good faith. Why are the identities of the “private” owners of the fund in The British Virgin Islands being withheld ?
6.Is PD "superman “ really “tiredofbeingtired” and “toilet flush”and just pretending to be a pilot with sub grade 4 aviation English ?
7.Have the “founding members” or “consultants” of aircrew protection international ever intervened post claim submission in any process or decision on process involving interaction and communication /correspondence between Harvey Watt & Co, the doctors providing opinions for Harvey Watt & Co and Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited so as to influence decision making or choice course of action ?
8.Why is there no appeals procedure in place in cases where a pilot has his/her claim denied based on a API-Sovereign contracted Harvey Watt & Co doctor (s) opinion (as so many pilots recently have) where the pilot after obtaining and presenting expert and scientifically proven medical evidence that totally disproves the Harvey Watt & Co contracted doctors opinions to deny must resort to a lawsuit against Sovereign API to obtain justice ?
9.Do the aircrew protection international board have any medico- legal- financial qualifications whatsoever and if they do what are they?
10.Exactly how many individual pilots have current lawsuits against API /Sovereign Guernsey Limited ?
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 3rd Mar 2018 at 21:31.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: i'm in the parking lot
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except for #6. I couldn't give a toss about.... It was all going so well, but personal attacks simply weaken your argument and credibility.
I, too am interested in the reply
I, too am interested in the reply
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Dubai
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Thunderbird. Just back from a layover. Thanks for your questions.
1. Do you mean the API Trust in Guernsey? There is a legal proceeding involving the Trust (which makes the decisions for claims benefits) but you'd have to ask them directly. I can provide you with their contact info, if you'd like.
2. & 3. You will have to ask the Trust. We, the consultants, are not involved. It's just the cost of doing business. The fund is used for everything needed to support our members. We have money coming in and money going out. It's a non-profit, mutual benefit fund.
4. I don't understand what you're asking with this question. Please rephrase it and I'll be happy to try and answer it.
5. Which document are you referring to? Please present the document and I'll be happy to try and answer those questions.
6. I have put myself out here on this forum, as who I am, to help answer questions about API, not to engage in other antics. I don't know who anyone is on this forum, I would have no way of knowing. And I don't care. Please keep it professional and respectful when you refer to any of the people I work with or our members, or I won't answer your questions.
7. I'll explain how this works in a way we can all relate. Harvey Watt is Medlink (or now it's Ground Medical Support). The Trust is the Captain. Harvey Watt (Medlink) gathers medical facts and information sent to them by the member (the passenger). They then come up with a recommendation to the Trust (The Captain). We, the API consultants, are the FO, following along (or we are SATCOM, helping facilitate communications between the member, Harvey Watt and the Trust). But, to be clear, it's the Trust's (like the Captain's) decision by law based on legal guidelines and it's their responsibility to make the correct decision (just like us Captain's). All we can do (us "FOs", or Harvey Watt & Co.) is provide the best input we can, but we do not make the final decision. And we wouldn't want to. It's not our area of expertise, it's the Trust's. That's why the system has been set up the way it has.
8. There is an appeals process. In regards to the pilots "...who've so many have recently had their claims denied...". Which pilots are you referring to? If you reference the "Claims" section on our website, you'll see that since inception, 30 claims have been approved (including 2 in the past month) and only 5 denied in the 11-year history of the plan. 25 of those claims are still active and the members are receiving monthly benefits and 5 claims have expired with the member reaching the term of the benefit. There was one claim denied in 2016 and one in 2017.
9. I only know my qualifications, not everyone else's. We hire professionals with professional credentials, such as Harvey Watt & Co. for expert medical advice, Hamdan Al Harmi & Associates as our attorneys, Mondial and Takaud for investment guidance, and Sovereign Trust to make final independent, legally regulated decisions on claims. We're just pilots, which is why we hire experts in these fields.
10. There is 1 legal proceeding involving the Trust from 1 former member whose claim was denied due to a pre-existing condition. See answers 1, 2, and 3.
1. Do you mean the API Trust in Guernsey? There is a legal proceeding involving the Trust (which makes the decisions for claims benefits) but you'd have to ask them directly. I can provide you with their contact info, if you'd like.
2. & 3. You will have to ask the Trust. We, the consultants, are not involved. It's just the cost of doing business. The fund is used for everything needed to support our members. We have money coming in and money going out. It's a non-profit, mutual benefit fund.
4. I don't understand what you're asking with this question. Please rephrase it and I'll be happy to try and answer it.
5. Which document are you referring to? Please present the document and I'll be happy to try and answer those questions.
6. I have put myself out here on this forum, as who I am, to help answer questions about API, not to engage in other antics. I don't know who anyone is on this forum, I would have no way of knowing. And I don't care. Please keep it professional and respectful when you refer to any of the people I work with or our members, or I won't answer your questions.
7. I'll explain how this works in a way we can all relate. Harvey Watt is Medlink (or now it's Ground Medical Support). The Trust is the Captain. Harvey Watt (Medlink) gathers medical facts and information sent to them by the member (the passenger). They then come up with a recommendation to the Trust (The Captain). We, the API consultants, are the FO, following along (or we are SATCOM, helping facilitate communications between the member, Harvey Watt and the Trust). But, to be clear, it's the Trust's (like the Captain's) decision by law based on legal guidelines and it's their responsibility to make the correct decision (just like us Captain's). All we can do (us "FOs", or Harvey Watt & Co.) is provide the best input we can, but we do not make the final decision. And we wouldn't want to. It's not our area of expertise, it's the Trust's. That's why the system has been set up the way it has.
