“A Tampa dentist or Dade City print shop with a dip in 2010 revenue may qualify even if the dip had nothing to do with the BP oil spill.” Tampa law firm to potential clients

WASHINGTON—Should an adult escort service have received $173,000 in compensation because of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill?

BP certainly doesn’t think so, and it is attempting to stop the payments, arguing companies have received “hundreds of millions of dollars” under a settlement agreement without proving the 2010 disaster in the Gulf of Mexico cost them business.

The 2012 settlement agreement is now in turmoil as the London-based oil giant wages an aggressive campaign in the courts and the news media.

See a photo gallery from the disaster

BP agreed to the deal under pressure as claims mounted from the oil rig explosion that killed 11 workers, led to the biggest environmental disaster in U.S. history and did major economic damage to businesses in the region.

When it signed the deal, BP expected a cost of about $7.8 billion (U.S.). But it soon became clear that payouts would swell. Now BP is in court arguing the claims administrator and the judge overseeing the settlement are misinterpreting the terms of the deal. The company is trying to persuade a federal appeals court to block payments to companies that can’t prove the spill caused their losses.

“BP has been ordered to pay hundreds of millions of dollars — soon likely to be billions — of fictitious and inflated losses,” the company argues.

Blaine LeCesne, a law professor at Loyola University in New Orleans, said BP was trying to back out of the settlement terms it had signed.

“It’s a mess. It’s a total mess,” he said.

The class-action settlement, which BP reached with private plaintiff’s lawyers, never said that companies must prove the spill directly caused their losses, LeCesne said.

That’s because the only way to prove such a thing is through a trial, he said. And going through trials in tens of thousands of cases would be long and expensive. Instead, he said, BP and the plaintiffs agreed to a formula where, if a business met the criteria, its loss was presumed to be a result of the 2010 spill.

The formula takes into account the business’s distance from the Gulf and compares revenue for certain months before and after the spill. Businesses in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and some counties on the west coast of Florida and in southeastern Texas are eligible to apply. The names of the businesses and the amounts they received are confidential, but some details have become public as a result of the battle between BP and the claims administrator.

Lawyers saw a shining opportunity in the broadness of the settlement terms. A Tampa, Fla., law firm declares to potential clients that “your business may be eligible for compensation even without a loss related to the spill.”

“A Tampa dentist or Dade City print shop with a dip in 2010 revenue may qualify even if the dip had nothing to do with the BP oil spill,” the firm trumpets.

A Tallahassee, Fla., law firm solicited potential clients with an advertisement that said, “Your losses don’t have to be directly traceable to the oil spill.”

BP is taking out full-page advertisements in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, alleging that more than $500 million has been paid in undeserving claims, some to businesses far from the Gulf and others with no real losses. BP is targeting claimants who range from celebrity chef Emeril Lagasse to a Florida RV park owner.

One advertisement complains an adult escort service received $173,000 with a claim based on sloppy tax returns.

“The IRS wouldn’t accept this claim,” BP said in the ad. “But the Gulf Settlement Program did.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

The New Orleans judge who oversees the claims process, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier, is defending the payouts. On Christmas Eve, he ruled against BP’s argument that businesses should have to show the spill caused their losses, writing that “would bring the claims administration process to a virtual standstill.” BP asked an appeals court to overrule him, but it upheld the decision.

BP said it wasn’t trying to back out of a deal, just to make sure it wasn’t bilked by fraudulent claims. BP said in a statement that this “was not the settlement the company agreed to. BP agreed to a settlement that would pay legitimate claims for real financial losses due to the spill, not fictitious losses based on cash receipts that do not reflect economic reality.”

Edward Sherman, a law professor at Tulane University in New Orleans who’s tracking the case, said in an interview that BP didn’t anticipate how far the settlement would go, with businesses claiming millions of dollars in losses without tracing them to the spill.

“I think it’s in part that BP didn’t fully realize how this could run up the bill until the claims started being paid,” he said. “In some ways, it may be that BP has just had regrets that they entered into this agreement.”