mr. feinberg? >> mr. feinberg's program is a

mr. feinberg's employer. all of these questions need to be answered today, and i look forward to your testimony. thank you. i thank you mr. chairman for holding this hearing. the second on the failure to recall defect of pickles in a timely manner. i think our witnesses for being here. of families of the victims gm's respective vehicles deserved better. gm failed you. we are looking at those pictures in the back of the room, and they need more than an apology. , who was, mr. valukas well known in chicago and well respected reviewed the ignition switch failures, and his report was released on june 5. it characterized the company as a convoluted structure and very little accountability weathers with an institutional failure to meet and coordinate between different departments. there is a story today bloomberg business week about a whistleblower who tried to bring these albums to the attention of the company and lost his job as a result. previous appearance, ms. barra pointed to the valukas as important to answer

mr. feinberg craig c. that's correct. >> one of the things we know there's your loan gm has issued an astonishing 44 recalls covering 17.7 million vehicles in the u.s. and more than 20 million worldwide. how many of those recalls to your knowledge relate to problems that were known to someone at gm before the bankruptcy sale order of july 2009? see at the senior level no action would have been taken. >> so adjure testimony that none of those are covert? >> i am not sure. >> you were saying here today that no one, that none of the recalls that have been initiated this you relate to problems known to someone at gm before the bankruptcy sale order in july 2009? see what i said the senior leadership had no knowledge of those issues. >> that's my question. you did a very exhaustive investigation into the cultural problems at gm. my question as part of that investigation did you identify anyone working at gm who acknowledged relating to those product recalls that covered products affected by that bankruptcy disc

mr. feinberg? >> mr. feinberg's program is a voluntary program. otherwise people have the same rights they have today. >> they have the same rights, but you're trying to block those rights in the bankruptcy court yes or no? >> our intent is to do a compensation program and the right thing for these individuals. >> but you'restructing your lawyers to back off the bankruptcy case. so if mr. feinberg's parameters don't mitt but a competent court finds they might, not going to matter to you. i'll move on to another question. i'm concerned a little bit about the fact that your legal department didn't pick this up. were any of the lawyers fired for not being dill gept? >> there were four different functions in which individuals were fired. legal being one of them, engineering, quality and public policy. >> because it did concern me that the trooper young's report was sitting in the gm files in the legal department for a period of about six years and only one person opened the fire during that time period and that was the legal assistant. let me ask you

mr. feinberg? >> that is correct. >> now, one of the things we know is that by this year alone gm has issued an astonishes 44 recalls. cover 17.4 vehicles in the u.s. and 24 million worldwide. how many of those recalls, to your knowledge, relate to problems that were known to someone in gm before the bankruptcy sale order of july 2009? >> at the senior level of the company where the action would have been taken. >> so it's your testimony that none of those are covered? >> i'm not sure what you -- >> you're saying here today, that no one -- that none of the recalls that have been initiated this year, relate to problems known to someone at gm before the bankruptcy sale order in july 2009? >> what i said was, the senior leadership had no knowledge of those issues. >> and that's not my question. you did a very exhaustive investigation into the cultural problems at gm. >> yes, we did. >> my question is, as part of that investigation, did you identify anyone working at gm who had knowledge relating to th

mr. feinberg if there isn't already a settlement, isn't that correct, yes or no? >> mr. feinberg a program is voluntary. otherwise people have the same rights they have today. >> they have the same rights that you're trying to block those rights in the bankruptcy court, yes or no? >> our intent is to do a compensation program is to do the right thing for these individuals. >> but you're not instructing your lawyers to back off the claums that you want to be shielded in the bankruptcy court for any claims that the outside parties might bring so if mr. feinberg's parameters don't fit but a competent court might find they should fit it won't matter because you have the bankruptcy protection. i'll move on to another question. i'm concerned a little bit about the fact that your legal department didn't pick this up and i want to know, were any of the lawyers fired for not being diligent? >> i have stated that there were four different functions in which viz were fired at all levels of the company. legal being one of them. engineering quality and public policy. >> okay. because