8. There is an appeals process. In regards to the pilots "...who've so many have recently had their claims denied...". Which pilots are you referring to? If you reference the "Claims" section on our website, you'll see that since inception, 30 claims have been approved (including 2 in the past month) and only 5 denied in the 11-year history of the plan. 25 of those claims are still active and the members are receiving monthly benefits and 5 claims have expired with the member reaching the term of the benefit. There was one claim denied in 2016 and one in 2017.
9. I only know my qualifications, not everyone else's. We hire professionals with professional credentials, such as Harvey Watt & Co. for expert medical advice, Hamdan Al Harmi & Associates as our attorneys, Mondial and Takaud for investment guidance, and Sovereign Trust to make final independent, legally regulated decisions on claims. We're just pilots, which is why we hire experts in these fields.
10. There is 1 legal proceeding involving the Trust from 1 former member whose claim was denied due to a pre-existing condition. See answers 1, 2, and 3.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So to paraphrase your answers Dave
1.ask someone else
2 & 3.ask someone else
4. I don’t understand you.
5. I don’t understand what document you are talking about
6. I don’t understand your question
7. I will avoid the question
8. there is an appeals process(really where ?)
9. none
10.one
And you required a lawyer to help you provide the response above ?
Hopefully the above paraphrasing of Dave’s answers will provide an insight to current beneficiaries and members alike how the fund ended up in a position where members money is heading for a serious and needless squandering.
To put that squandering in perspective and using conservative estimate, a single monthly members contribution to the fund would barely finance 6 minutes of legal consultation at this level.
Professional services at Barrister level can run at 81000 AED (180 members monthly contributions) an hour.
Most multinational corporations would baulk at the prospect of risking such a significant percentage of their capital on one court action and for this reason alone prefer to settle out of court.
How can squandering money that legally belongs to active beneficiaries and is contributed to from monthly members premiums be acting in utmost good faith and in the best interests of the beneficiaries?
Where you request I will provide you with simplified (less legal) English to assist you provide comprehensive answers members need from you on questions 4 5 7 8 and 10.
Meantime I’m sure members would require from you the contact details for Sovereign Trust (Guernsey) Limited preferably including the direct e mail address and telephone number for Trust Manager Stephen Hare to answer and clarify on record, answers to questions 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 and 10.
1.ask someone else
2 & 3.ask someone else
4. I don’t understand you.
5. I don’t understand what document you are talking about
6. I don’t understand your question
7. I will avoid the question
8. there is an appeals process(really where ?)
9. none
10.one
And you required a lawyer to help you provide the response above ?
Hopefully the above paraphrasing of Dave’s answers will provide an insight to current beneficiaries and members alike how the fund ended up in a position where members money is heading for a serious and needless squandering.
To put that squandering in perspective and using conservative estimate, a single monthly members contribution to the fund would barely finance 6 minutes of legal consultation at this level.
Professional services at Barrister level can run at 81000 AED (180 members monthly contributions) an hour.
Most multinational corporations would baulk at the prospect of risking such a significant percentage of their capital on one court action and for this reason alone prefer to settle out of court.
How can squandering money that legally belongs to active beneficiaries and is contributed to from monthly members premiums be acting in utmost good faith and in the best interests of the beneficiaries?
Where you request I will provide you with simplified (less legal) English to assist you provide comprehensive answers members need from you on questions 4 5 7 8 and 10.
Meantime I’m sure members would require from you the contact details for Sovereign Trust (Guernsey) Limited preferably including the direct e mail address and telephone number for Trust Manager Stephen Hare to answer and clarify on record, answers to questions 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 and 10.
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 6th Mar 2018 at 21:02.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions for Dave with API ( reframed ).
1. Is it true that Aircrew Protection International are about to attempt to defend a major lawsuit in the Channel Islands using the pilot fund to finance same ?
Members are awaiting your post providing contact details for Sovereign Trust(Guernsey) Limited preferably including the direct
e mail address and telephone number for Trust Manager Stephen Hare.
2.How much is the plaintiffs claim against the API fund ?
as in question 1 above.
3. How much will the defense of the lawsuit cost the pilot fund ?
as in question 1 above.
4. How much as a percentage of the fund can Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited legally spend on fighting lawsuits arising from decisions made by Trust manager Stephen Hare and still be judged as acting in utmost good faith and acting in the best interests of the current Beneficiaries ?
5. Refer to post #194 page 10 of this thread and watch and listen to the narrative in the video. The question is What is the identity of the registered Owners/ managers/ shareholders listed under “private” in the aircrew protection international British Virgin Islands limited company incorporation document and why was this information withheld on Registration ?
6. (The original question has been replaced with a more pertinent one.).
Referring to the plan rules 5.9-5.11 inclusive below, will members be provided with three months notice of reduction of benefit due legal expenses
incurred by the Trust ?
5.9 Benefits payable under the Plan to members cannot exceed the vailue of the assets held in the Plan at any time.
5.10 If the balance of the funds becomes insufficient to pay the claimants as per Section 6, then the income of the fund shall be distributed to the claimants to the maximum extent possible on a pro-rata basis as determined by the Directors.
5.11 Under certain unlikely conditions, (for example a sudden, massive increase in the number of claims due the same tragedy ie. a large group of pilots travelling together) the Plan allows for monthly payments to claimants to be reduced, at the discretion of the Directors. This would only be towards ensuring viability of the Plan. In the unlikely event this facility of the Rules is required, members and claimants will be provided with three months' written notice.
API – 4 December 2017
Page 6 of 27.
