Home
$3 million case for fraud relates to 1999-2001 Tour wins

In the latest blow to his hopes of a quiet life in retirement, Lance Armstrong’s request to dismiss a court case against him has been refused by a Texas judge.

Acceptance Insurance Holdings guaranteed Armstrong’s win bonuses for his Tour de france victories in 1999, 2000 and 2001 when he was riding for the US Postal team run by Tailwind Sports.

Now the insurance company wants its $3 million back after Armstrong confessed in January to using performance-enhancing drugs in all of his Tour de France victories.

Armstrong’s lawyers argued that the case should be dismissed because because the statute of limitations for fraud and breach of contract claims expired by 2011.

Acceptance Insurance said the statute of limitations period did not start until Armstrong admitted cheating.

On Monday, Travis County Judge Darlene Byrne denied Armstrong's request to dismiss.

Acceptance attorney Mark Kincaid said the company intends to call Armstrong as its first witness and to question him under oath.

Armstrong has avoided testifying under oath since his confession, and has maintained that he did not dope during his 2009-2011 comeback. If he admits under oath that he also doped in the period, he opens the door to more lawsuits.

Armstrong is already facing several lawsuits relating to his Tour de France victories and other aspects his former team’s activities. A federal case against Armstrong is seeking to recover $40 million paid by the US Postal Service

Armstrong is also being sued by SCA Promotions, which guaranteed his later Tour de France bonuses, and the Sunday Times, which settled a libel case out of court with Armstrong in 2006.

Armstrong’s total liability if all the suits find against him is estimated at $135 million dollars. His personal net worth is estimated at $125 million.

Our official grumpy Northerner, John has been riding bikes for over 30 years since discovering as an uncoordinated teen that a sport could be fun if it didn't require you to catch a ball or get in the way of a hulking prop forward.

Road touring was followed by mountain biking and a career racing in the mud that was as brief as it was unsuccessful.

Somewhere along the line came the discovery that he could string a few words together, followed by the even more remarkable discovery that people were mug enough to pay for this rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work. He's pretty certain he's worked for even more bike publications than Mat Brett.

The inevitable 30-something MAMIL transition saw him shift to skinny tyres and these days he lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.

19 comments

Avatar
brackley88 [164 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Good...

Avatar
timothy [38 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

it's time to leave him alone. He has got what he deserves, total humiliation world wide.

Avatar
titusrider [25 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

I think it would be good to give him prosecution immunity on the condition it fully participates in a truth and reconciliation initiative (which would be more beneficial to cycling)

I believe the threat of law suits will make any attempt to get him to testify in a T and R situation impossible

Avatar
The Rumpo Kid [589 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
timothy wrote:

it's time to leave him alone. He has got what he deserves, total humiliation world wide.

Are you serious? Do you think he should be allowed to keep the money? This is other people's insurance premiums we're talking about.

Avatar
JeevesBath [177 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
The Rumpo Kid wrote:
timothy wrote:

it's time to leave him alone. He has got what he deserves, total humiliation world wide.

Are you serious? Do you think he should be allowed to keep the money? This is other people's insurance premiums we're talking about.

He was being paid to win, which he did. The US Postal Service and all his other sponsors certainly got their money's worth out of him for those 7 years - so no-one lost financially during that time.

Avatar
The Rumpo Kid [589 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
JeevesBath wrote:
The Rumpo Kid wrote:
timothy wrote:

it's time to leave him alone. He has got what he deserves, total humiliation world wide.

Are you serious? Do you think he should be allowed to keep the money? This is other people's insurance premiums we're talking about.

He was being paid to win, which he did. The US Postal Service and all his other sponsors certainly got their money's worth out of him for those 7 years - so no-one lost financially during that time.

Three points:
He didn't win, he's been disqualified. Secondly, these people are not sponsors, they are an insurance company with whom Armstrong made a fraudulent arrangement. And third, any sponsor who's brand was successful because of association with Armstrong, will now find that brand tainted because of the same association.

Avatar
JeevesBath [177 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
The Rumpo Kid wrote:
JeevesBath wrote:
The Rumpo Kid wrote:
timothy wrote:

it's time to leave him alone. He has got what he deserves, total humiliation world wide.

Are you serious? Do you think he should be allowed to keep the money? This is other people's insurance premiums we're talking about.