mr. feinberg is offering or go to court and take your chances trying to get more?s at least look at the award. at least know what the award will be before you decide to take it or walk away from it. if you choose to walk away from it, you have some potential benefits and you have some potential risks. keep in mind each state now caps punitive damages. and they cap pain and suffering damages. so if there is a case where perhaps there are some contributory negligence or a bankruptcy defense, do you two, three years from now ask a jury to award a certain amount of money and can that award, under your state's caps, be more than the offer that mr. feinberg makes for you. >> another key point is the gm bankruptcy may shield the company from damages if the accident occurred during the bankruptcy. but i want to pose to you a broader question which is kenneth feinberg said he doesn't know how many have died in these accidents or how many injuries there might have been. gm acknowledges only 13 deaths so far. how many do you believe there are? >> the reason feinberg didn't kn

mr. feinberg and it mary barra have to keep in mind. these are real people the loss is a direct result of gm and they have rights to a trial by jury if the conversation is not appropriate to. cheryl: jeff flock wanted to add something. >> but i don't want to speak for the company but they bush argues some of these cases some of the drivers were speeding, not wearing seat belts or over the legal limit with alcohol and i am guessing that will have day mitigating impact. but my suspicion is it would >> every single person deserves a right to survive. in a collision. doesn't matter if you have alcohol in your system if it could have saved you so you can live and to have family and children. the penalty is not death it is not to be killed because you hit the dash board way in your air bag does not apply. even though there may be some specific cases where individuals had carelessness they had a right to expect the car they were driving would function properly and would save their lives everybody deserves another day or another chance. cheryl:

mr. feinberg. some of these families have said they want to go to court to seek punitive damages against gm because they feel that will bring gm further to justice for covering this up, for lingering this problem for so long. why should they take what you're offering rather than -- >> they shouldn't. they shouldn't. if an individual family member wants to seek to bring general hotters to justice -- general motors to justice in their mind by seeking punitive damages, they should not come into this program. they should sue. now, i would say this about litigating against general motors: it's one thing if somebody wants to litigate to get additional monetary punishment of general motors. i'm here to compensate victims, not punish general motors. i'm here to compensate victims, innocent victims. sometimes i hear victims tell me or their family we want to litigate because it's the only way we can find out what really happened. i'd be careful about that argument. there are other, more efficient available

mr. feinberg who may be the right man for this job because he understands litigation. we have a strong relationship and i tell him as i'm telling you that i'm hopeful that this is going to be fair , but there are some things we are going to require if we are signing off on this. gerri: bob, i guess you're not going to tell me what he's telling you then? that's what i asked. >> i would like to, but part of the process is that it is a process and-- gerri: here's what i want to get to. i want your response on this. tomorrow there will be a lot of fireworks on capitol hill, no doubt about it as she testified i thank you will expect a lot of congress members to be adamant in their questions and insistent on change. what would you ask her if you were one of those commerce members? >> i would say, there is no one anywhere that believes this was a rogue engineer. your own policies and procedures would make a change like that-- a sign off of a document like that go up the food chain. if you had a corporate culture of complete not and say you're going to to do something, but you

mr. feinberg's right you can come back into the plan. they say the devil is in the details. gm or mr. feinberg's plan will require an offset as to anything you may have settled. in other words, let's say there's a case where you settled for $5 million but you didn't know about the fraud. you didn't know about the defect. so you tear up your release, come back into the plan. looking at numbers that the plan provides, i don't know that you would ever reach your $5 million threshold before you actually got any additional money. so in regards to coming back into the plan, once you have settled the case, you'll have to take a look at each individual claim and make a decision. your first part of your question was the bankruptcy issue. my response to that has always been the same, and it was my response to mr. feinberg and gm, if this is voluntary, how can it be voluntary if the alternative is should you not choose it, they will use bankruptcy to defeat your claim? this is almost like voluntary servitude. if you have to use the fund in order to

mr. feinberg's hands. only going to allow him to consider less than half of the recalled vehicles as part of the compensation plan. so the scope we need to listen to, but the scope likely is going to be far too narrow. as far as the compensation is concerned i haven't seen the final numbers, but my main concern for the compensation would be, this is unlike what mr. feinberg has ever done before. because you have a significant punitive component here. in other words, not only is gm at fault for what happened with these victims. but there could be punitive damages awarded because of the egregious pate of their conduct. >> which then brings up the question, will people opt in for this? because there will be some people who look at this and say, threat's throw a hypothetical number of $8 million per fatality. some people will say this is not about the $8 million, if i go to court i can get some punitive damages here not just about the money but i want to really put some sting into general motors. is that a pot