Below is a direct quote from
The API 2017 annual summary
"We also ask you, the member, if you can suggest anything we might have missed as a way to increase membership beyond word-of-mouth? Perhaps you have ideas, seen from the outside, that we haven’t considered. It is in every member’s benefit to increase the number of contribution-paying members to keep the mutual-benefit fund growing!”
end of quote
Fact
The API 2017 annual summary states that the number of members (those contributing to the funds and referred to you david as “money going in”) stands at 1546.
Basic mathematics here
1546 members each contributing 450 AED a month = 695700 AED a month “coming in”
25 Current beneficiaries each receiving 25000 AED a month = 625000 AED “going out”
This would leave 70700 AED a month remaining before expenses are deducted.
Using financial data from the API 2017 annual summary the following “expenses” are incurred by the fund each month :
Fuller Admin and Fuller Accounting Services:Accounting and data entry from service provider
210000 AED /12 = 17500 AED (money going out)
Banking /Financial Services Dubai & Guernsey (Sovereign Trust)
211088.56 AED/12 = 17590.71 AED (money going out)
Corporate Contracts ( Oman Insurance,Harvey Watt & Co USA , Website management)
1,221,142.27/12 AED/12=101761.85 AED (money going out )
Employee costs (Consultants, admin)
300413 AED /12= 25034 AED (money going out)
Conclusion:
Funds available balance each month
70700 AED
less monthly expenses
70700 AED - 17500 - 17590.71 - 101761.85 - 25034= - 91186.56 AED a month in the negative.
That’s a monthly deficit (loss to the fund ) of -91186.56 AED
(202 individual pilot monthly contributions)
an annual deficit (loss to the fund ) of - 1,094,238.72 AED
(2,431.64 individual pilot monthly contributions)
members can cross check the above figures on the aircrewprotection.org website
under the NEWS tab
https://www.aircrewprotection.org/news/1
David
have the pilot consultants considered the annual running cost or what you refer to as “just the cost of doing business" already running at 1942643.83 AED (4316.98 individual pilot monthly contributions ) a year indicates aircrewprotection international cannot afford to finance a pending colossal legal drain from the fund.
With audited accounts as published in the API annual summary 2017 indicating running costs are on a monthly deficit, an astute observer as seen from inside or out could not miss the fact that any additional legal costs incurred in defending any lawsuit would have to be drawn from the source fund (capital) held in The API Trust and managed by Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited and sanctioned by Trust manager Stephen Hare.
7. A member of the plan loses his license on medical grounds and puts in a claim to API.
The question is have the “founding members” or “consultants” of aircrew protection international ever intervened in any process or decision on process involving interaction /correspondence between Harvey Watt & Co, the doctors providing opinions for Harvey Watt & Co and Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited so as to influence decisions that effected the potential or actual outcome of that claim being settled or denied?
8. Why is there no appeals procedure in existence ? You say there is :to date 040318 where is it documented in the rules of LIPS, API or anywhere ?
10.Exactly how many individual pilots have current lawsuits against API /Sovereign Guernsey Limited ?
You answered one .
Fact
The API 2017 summary states:
“There are several, ongoing legal disputes from claimants regarding their
entitlements which also increases the legal costs of the Trust’s attorneys....”.
So exactly how many individual pilots have current lawsuits against API / Sovereign Trust Guernsey
Limited ?
1. Is it true that Aircrew Protection International are about to attempt to defend a major lawsuit in the Channel Islands using the pilot fund to finance same ?
Members are awaiting your post providing contact details for Sovereign Trust(Guernsey) Limited preferably including the direct
e mail address and telephone number for Trust Manager Stephen Hare.
2.How much is the plaintiffs claim against the API fund ?
as in question 1 above.
3. How much will the defense of the lawsuit cost the pilot fund ?
as in question 1 above.
4. How much as a percentage of the fund can Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited legally spend on fighting lawsuits arising from decisions made by Trust manager Stephen Hare and still be judged as acting in utmost good faith and acting in the best interests of the current Beneficiaries ?
5. Refer to post #194 page 10 of this thread and watch and listen to the narrative in the video. The question is What is the identity of the registered Owners/ managers/ shareholders listed under “private” in the aircrew protection international British Virgin Islands limited company incorporation document and why was this information withheld on Registration ?
6. (The original question has been replaced with a more pertinent one.).
Referring to the plan rules 5.9-5.11 inclusive below, will members be provided with three months notice of reduction of benefit due legal expenses
incurred by the Trust ?
5.9 Benefits payable under the Plan to members cannot exceed the vailue of the assets held in the Plan at any time.
5.10 If the balance of the funds becomes insufficient to pay the claimants as per Section 6, then the income of the fund shall be distributed to the claimants to the maximum extent possible on a pro-rata basis as determined by the Directors.
5.11 Under certain unlikely conditions, (for example a sudden, massive increase in the number of claims due the same tragedy ie. a large group of pilots travelling together) the Plan allows for monthly payments to claimants to be reduced, at the discretion of the Directors. This would only be towards ensuring viability of the Plan. In the unlikely event this facility of the Rules is required, members and claimants will be provided with three months' written notice.
API – 4 December 2017
Page 6 of 27.
Below is a direct quote from
The API 2017 annual summary
"We also ask you, the member, if you can suggest anything we might have missed as a way to increase membership beyond word-of-mouth? Perhaps you have ideas, seen from the outside, that we haven’t considered. It is in every member’s benefit to increase the number of contribution-paying members to keep the mutual-benefit fund growing!”
end of quote
Fact
The API 2017 annual summary states that the number of members (those contributing to the funds and referred to you david as “money going in”) stands at 1546.