He was being paid to win, which he did. The US Postal Service and all his other sponsors certainly got their money's worth out of him for those 7 years - so no-one lost financially during that time.

Three points:
He didn't win, he's been disqualified. Secondly, these people are not sponsors, they are an insurance company with whom Armstrong made a fraudulent arrangement. And third, any sponsor who's brand was successful because of association with Armstrong, will now find that brand tainted because of the same association.

He won at the time, and many people profited from it - not just Armstrong himself. The sponsors who entered into contracts with him would be aware that at that time cycling was known for doping, therefore accepting the reputational risk involved if it turned out the performances weren't clean.
I'm sorry but I can't find any sympathy for an insurance company. They took a risk by underwriting the win bonus, and are trying to wriggle out of it. A situation that I'm sure many ordinary people have been on the receiving end of....

Avatar
robbo764 [52 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

who cares anymore,really lance who.lance was product of the times in cycling in those years ,lets face everyone doped all the great riders did going back years and years,lets get on with the here and now...  16

Avatar
JonnieC [12 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Don't disagree that the guy should not profit from his fraud but on the flip side why aren't all the others who admitted to doping also being chased for their earnings from the sport. I dare say finishing runner up in the TDF is also worth a few bob both in both prize money and attaching endorsements.

Avatar
The Rumpo Kid [589 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
JeevesBath wrote:

I'm sorry but I can't find any sympathy for an insurance company. They took a risk by underwriting the win bonus, and are trying to wriggle out of it. A situation that I'm sure many ordinary people have been on the receiving end of....

No, Armstrong defrauded the insurance company. The only wriggling being done is by Armstong himself.

Avatar
giobox [356 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

SCA were an 'insurance' company in the loosest sense of that word. It arguably had far more in common with a gambling 'bet' with appropriate odds offered by SCA in return (the company is run by an ex-professional card player). As other's have said, it was only US Postal that paid, no one else paid premiums into it as such.

The SCA deal was very explicit in requiring that Lance won without doping, I can't really see how Lance can wiggle out of this one.

Avatar
Karbon Kev [688 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

good, i'm very glad about this ...

Avatar
alotronic [477 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

They're all sharks. But one shark took the bet and cheated on it. That shark gets a slap. What's to question? Should we feel sorry for either shark?

Avatar
Sadly Biggins [269 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
giobox wrote:

The SCA deal was very explicit in requiring that Lance won without doping, I can't really see how Lance can wiggle out of this one.

I might be wrong, but my recollection is that the deal with SCA did not have a doping carve-out in it so that SCA had to pay LA even though SCA suspected he was on the juice.

Avatar
The Rumpo Kid [589 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
Sadly Biggins wrote:
giobox wrote:

The SCA deal was very explicit in requiring that Lance won without doping, I can't really see how Lance can wiggle out of this one.

I might be wrong, but my recollection is that the deal with SCA did not have a doping carve-out in it so that SCA had to pay LA even though SCA suspected he was on the juice.

No, you're right. But in his case against SCA, Armstrong agreed it was implicit that winning meant winning clean, and his lawyers said that if he were ever to be stripped of his titles, the win bonuses would be repaid.

Avatar
Sadly Biggins [269 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

OK, thanks - makes sense. I don't have any sympathy for LA on this anyway.

Avatar
monty dog [459 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

The SCA case was originally dismissed because no doping wasn't a specific exclusion. The whole saga was a deliberate fraud - he, Weisel, Tailwind and his cronies effectively placed bets on themselves winning, combined with the cancer survivor image they deliberately created, and leveraging his goody-image to place even bigger bets. Trouble is, he pi$$ed-off too many people along the way with his bullying and his lawyers, funded by LiveStrong couldn't suppress the truth.

Plenty of other riders doped, but they didn't bully, cheat, threaten and bribe their way to the top.

Avatar
ch [188 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

To those who have an inkling of sympathy for him: If he loses all his money and goes back from zero, it's a chance for him to remake himself. Humble ain't so bad.

Avatar
alun [45 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
monty dog wrote:

Plenty of other riders doped, but they didn't bully, cheat, threaten and bribe their way to the top.

If other riders doped, then by definition they also cheated. Armstrong didn't have the monopoly there.