Trade Center RM: 9/11 Trauma Affected My Actions

Mr. Strachan, who was called to the stand by Swiss Reinsurance Company, said that he had faxed copies of the Willis Property form to two people a day after the Sept. 11 terror attack, but added during a cross examination by an attorney for Mr. Silverstein that he was "upset and confused" at the time and that he faxed over a "Wilprop" form because "it was the only policy I had in my office" at the time.

Mr. Strachan was the first witness in the legal battle between Mr. Silverstein and 13 of his insurers. In the trial, insurers are arguing that they are bound to the Wilprop form, which specifically defines "occurrence" and would limit the claim to one event of $3.55 billion, rather than the Travelers form which offers no such definition.

Mr. Silverstein's position is that when terrorists used two jetliners to bring down the Twin Towers it represented two occurrences and a loss of nearly $7 billion.

Mr. Strachan, who had planned to retire in Oct. 2001 but stayed on at Mr. Silverstein's company because of the pending court case, was tentative in many of his replies on the stand, changing some answers when Swiss Re's lead attorney Barry Ostrager noted in his examination some discrepancies between his new testimony and previous depositions.

Mr. Strachan acknowledged he had faxed the Wilprop form to Martha Feltenstein, an attorney for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the WTC buildings' owner, as well as to a representative for GMAC, the buildings' major lender:

"And you wanted to be sure that you gave [Ms. Feltenstein] accurate information [about the extent of coverage], correct? Mr. Ostrager asked.

"I wanted to cooperate with her and respond to her request," responded Mr. Strachan.

During his examination, Mr. Ostrager showed jurors that Mr. Strachan had made notations in his fax to Ms. Feltenstein which point to Wilprop form's definition of occurrence:

Mr. Ostrager: And the word "occurrence" that's handwritten in the side with two underlinings, that's in your handwriting, correct?

Mr. Strachan: It is.

Mr. Ostrager: And then the bracket around the definitions, that's in your handwriting as well?

Mr. Strachan: Yes, that is correct.

Mr. Ostrager: And we can agree that this is for the Wilprop form, correct?

Mr. Strachan: Yes, it is.

During the testimony, Mr. Ostrager also displayed to the jury rough, handwritten calculations Mr. Strachan had scribbled on Sept. 12, 2001, in which he subtracted certain numbers from $3.5 billion, implying that that figure was the full amount Mr. Strachan thought he could receive from insurers after the terrorist attack.

But under a cross-examination from Eric Roth, one of Mr. Silverstein's attorneys, Mr. Strachan added that he was upset and confused in the aftermath of Sept. 11 and that he faxed the Wilprop form because "it was the only policy I had in my office."

Mr. Roth: Tell us, Mr. Strachan, what was it like at Silverstein Properties on September 12, 2001?

Mr. Strachan: If September 11th was shock, September 12 was?it was very confused and a day when almost bedlam?it was a very, very difficult day for everyone?. As the day progressed, it became more and more apparent that we had lost some employees.

"One of the things I did do, because I was involved in benefits, workers' compensation, and I knew most of the people downtown, was to try and prepare that list, which was really more an identification of who we knew had survived. In the end, we lost four people, and two people were severely injured.

Mr. Strachan also added that he knew since July 2001 that the form governing WTC property insurance had been changed from the Wilprop form to Travelers'.

Mr. Roth: At the time you sent this fax cover page and what was annexed to Ms. Feltenstein, which form did you believe would be used for the World Trade Center placement?

Mr. Strachan: Travelers policy.

Mr. Roth: What was the basis for your view at the time you sent the fax that Travelers was going to be the operative form?

Mr. Strachan: Going back to July, I had accepted the Travelers policy as the operative policy.

Mr. Roth: In view of that, Mr. Strachan, what did you mean when you wrote to Martha Feltenstein that the Willis policy was a policy you were, quote, working with?

Mr. Strachan: Willis was still working to consolidate or to work the Travelers policy. There were open items on the working list?. You know, it simply was my way of saying that, identifying the Willis policy and indicating that we were working with it. I didn't say that it was the operative policy. It was the only policy I had in my office.

Mr. Strachan: I did not have the Travelers policy. I had to send [Ms. Feltenstein] something, and I used the Wilprop form for the items she had asked for.