Basic mathematics here
1546 members each contributing 450 AED a month = 695700 AED a month “coming in”
25 Current beneficiaries each receiving 25000 AED a month = 625000 AED “going out”
This would leave 70700 AED a month remaining before expenses are deducted.
Using financial data from the API 2017 annual summary the following “expenses” are incurred by the fund each month :
Fuller Admin and Fuller Accounting Services:Accounting and data entry from service provider
210000 AED /12 = 17500 AED (money going out)
Banking /Financial Services Dubai & Guernsey (Sovereign Trust)
211088.56 AED/12 = 17590.71 AED (money going out)
Corporate Contracts ( Oman Insurance,Harvey Watt & Co USA , Website management)
1,221,142.27/12 AED/12=101761.85 AED (money going out )
Employee costs (Consultants, admin)
300413 AED /12= 25034 AED (money going out)
Conclusion:
Funds available balance each month
70700 AED
less monthly expenses
70700 AED - 17500 - 17590.71 - 101761.85 - 25034= - 91186.56 AED a month in the negative.
That’s a monthly deficit (loss to the fund ) of -91186.56 AED
(202 individual pilot monthly contributions)
an annual deficit (loss to the fund ) of - 1,094,238.72 AED
(2,431.64 individual pilot monthly contributions)
members can cross check the above figures on the aircrewprotection.org website
under the NEWS tab
https://www.aircrewprotection.org/news/1
David
have the pilot consultants considered the annual running cost or what you refer to as “just the cost of doing business" already running at 1942643.83 AED (4316.98 individual pilot monthly contributions ) a year indicates aircrewprotection international cannot afford to finance a pending colossal legal drain from the fund.
With audited accounts as published in the API annual summary 2017 indicating running costs are on a monthly deficit, an astute observer as seen from inside or out could not miss the fact that any additional legal costs incurred in defending any lawsuit would have to be drawn from the source fund (capital) held in The API Trust and managed by Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited and sanctioned by Trust manager Stephen Hare.
7. A member of the plan loses his license on medical grounds and puts in a claim to API.
The question is have the “founding members” or “consultants” of aircrew protection international ever intervened in any process or decision on process involving interaction /correspondence between Harvey Watt & Co, the doctors providing opinions for Harvey Watt & Co and Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited so as to influence decisions that effected the potential or actual outcome of that claim being settled or denied?
8. Why is there no appeals procedure in existence ? You say there is :to date 040318 where is it documented in the rules of LIPS, API or anywhere ?
10.Exactly how many individual pilots have current lawsuits against API /Sovereign Guernsey Limited ?
You answered one .
Fact
The API 2017 summary states:
“There are several, ongoing legal disputes from claimants regarding their
entitlements which also increases the legal costs of the Trust’s attorneys....”.
So exactly how many individual pilots have current lawsuits against API / Sovereign Trust Guernsey
Limited ?
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 7th Mar 2018 at 00:06.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just having a read through the new rules, can David please explain to me how and I quote directly,
13.3.8 injury incurred as a result of deliberate exposure by the member to Exceptional
Danger (except in an attempt to save human life); this does don’t apply to extreme
sports. so Scuba Diving, Skiing and Sky Diving etc are covered, yet and again I quote directly,
SELF-REPORTED DISABILITIES: A disability characterized by manifestations that are
not verifiable or conclusive using tests or procedures accepted as standard medical
practice OR are historically limiting from an aviation regulatory point-of-view versus a
medically or life-limiting point-of-view OR include (but are not limited to) one or more of
the following: chronic fatigue, any allergy or sensitivity to chemicals or the environment,
chronic pain conditions, obstructive sleep apnea, insomnia, vertigo, dizziness, nausea,
loss of consciousness, headache, pain, Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms
(MUPS), Meniere’s Disease, Migraines, Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsy, Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrome, Systemic
Exertion Intolerance Disease (SEID), fatigue, loss of energy, stiffness, soreness, ringing
in the ears, numbness, itching, sudden or rapid or unexplained loss of hearing, sudden
or rapid or unexplained loss of visual acuity or colour blindness.
Which you have no control over are not, the exclusion list seems to get longer all the time.
The cynic in me would guess that the directors are all fans of "Extreme Sports" where you take a calculated risk of permanent injury, whilst many of the diseases can be proven medically, which are not lifestyle choices are they ! And surely this is what you are paying the monthly fees to protect yourself and your family against.
13.3.8 injury incurred as a result of deliberate exposure by the member to Exceptional
Danger (except in an attempt to save human life); this does don’t apply to extreme
sports. so Scuba Diving, Skiing and Sky Diving etc are covered, yet and again I quote directly,
SELF-REPORTED DISABILITIES: A disability characterized by manifestations that are
not verifiable or conclusive using tests or procedures accepted as standard medical
practice OR are historically limiting from an aviation regulatory point-of-view versus a
medically or life-limiting point-of-view OR include (but are not limited to) one or more of
the following: chronic fatigue, any allergy or sensitivity to chemicals or the environment,
chronic pain conditions, obstructive sleep apnea, insomnia, vertigo, dizziness, nausea,
loss of consciousness, headache, pain, Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms
(MUPS), Meniere’s Disease, Migraines, Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsy, Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrome, Systemic
Exertion Intolerance Disease (SEID), fatigue, loss of energy, stiffness, soreness, ringing
in the ears, numbness, itching, sudden or rapid or unexplained loss of hearing, sudden
or rapid or unexplained loss of visual acuity or colour blindness.
Which you have no control over are not, the exclusion list seems to get longer all the time.