mr. feinberg and he will determine how much, that they, therefore, will be waiving the criticism from theourt. gm's attorneys continue to suggest that if somebody is going to try to sue them for a defect, that they would stand behind the protections under the bankruptcy protection, under the bankruptcy clause. keep in mind that gm was in bankruptcy for much of this period of time and this would not be obligated to pay anyone for what happened to a cobalt. there is this underhanded push to encourage people to take the compensation, whatever it might be from mr. feinberg, not go to the courts because gm's own lawyers are going to fight them and claim that they have protection from bankruptcy. >> it seems to me like they've got to sort -- the families have got to get clear answers as to whether -- >> they don't know how much they are going to get and they don't know who is going to be getting that money. if, for example, you sat in the back seat of a car that had a terrible accident, would you be compensated? you weren't in the front seat. you didn't have air bag protection if the air bags d

mr. feinberg really is independent. really is neutral and understands the need to have everyone see him that way. i think that mr. feinberg really believes that he has that reputation, that he can do the right thing. >> bob, quickly, how many other clients do you expect to take this compensation? are you actually recommending it? >> it will not be a blanket recommendation. for some it may fit the plan better than others. i will give them recommendations. my intent right now is to look at all of my clients individual fact patterns, what the damages are, give them what i believe there award would the end of the plan and let them look at the trial and thento make recommendations. it is not an all in or all out, it will be very dependent on the facts. >> we really appreciate your insight, bob. we will be talking to ken feinberg in the next hour. breaking news out of washington, companies with religious objections to contraception can refuse to pay for them. megan hughes has been covering the story. megan, go ahead, take it

mr. feinberg and i have let him know specifically the conditions upon which i would recommend the fund toe are -- >> you know how ken feinberg operates? right? in charge of the 9/11 fund and the bp disaster fund. he tends to base it not equal in all for all victims but on things such as their age, when they lofst their lives or were injured and earnings potential. what kind of job they had. very controversial after 9/11. are you ready for that type of thinking, in whatever awards will go out here? >> no, and i don't think he'll do that. the reason i walked away from discussions two months ago is because i was not going to recommend a cookie cutter approach. you know, these are individuals. they have individual losses. separate and apart from the lost wages, you have the loss of a son and the value of a life, that has to be compensated. that has to be considered. you know, ken's working hard on trying to figure out if there's a way, and i'm not convinced one way or the other, but my duty to my clients is at least to look at it, and to see and to weigh what they propose and then give my rec

mr. feinberg today? >> i want to hear he's going to actually acknowledge each and every single death that we know about. i personally have found about 165 so far just myself. we know that there is a lot more out there. >> and, poppy, do you think feinberg will include those deaths in this settlement announcement? and what happens if families choose not to take part? >> well, that's the real key question. first, in terms if families don't part, we know some do not want to take part. they want to sue gm and see this go through trial. it is unclear whether or not if they do opt into this compensation program, if, carol, they're going to give up their right to sue in court or not. it is a mixed bag on that. bp oil spill, some got compensation could sue and some couldn't sue. that's a big question. some of them do not want to take part what they have heard so far, they're not pleased with. in terms of whether or not this number is going to go significantly higher, that is the ultimate, ultimate question. ken

mr. feinberg? >> mr. feinberg's program is a voluntary program. otherwise people have the same rights they have today. >> they have the same rights, but you're trying to block those rights in the bankruptcy court yes or no? >> our intent is to do a compensation program and the right thing for these individuals. >> but you'restructing your lawyers to back off the bankruptcy case. so if mr. feinberg's parameters don't mitt but a competent court finds they might, not going to matter to you. i'll move on to another question. i'm concerned a little bit about the fact that your legal department didn't pick this up. were any of the lawyers fired for not being dill gept? >> there were four different functions in which individuals were fired. legal being one of them, engineering, quality and public policy. >> because it did concern me that the trooper young's report was sitting in the gm files in the legal department for a period of about six years and only one person opened the fire during that time period and that was the legal assistant. let me ask you

mr. feinberg set out. lack of contributory negligence as a defense. no bankruptcy as a defense. so we're really be a case-by-case, client by client evaluation, after the award is made. gerri: all right. i want to bring in robin who is also an attorney, representing victims in this cash. crash. robin, to cap as we were saying no cap on awards that could be made. gm says we're not even putting a price tag on this fund because we don't know what it is going to be. also if you sued and had a settlement let's say, you had a settlement with gm you can also come back to the table here. will you recommend, robin, your clients take this deal? >> it will depend. there is some good aspects to the fund as i think people have been talking about. there's, it is an uncapped fund. there is no requirement that someone, that there be a certain percentage of people participating in the fund. a claimant can go into the find out, what kind of claim he or she receives and decides whether to take it or not. there is no requirement once you're in the fund to accept what you get. there are certain struc

