Jump to content

ThenNow

Members
  • Content Count

    2594
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    60

Posts posted by ThenNow

  1. 59 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Trust Claim Submissions: You need to submit a brand new document with lots more information and be subject to interviews.

    So much for submit a claim, be anonymous and get a check. I guess those ads were a bit misleading after all? The documentation burden alone is going to be nearly insurmountable for some claimants. What amounts to in one’s “possession”? This is a huge fulcrum to flip people into the Expedited track. I’m ready, but I don’t know how many others are or will be. Zowie.  

  2. 17 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Tier    Scaling Factor
    Open    1.0
    Gray 1    .50-.70
    Gray 2    .30-.45
    Gray 3    .10-.25
    Closed    .01-.10

    So, a CSA claimant who suffered abuse in a Gray 1, Gray 2 and Gray 3 state has a potential multiplier of 1.4. Sweet. I’m in the money. Put me in a new tier above Open, please. 

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1
  3. 4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    at this point does it matter in the sense that the Settlement Trustee will be focused on a) determining validity of claims and b) value of claims and therefore c) the only entities that will have to worry about his determinations are the victims, the insurance companies, and possibly the COs?

    In other words, his determinations will have zero bearing on BSA. They're out of the settlement process at that point.

    Perhaps not to the BSA. It matters greatly to me and us. Anywho, I’m heating up the frying pan for the bigger fish flopping around in the bottom of my canoe. 

  4. 6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Sorry, I thought you meant light as in "no previous experience in handing child sexual abuse claims and cases." I know that was a concern some people had: that whoever is involved forward has some background in child sexual abuse. This guy...isn't that.

    I’m just babbling as I wait for the breaking news at 11. My anxiety is showing. Pay me no mind for the next few...

    That detail doesn’t make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

  5. 5 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

    He’s very close to BSA’s lawyers. He’s done a LOT of mediations for Sidley and Austin which are Lauria and Andolina’s prior firm. Green was rejected by the TCC as a mediation team member for that reason and others. He is said to have a god complex. Lawyers who had dealings with him were not complimentary. A vocal lawyer on the Coalition advocated hard for him a year ago. 

    What? Say it ain’t so. This is purely the BSA’s man and not someone agreed to by the other parties? That don’t sound so good. Someone got some splainin’ to do.

  6. 3 hours ago, Muttsy said:

    There is literally hundreds of billions of dollars in insurance. Chubb alone showed 175B in assets on its 2020 Annual financial statement. 

    Two questions for the wizards in our midst. The eventual Plan and Disclosure Statement will attach the “comprehensive” list of insurance policies. Does anyone know if they will provide any segmentation data for the applicable fields (CO, LC, additional insured, co-insured, years of coverage...)? And, will we plebes have access to those policies or will they be hidden behind The Great and Powerful’s curtain, shrouded in smoke and guarded by a blustering hologram?

  7. 17 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    the Settlement Trustee will weigh the strength of
    any relevant evidence submitted by the Abuse Claimant to determine whether the
    statute of limitations could be tolled under applicable law based on a Protected
    Party’s conduct, and may apply a higher Scaling Factor if such evidence
    demonstrates to the Settlement Trustee that tolling would be appropriate under
    applicable state law;

    Still don't get this fudge factor. "Higher Scaling Factor" than 1% or the applicable Upscaling Claim Value (factors), as they're called? Specifically, Consideration of Aggravating Factors, Abuser Profile and Impact of the Abuse. If a valid case for tolling is accepted by the Trustee and s/he does NOT kick the claim into open state status, that would be mind boggling and contrary to law.

  8. Just now, Eagle1970 said:

    Is "time-barred" an absolute?  I have heard of instances where memories were repressed and other theories.  Looking at my State statute, it sure looks like time-barred is time-barred.

    Currently, the only defense with traction that I can find is tolling of the SoL based on fraudulent concealment. From my lawyer's brain perspective, the whole thing is fascinating. It's a longstanding theory that is being successfully applied to the BSA CSA cases.