The cynic in me would guess that the directors are all fans of "Extreme Sports" where you take a calculated risk of permanent injury, whilst many of the diseases can be proven medically, which are not lifestyle choices are they ! And surely this is what you are paying the monthly fees to protect yourself and your family against.
Last edited by gardenshed; 5th Mar 2018 at 19:53.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello David with API : the members are waiting
Hello Thunderbird. Thanks for your questions.
1. Do you mean the API Trust in Guernsey? There is a legal proceeding involving the Trust (which makes the decisions for claims benefits) but you'd have to ask them directly. I can provide you with their contact info, if you'd like.
10. There is 1 legal proceeding involving the Trust from 1 former member whose claim was denied due to a pre-existing condition. See answers 1, 2, and 3.
1. Do you mean the API Trust in Guernsey? There is a legal proceeding involving the Trust (which makes the decisions for claims benefits) but you'd have to ask them directly. I can provide you with their contact info, if you'd like.
10. There is 1 legal proceeding involving the Trust from 1 former member whose claim was denied due to a pre-existing condition. See answers 1, 2, and 3.
The members are waiting for the contact details for a Mr Stephen Hare,API Trust Manager at Sovereign Trust (Guernsey) Limited.
In seeking answers to questions 1 2 and 3 in post #209 we require the following for Stephen Hare
Direct e mail address
Direct mobile and landline telephone number
current beneficiaries and members also look forward with anticipation to answers to the questions 4 5 6 7 8 and 10 in post #209 above.
Thank you
Thunderbirds54321 on behalf of the beneficiaries and contributing members of the api scheme.
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 6th Mar 2018 at 21:05.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Travelling East
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have a beef with API, deal with it.
You are very quick to sprout a whole pile of accusations, if you have the details, pass them on, but if not, then stop trying to bully API over the internet.
This thread is pages of you and your alter ego being obnoxious and demanding, with no substance. From the outside, it looks like you have had a claim turned down, and now, like a kid in the playground, are having a serious dummy-spitting episode.
If you do have a valid claim, then take it up with them, this "internet shaming" is childish and doing nothing to advance your cause.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who made you our representative?
You have a beef with API, deal with it.
You are very quick to sprout a whole pile of accusations, if you have the details, pass them on, but if not, then stop trying to bully API over the internet.
This thread is pages of you and your alter ego being obnoxious and demanding, with no substance. From the outside, it looks like you have had a claim turned down, and now, like a kid in the playground, are having a serious dummy-spitting episode.
If you do have a valid claim, then take it up with them, this "internet shaming" is childish and doing nothing to advance your cause.
You have a beef with API, deal with it.
You are very quick to sprout a whole pile of accusations, if you have the details, pass them on, but if not, then stop trying to bully API over the internet.
This thread is pages of you and your alter ego being obnoxious and demanding, with no substance. From the outside, it looks like you have had a claim turned down, and now, like a kid in the playground, are having a serious dummy-spitting episode.
If you do have a valid claim, then take it up with them, this "internet shaming" is childish and doing nothing to advance your cause.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyvan & Fliion,
If you bothered to read the recent posts, you would see that the accusations if you want to call them that are backed by fact.
One can only hope that neither of you ever have to rely on having to make a claim on your LIPS/API Protection scheme, as if you do, you might be in for a nasty shock, unless of course that the reason that your permanent loss of a medical was for "Extreme Sports".
Do you really think that the person involved hasn't been dealing with the API behind the scenes , and only posting here on Pprune.
You don't get down to the point of a imminent UK High Court hearing without substantial evidence to back up a case.
If you bothered to read the recent posts, you would see that the accusations if you want to call them that are backed by fact.
One can only hope that neither of you ever have to rely on having to make a claim on your LIPS/API Protection scheme, as if you do, you might be in for a nasty shock, unless of course that the reason that your permanent loss of a medical was for "Extreme Sports".
Do you really think that the person involved hasn't been dealing with the API behind the scenes , and only posting here on Pprune.
You don't get down to the point of a imminent UK High Court hearing without substantial evidence to back up a case.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Travelling East
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gardenshed,
I have a friend currently receiving the API payout, and a couple who did receive it, so I do know that it does work for those with a valid claim, I am also not saying that any other claim is or is not valid.
What I do object to is this incessant, aggressive posting when there is a case ready to go before the courts!
If it is going to the High Court, then he does not need public opinion on his side. If he has questions, let his legal team ask them. Once the answer is given in court, it becomes a matter of public record and then he can flood the internet as much as he likes, but until then, pushing innuendo and fluff at us just about every day is merely serving to make us hope for a resolution, either way, just to shut him up!
I am surprised his lawyers have not advised him to keep this off social media, once there is a court action the matter is sub-judice and anything he says now could jeopardise his case.
Either way, please, for now, just shut up and let the law take it's course. Nobody cares anymore, you have lost any support you might have had by not knowing when to be quiet!
I have a friend currently receiving the API payout, and a couple who did receive it, so I do know that it does work for those with a valid claim, I am also not saying that any other claim is or is not valid.
What I do object to is this incessant, aggressive posting when there is a case ready to go before the courts!
If it is going to the High Court, then he does not need public opinion on his side. If he has questions, let his legal team ask them. Once the answer is given in court, it becomes a matter of public record and then he can flood the internet as much as he likes, but until then, pushing innuendo and fluff at us just about every day is merely serving to make us hope for a resolution, either way, just to shut him up!
I am surprised his lawyers have not advised him to keep this off social media, once there is a court action the matter is sub-judice and anything he says now could jeopardise his case.
Either way, please, for now, just shut up and let the law take it's course. Nobody cares anymore, you have lost any support you might have had by not knowing when to be quiet!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyvan,
The Law will take its course no doubt.