mr. feinberg offers, this is going to be your alternative. you will fight news bankruptcy and, what we tell gm we're prepared to fight that. gm, the fraud is not that long shot. gerri: all right. thanks to both of you, you guys. you both did a great job. lauren and bob, thanks so much. >> good seeing you, gerri. gerri: good to see you both of you. later in the broadcast we'll have the very latest on auto sales from jeff flock in chicago. >>> we have more and more to come this hour including your voice. we want to you facebook me and tweet me @gerriwillisfbn. at the bottom of the hour i will read your tweets and emails. >>> who is exactly taking care of our elderly and what are they hiding? new warnings from federal investigators on a potential security hole. stay with us. peace of mind is important when you're running a successful business. so we provide it services you can rely on. with centurylink as your trusted it partner, you'll experience reliable uptime for the network and services you depend on. multi-layered security solutions keep y

mr. feinberg previously advised compensation programs for the and ther 11 attacks boston marathon bombings. we'll have the news conference eastern on00 a.m. c-span2. and here on c-span, live at 2:30 on educationrum policy hosted by the education commission of the states. the speakers will be former homeland security secretary janet napolitano who the university of california. >> you had broadcast tv and then then came along and satellite. what if satellite had said, you know, we're different than cable, we have a slightly so we're technology going to take that and not consider ourselves to be what is an mvpd?lled so we don't have to negotiate. do that.lite didn't and so why should aerial be able different with a technology and say we don't have to negotiate for copyrighted material? from the beginning this isn't about being opposed technology. there's still a technology in aerial and maybe there's a business model for it, but that can evade theou law to run a business. the supreme court decisiosupreme courtwith the hel broadcasters, gordon smith, monday, 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> "book t

mr. feinberg has full authority to establish eligibility criteria for victims and determine compensationhe company leaving it in feinbe feinberg's hands, how much money to dole out and to whom. >> okay. >> hopefully get some answers. i'm curious, i know you don't know, why don't they just replace the ignition? what if they're wrong, they got to do this all again? we'll find out. >> we will find out. >> good to see you. >>> people in eastern nebraska recovering from tornadoes. we'll take a look and cover the story next. i'm sorry- i'm just really reluctant to try new things. really? what's wrong with trying new things? you feel that in your muscles? yeah...i do... drink water. it's a long story. well, not having branches lets us give you great rates and service. i'd like that. experience a new way to bank where no branches = great rates. ally bank. your money needs an ally. mayo? corn dogs? you are so outta here! aah! [ female announcer ] the complete balanced nutrition of great-tasting ensure. 24 vitamins and minerals, antioxidants, and 9 grams of protein. [ bottle ] ensure®. nutrition i

mr. feinberg seems to be saying his committee will have the ability to sift through claims relatively quicklyote we gave us. at this point your family and other families have already been grieving and have already been in contact with the company for years at this point. i'm just wondering now that he put a date on this and put a fund together, what are some of the advantages that you are thinking about potentially participating in that versus just waiting it out and continuing with a loss that you already have against the company for wrongful death? >> we have been into it for 7 1/2 years already. you know, the accident happened 7 1/2 years ago. we accepted that -- we didn't have the ryans or answer why the accident happened. now we have an answer. this is about would young girls that lost their lives. if it takes months or a year out our lives as family members that's least we do to make sure these two young girls didn't die in vain. >> feinberg said if you want punitive damages against g.m., then this fund, this plan, is not for you. how much of that do you desire? >> the whole idea is tha

mr. feinberg saying he would sit down with anybody who lost a loved one to hear about their claims individually's trying to make it easy for families to come forward. they've got several different tracks on how they can do this. they can go with track a which would allow people to make a death claim based upon national averages and try to get money as quickly as possible, oz they can say to him, listen, here's my situation, here's why it's different than the average and he says he wants to listen to. that they also have a track for folks who maybe weren't injured as badly. if you spent a night in the hospital, for example, you know, you'd get something like $20,000. >> what about the sort of current culture at g.m.? is there anybody who's going to be let go as a result of all of this or are they satisfied that they've got the right team? >> following g.m.'s internal investigation which was released earlier this month, the company announced that it had ousted 15 people and the c.e.o. says she feels like they have taken care of the issue, that they have fired everybody or pushed out everybody tha