    Just now, CynicalScouter said:

    What COULD happen is that a separate agreement or something is reached.

    A "counseling reimbursement trust" is what was mentioned to me.

    • Upvote 2
  9. 5 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Lower the peak for some, increase the baseline for others. 

    Want to see a bevy of apoplectic claimant attorneys who represent a pile of open staters? Do that. I can picture the conference room when that is proposed. Boy howdy. Yee haw. Sign me up for the midnight showing of that film.

    • Upvote 1
  10. 2 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

    But compensating for therapy and direct expenses should be a given.

    I did finally get a response from the BSA counseling reimbursement division, people, administrator or whatever. They said it is, "all subject to negotiation and settlement terms, at this time." I've not been able to confirm that with anyone on the claimants side, however. I know some non-claimants here think it wrong to get "money" in settlement and get "free" go forward counseling, but I don't think they contemplated the 58,000+ closed state abuse survivors' potential fate. Well, I hope they didn't. 

  11. 13 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

    Oops! I meant to comment on the Plus-Size person of the opposite of male gender having not yet exercised her vocal cords.

    Agreed. However, I am now in step-up therapy driven by the case. In my case, that means a tailored IOP. My treatment has elevated to twice per week with my primary (abuse and trauma) therapist and one day a week with her staff "intercessional" therapist. The latter basically makes sure I don't fall apart after two weekly sessions of trauma work. There's a point at which it is crushing not to have resolved. Twiddling while legislatures make sausage may be a bit too much for many. 

  12. 12 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I don't want to be overly optimistic but it is never over until the fat lady sings and she hasn't started to warm up yet.  

    I also think it important for those who may have significant disappointment in the future to being tempering hope with a pragmatic, left brain takeover. 

  13. 13 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    they also said consistent with maintaining scouting. There was never a scenario where BSA was going to be able to come up with billions of dollars here because it did not have billions of dollars to offer in the first place.

    I've said this before and wish it could be heard by the broader public. I believe many of you here have and acknowledge it, to one degree or another. Other than the guys who were geared up and ready to litigate in open states, I don't think many of us sat down and did an available assets analysis and distribution calculus when we read the invite to file a claim. It is a simple matter of fact to say, "there was never going to be a scenario...", but facts and feelings are in play. More so feelings I think. In the minds and hearts of many BSA CSA survivors, we heard a promise. In it was a nod, at long last, and a committment to provide "equitable" payment. It drew us out into the open. Now, here some of us stand, basically naked with our hands out. Oops. "Please, sir. May I have some more?" "Um. Sorry. No equitable compensation for you." I don't think most men ran a decision tree analysis or insurance defense scenarios when they felt a spark of hope for recompense and affirmation of their pain. Yes, maybe it was all there to see and black and white, but it's hard to read through buckets of tears. It may just be me...

    • Upvote 1
  14. 10 hours ago, RobertCalifornia said:

    SOL victims are going to get the short end of the stick with insurance  settlements.

    If memory serves (big if), this means about 50,000 men are about to get b-slapped. This is not a proverbial poke, but a legitimate musing. How do open state guys feel about those in closed states being left with an Oliver Twist look on their faces? I’m sure a good many of the 50,000 have similar or more egregious abuse stories and will get precious little. Meanwhile, just over the boarder, someone with a “minor to moderately severe” claim will get a notable sum. Does that feel at all troubling? 

  15. 3 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I believe an affidavit. It was about a 1.5 hour session with the psychologist not sure if he was following a form.  It didn't fee like he was.  

    Gotcha. Thanks. Without disclosing your details, of course, what was the nature of the interview and who selected the psychiatrist? Was it in person of virtual? 

    • Upvote 1
  16. On 6/29/2021 at 12:28 PM, johnsch322 said:

    Here in California to file a lawsuit if over a certain age you need a psychiatrist to evaluate you and render an opinion if he believes it was true

    I assume there is a form or required structure to that opinion. Is it an affidavit? Where might I find the form or requirements for the substance of the psychiatrist’s opinion? I’d love to review it. Thanks very much.

×
×
  • Create New...