But do you really think that all the members know exactly what is going on behind the scenes after they have paid over their dues, I didn't thats for sure, I am far more informed now.
Some of the information that is up on this site is not on the API website but it is documented, some of it is, and all has been published.
When one has documented medical evidence from a World Leader in his field Consultant, who has no axe to grind either why, rejected by a nameless face in Harvey Watt without any right of appeal one has to ask questions, and this is a public forum.
LIPS was set up with the best of intentions, but has now become a business no more no less, like you I had a friend who claimed under the "Old Lips" and was covered until he sadly died. I also have a friend who has lost his medical and has been paid out by EK, who API have rejected his claim via Harvey Watt, using the old insurance chestnut of Preexisting,it's a shame he didn't loose his medical while engaging in an extreme sport, rather than down to a medical condition of which he has no control over, and can be proven medically, but now seems to fall under the new exclusions category that I've copied off the API website and posted.
If you look at the financials that are on the API Website again many questions as to why so much money is being spent on anything other than pilots, and again one has to wonder why certain questions remain unanaswered, for example the need for a Tax Haven in the BVI which is notorious for secrecy, when Guernsey is also a Tax Haven and seeing that Sovereign seem to be based there, wouldn't that of made more sense.
As I said PpruNe is a public forum and it is a free society, if you are tired of reading this stuff, the simple answer is don't, bury your head in the sand if you wish, makes zero difference to me, just be aware that it costs a huge amount of money to fight a High court case,how are the API intending to finance that, also if they loose where is that money coming from ? If I was a claimant I would be asking more questions as to how my future payments are still going to be made.
The Law will take its course no doubt.
But do you really think that all the members know exactly what is going on behind the scenes after they have paid over their dues, I didn't thats for sure, I am far more informed now.
Some of the information that is up on this site is not on the API website but it is documented, some of it is, and all has been published.
When one has documented medical evidence from a World Leader in his field Consultant, who has no axe to grind either why, rejected by a nameless face in Harvey Watt without any right of appeal one has to ask questions, and this is a public forum.
LIPS was set up with the best of intentions, but has now become a business no more no less, like you I had a friend who claimed under the "Old Lips" and was covered until he sadly died. I also have a friend who has lost his medical and has been paid out by EK, who API have rejected his claim via Harvey Watt, using the old insurance chestnut of Preexisting,it's a shame he didn't loose his medical while engaging in an extreme sport, rather than down to a medical condition of which he has no control over, and can be proven medically, but now seems to fall under the new exclusions category that I've copied off the API website and posted.
If you look at the financials that are on the API Website again many questions as to why so much money is being spent on anything other than pilots, and again one has to wonder why certain questions remain unanaswered, for example the need for a Tax Haven in the BVI which is notorious for secrecy, when Guernsey is also a Tax Haven and seeing that Sovereign seem to be based there, wouldn't that of made more sense.
As I said PpruNe is a public forum and it is a free society, if you are tired of reading this stuff, the simple answer is don't, bury your head in the sand if you wish, makes zero difference to me, just be aware that it costs a huge amount of money to fight a High court case,how are the API intending to finance that, also if they loose where is that money coming from ? If I was a claimant I would be asking more questions as to how my future payments are still going to be made.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gardenshed,
I have a friend currently receiving the API payout, and a couple who did receive it, so I do know that it does work for those with a valid claim, I am also not saying that any other claim is or is not valid.
What I do object to is this incessant, aggressive posting when there is a case ready to go before the courts!
If it is going to the High Court, then he does not need public opinion on his side. If he has questions, let his legal team ask them. Once the answer is given in court, it becomes a matter of public record and then he can flood the internet as much as he likes, but until then, pushing innuendo and fluff at us just about every day is merely serving to make us hope for a resolution, either way, just to shut him up!
I am surprised his lawyers have not advised him to keep this off social media, once there is a court action the matter is sub-judice and anything he says now could jeopardise his case.
Either way, please, for now, just shut up and let the law take it's course. Nobody cares anymore, you have lost any support you might have had by not knowing when to be quiet!
I have a friend currently receiving the API payout, and a couple who did receive it, so I do know that it does work for those with a valid claim, I am also not saying that any other claim is or is not valid.
What I do object to is this incessant, aggressive posting when there is a case ready to go before the courts!
If it is going to the High Court, then he does not need public opinion on his side. If he has questions, let his legal team ask them. Once the answer is given in court, it becomes a matter of public record and then he can flood the internet as much as he likes, but until then, pushing innuendo and fluff at us just about every day is merely serving to make us hope for a resolution, either way, just to shut him up!
I am surprised his lawyers have not advised him to keep this off social media, once there is a court action the matter is sub-judice and anything he says now could jeopardise his case.
Either way, please, for now, just shut up and let the law take it's course. Nobody cares anymore, you have lost any support you might have had by not knowing when to be quiet!
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions for David with API and the need for answers
David from API
kindly answer the re framed questions post #209 in response to your request for questions in post #203, or let members of the plan know if you are unable to answer the questions.
The questions concern financial account data published by API on the
aircrewprotection.org website and focus on concerns arising from the data they contain.
David you offered in post #207 to provide the contact details of the API Trust fund at Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited.
Stephen Hare is identified as The API Trust Fund Manager, again in information published on the API website here.
https://www.aircrewprotection.org/in...-the-api-trust
This will allow members to pose questions to Stephen Hare that you stated you were unable to answer.
thank you
Thunderbirds54321
kindly answer the re framed questions post #209 in response to your request for questions in post #203, or let members of the plan know if you are unable to answer the questions.