mr. feinberg, your formula doesn't take into account extraordinary circumstances. i've heard some cases, one lady has lived for ten years with a felony conviction for reckless driving because no one knew at the time, they blamed her. nobody knew at the time it was the switch. that lady has extraordinary claim here, and we will go outside the formula and take a look at those unique characteristics. >> brown: this is a case, and i think b.p. was also, where you were hired by the company to help settle. gm, of course, has been under extreme criticism for keeping this to itself. what is your relationship with gm? what is your experience so far in terms of their cooperation? >> first of all, they've been extraordinarily cooperative. mary barra has lived up to her promise in terms of cooperating completely with me and the team that we've assembled in trying to design this program. i have no complaints whatsoever. i think the plaintiff's lawyers around the country, bob hilliard and lance cooper and elizabeth cabrese and others have been extremely cooperative. the center f

mr. feinberg is going to pay those. >> did that happen in the toyota case?> it did not happen in the toyota case. the accidents in the toyota case, most were so bad, the people did save the car and they did sue. the issue of unintended acceleration has been around for a long time. lawyers know to look for it. this issue was hidden. no one knew to look for it. the lawyer cannot find anything wrong with the car. >> how many cases are you aware of, what can we be talking about here? if it is potentially hundreds, then that is enough, if you throw in punitive damages, to easily bankrupt the company, right? >> i don't think we are talking about a bankruptcy situation here. gm is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. but they will wind up paying between you billion dollars and $4 billion to get out of this. >> thank you so much for joining on this. and also to our bloomberg auto expert, matt miller. we will return in tubing minutes. ♪ >> now you will be able to get airline and restaurant registrations from one company. correspondedrkets julie hyman has been liste

mr. feinberg, the white in seventh he is in charge of it. that is scary.f general motors at the time of the government take over the bailout of general motors, do you suspect that they knew about this safety problem but swept it under the rug to get the bailout done? any suspicion like that? >> we just don't know. we are trying to find out the truth. how many people have been killed by a defective vehicles the? ranch simple. how many have been injured by defective vehicles? stuart: at 10:00 eastern time you have been here for two hours and are asking questions. what is your judgment of miss bara's responses? >> she has taken charge, results of the for what happened but the bottom line is still it happened. people have died because these vehicles were defective. some people at gm knew that but that didn't get to people who could fix the problem and that is outrageous and we're trying to find out what this happened, make sure it never happens again. stuart: congressman pete olsen, thank you for joining us on a busy day, thank you very much. grover norquist w

mr. feinberg, my daughter was going to be married next week. andwas our only daughter she giant -- she died in the world trade center. we recognize that as track be. we lost oath our children in the world trade center. we recognize that as track be. in the general motors matter, i represent a client who, 10 years ago, was driving when her for 10nd was killed and, years, she thought she was the reckless driver. it destroyed her life. we want to go track be, of course. of course. individualk with family members to try and develop track a or track be for death or physical injury. then there is the third category. injury.ious physical this, want to know under we do not want to be flooded with less serious physical injuries and medical records and doctors reports. builds on the virginia tech program we established and one fun boston marathon we established. we just ask a couple of questions. eligible,ing you're how long were you in the hospital? hospitalization is a good surrogate for seriousness of injury. how long? overnight observation? $20,000.

mr. feinberg determined the criteria about who will be eligible for payment? yes or no? >> he is developing that. but i think the important -- >> so we don't have that criteria yet, correct? >> he's got a draft protocol that he's getting input. he is an independent -- >> would you please provide that to this committee. the draft protocol? >> yes, we can. >> thank you very much. >> can i make a point? >> no. let me ask you this. will mr. feinberg have discretion to make eligible for payment victims beyond those identified by gm today? because we're hearing there may be up to 100 deaths from this. >> we want to capture every single person who suffered serious physical injury or lost a loved one. every single person as a result of the -- >> so your answer is yes? >> yes. >> okay. and will those people who received payment through this program be required to release their legal claims? >> i'm sorry. the voluntary program? >> no. if they get compensated from mr. feinberg's program, will they have to release their legal claims to go to court? do you know? >> this program is in