The questions concern financial account data published by API on the
aircrewprotection.org website and focus on concerns arising from the data they contain.
David you offered in post #207 to provide the contact details of the API Trust fund at Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited.
Stephen Hare is identified as The API Trust Fund Manager, again in information published on the API website here.
https://www.aircrewprotection.org/in...-the-api-trust
This will allow members to pose questions to Stephen Hare that you stated you were unable to answer.
thank you
Thunderbirds54321
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 7th Mar 2018 at 09:35.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fliion,
Same advice I offered to Skyvan.
This is a public forum still, here on PpruNe, if it bores you simple thing is do not read it, stay away etc.
I am more than happy to enter into constructive Adult conversation if that is what you wish though.
Toodles.
Same advice I offered to Skyvan.
This is a public forum still, here on PpruNe, if it bores you simple thing is do not read it, stay away etc.
I am more than happy to enter into constructive Adult conversation if that is what you wish though.
Toodles.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn’t bore me. I agree with Skyvans thoughts - and the way that this is being handled by you & Tbird.
It is a legally tricky business and you and I know their hands are tied and cannot litigate this on pprune- but you can because of your anonymity- and in effect are. The fact they they are not answering certain specifibv legal issues as pointed out by Dave is because they cannot.
If you two go unchecked - it makes the appearance that you hold the moral high ground because of no response - when in fact any first year law student will tell API - not to engage in the specifics on social media.
You and T bird use this fact against API - which to the casual observer might cause distrust and damage the financial health of API - which could hinder future pay outs to valid claims.
A healthy API is in the members best interests...and I just like to see a fair fight, which this is not for reasons above.
If Tbird et al didn’t engage is the petty hit job and name calling - he might have had people a bit more trusting of his position.
Dave has put himself out there and tried his professional best to post what he can.
You guys and the “Superman” name calling act - destroyed your credibility
It is a legally tricky business and you and I know their hands are tied and cannot litigate this on pprune- but you can because of your anonymity- and in effect are. The fact they they are not answering certain specifibv legal issues as pointed out by Dave is because they cannot.
If you two go unchecked - it makes the appearance that you hold the moral high ground because of no response - when in fact any first year law student will tell API - not to engage in the specifics on social media.
You and T bird use this fact against API - which to the casual observer might cause distrust and damage the financial health of API - which could hinder future pay outs to valid claims.
A healthy API is in the members best interests...and I just like to see a fair fight, which this is not for reasons above.
If Tbird et al didn’t engage is the petty hit job and name calling - he might have had people a bit more trusting of his position.
Dave has put himself out there and tried his professional best to post what he can.
You guys and the “Superman” name calling act - destroyed your credibility
Last edited by fliion; 7th Mar 2018 at 09:44.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Writing Cheques you cannot afford
Doesn’t bore me. I agree with Skyvans thoughts - and the way that this is being handled by you & Tbird.
It is a legally tricky business and you and I know their hands are tied and cannot litigate this on pprune- but you can because of your anonymity- and in effect are. The fact they they are not answering certain specifibv legal issues as pointed out by Dave is because they cannot.
If you two go unchecked - it makes the appearance that you hold the moral high ground because of no response - when in fact any first year law student will tell API - not to engage in the specifics on social media.
You and T bird use this fact against API - which to the casual observer might cause distrust and damage the financial health of API - which could hinder future pay outs to valid claims.
A healthy API is in the members best interests...and I just like to see a fair fight, which this is not for reasons above.
It is a legally tricky business and you and I know their hands are tied and cannot litigate this on pprune- but you can because of your anonymity- and in effect are. The fact they they are not answering certain specifibv legal issues as pointed out by Dave is because they cannot.
If you two go unchecked - it makes the appearance that you hold the moral high ground because of no response - when in fact any first year law student will tell API - not to engage in the specifics on social media.
You and T bird use this fact against API - which to the casual observer might cause distrust and damage the financial health of API - which could hinder future pay outs to valid claims.
A healthy API is in the members best interests...and I just like to see a fair fight, which this is not for reasons above.
Fliion
Certain behaviors from API have shown improvement because of deficiencies pointed out on this thread
-previously unannounced changes to core rules eg: the re written definitions of pre existing condition, addition of newly excluded medical conditions, and re affirmation of coverage for extreme sports are now given more specific mention in the info section on the API website.
-API now has a declared Emirates pilot acting as a consultant eg David who has offered to answer members questions.
-members are now provided with accurate identity information on who the managers now called consultants are.
- the role of consultants as facilitators has been defined and the ultimate responsibility for decisions and cosequences arising from those decisions rest with API Trust Manager Stephen Hare.
-with respect to this thread, facts as published by API are being hi lighted eg: the API annual summary 2017, open questions are being encouraged by David with API, and rumor is where possible given no quarter.
these improvements show promise.
Stephen Hare has a Fiduciary duty to provide answers to the questions and concerns beneficiaries and members present irrespective of the Trust’s legal position.
Thus the requirement the members are provided with an e mail address and phone number we can use to contact Stephen Hare directly, moving forward and before it is too late....... David?
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 8th Mar 2018 at 22:04.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Dubai
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Thunderbird. Thanks for your follow up questions. I’m going to just answer the third edit of your post as I can’t keep going back to gather information each time you re-edit the same post.
When I first answered your questions, I had not looked at any of the previous posts and I was a bit shocked by your anger, resentment towards API and personal aggressiveness towards me. A look back at previous posts now shows that you are constantly posting negative accusations and comments.
I came on this forum, by name, to help members, or potential members, with any questions or concerns regarding API. I certainly didn’t come on to be a punching bag for your crusade to satisfy whatever agenda you have. As its apparent to me that you are not a member this will be our final communication unless you care to go to our website and open a support ticket so we can verify your membership. We just received a satisfaction rating of 100% for February from our support desk platform for our ability to solve members’ issues in an expeditious manner so I’m sure we can solve yours quickly, too.
With all the above in mind, I’ll answer what I can though, again, pending something from you to validate your membership this’ll be the last time; I’m sure your issues with us will certainly not be solved on this thread.
1. We will be happy to provide an introduction to the Trustee on behalf of any of our members. Simply send a request to our member support on the website, we’ll verify your membership and that you are a beneficiary of the API Trust.
2, 3 and 4. As I stated before, we the Consultants are not involved. If a member wishes to inquire about any legal proceedings involving the Trust, they are welcome to contact the Trust. We will be happy to make an introduction.
5. I asked you to present the document. You’ve posted an edited .jpeg. I’m sure you’ll continue to look for a way to make everything we do look suspicious. You claim to be concerned and have anointed yourself as representing the API members. To be clear, the Trust represents the members.
6. Your question refers to expenses incurred by the Trust. Again, anything involving the Trust should be referred to the Trust. For the remainder of this section, you didn’t really ask a question. You stated some rules, did some math, made some comments, and cherry-picked what you thought was relevant. You did not consider the increase in new members signing up each week, the benefits we’re reaping from smart, conservative investing, and the refunds from OIC, just to name just a few.
7. I cannot answer for previous directors or consultants, most I’ve never even met. I’ve only been involved with three claims (all of which were successful) since I joined and they were straightforward and professional. I reject your assertion that anyone has done anything otherwise. We are working too hard to make this a great product for our members to have someone continually trying to discredit us with nothing more compelling than jpegs, YouTube videos, and accusations.
8. Until recently (last year) no one ever mentioned an appeal; when it came up we worked with all our people to write a formal process. The appeal process is with the Trust. We’ve asked that the Trust amend the Rules and we expect that to happen soon. The Trust has also given tentative approval for our members keeping their API cover when they resign from Emirates and move to another airline! That’s a huge benefit to the members and we hope to have more benefits announced very soon.
10. There is one legal proceeding involving the Trust, it may be taking place in a courthouse or it may be just lawyers talking. You’re the only one who has used the word “lawsuit”. Again, I reject your characterizations because it’s just you making accusations with no apparent foundation. In our 2017 summary, we did reference several ongoing disputes; anytime a member, or a member’s lawyer, contacts the Trust, we consider that a dispute. And each one costs money regardless of what the questions or contents might be.
When I first answered your questions, I had not looked at any of the previous posts and I was a bit shocked by your anger, resentment towards API and personal aggressiveness towards me. A look back at previous posts now shows that you are constantly posting negative accusations and comments.
I came on this forum, by name, to help members, or potential members, with any questions or concerns regarding API. I certainly didn’t come on to be a punching bag for your crusade to satisfy whatever agenda you have. As its apparent to me that you are not a member this will be our final communication unless you care to go to our website and open a support ticket so we can verify your membership. We just received a satisfaction rating of 100% for February from our support desk platform for our ability to solve members’ issues in an expeditious manner so I’m sure we can solve yours quickly, too.
With all the above in mind, I’ll answer what I can though, again, pending something from you to validate your membership this’ll be the last time; I’m sure your issues with us will certainly not be solved on this thread.
1. We will be happy to provide an introduction to the Trustee on behalf of any of our members. Simply send a request to our member support on the website, we’ll verify your membership and that you are a beneficiary of the API Trust.
2, 3 and 4. As I stated before, we the Consultants are not involved. If a member wishes to inquire about any legal proceedings involving the Trust, they are welcome to contact the Trust. We will be happy to make an introduction.
5. I asked you to present the document. You’ve posted an edited .jpeg. I’m sure you’ll continue to look for a way to make everything we do look suspicious. You claim to be concerned and have anointed yourself as representing the API members. To be clear, the Trust represents the members.
6. Your question refers to expenses incurred by the Trust. Again, anything involving the Trust should be referred to the Trust. For the remainder of this section, you didn’t really ask a question. You stated some rules, did some math, made some comments, and cherry-picked what you thought was relevant. You did not consider the increase in new members signing up each week, the benefits we’re reaping from smart, conservative investing, and the refunds from OIC, just to name just a few.
7. I cannot answer for previous directors or consultants, most I’ve never even met. I’ve only been involved with three claims (all of which were successful) since I joined and they were straightforward and professional. I reject your assertion that anyone has done anything otherwise. We are working too hard to make this a great product for our members to have someone continually trying to discredit us with nothing more compelling than jpegs, YouTube videos, and accusations.
8. Until recently (last year) no one ever mentioned an appeal; when it came up we worked with all our people to write a formal process. The appeal process is with the Trust. We’ve asked that the Trust amend the Rules and we expect that to happen soon. The Trust has also given tentative approval for our members keeping their API cover when they resign from Emirates and move to another airline! That’s a huge benefit to the members and we hope to have more benefits announced very soon.
10. There is one legal proceeding involving the Trust, it may be taking place in a courthouse or it may be just lawyers talking. You’re the only one who has used the word “lawsuit”. Again, I reject your characterizations because it’s just you making accusations with no apparent foundation. In our 2017 summary, we did reference several ongoing disputes; anytime a member, or a member’s lawyer, contacts the Trust, we consider that a dispute. And each one costs money regardless of what the questions or contents might be.