Jump to content

MYCVAStory

Members
  • Content Count

    532
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Posts posted by MYCVAStory

  1. 1 hour ago, MattR said:

    As for all the announcements about upcoming announcements, they're nothing but bait to keep everyone glued to each side's message stream.

    I appreciated the light humor!

    To be fair, the TCC's Town Hall was about six minutes long and basically said there were no developments, they encouraged every Survivor to vote (regardless of what that vote was) and keep an eye on their website for any updates.  No bait and switch.  As far as Stang stepping down, I have to guess that this was a tough decision by PSZJ but it speaks to wanting Survivors and the court focused on the settlement.  PSZJ said in court it made a mistake and is owning it.  It will now be interesting to see how far the Coalition wants to rub PSZJ's nose in the dirt.  We have to remember that these bankruptcy attorneys all compete for the same business.  So now they're going to act like children playing in the sandbox, reaching for a toy at the same time, and neither will let it go.  I was happy to see the TCC working to ignore that spat and I fully expect the Coalition having won this fight over a toy to now wave it in the TCC's face.  Survivors don't like bullies.  The TCC as nine survivors and NOT a group of lawyers has already shown it won't sit quietly and be bullied.  That'll be the wrong move if the Coalition overplays its hand.  It's still about money and YP.  Every Survivor should be thinking about the MOST the Coalition can get from the BSA and insurers.  Starting off so low makes the MOST possible a bar too low for me.  Let's see if any insurance settlements are announced and whether they come with charter organization releases.  If so, every Survivor whether they have voted or not should consider the ramifications of that and whether the settlement is anywhere near giving a CO a pass on all responsibility without a contribution and for open States what that means realistically for a case already filed where the insurance has evaporated.

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 1
  2. Just now, Eagle1993 said:

    I disagree.  Look, I applaud ANY survivor involvement but this is putting a band-aid on a spurting artery.  Will survivors help at any level?  Sure.  But think as well how that is going to shake out over the coming years and the challenges inherent with volunteers let alone with the sensitivity of the "qualification" needed.  What's needed is an independent body made up of  survivors, bsa-types and MOST importantly outside experts to inform the BSA and make recommendations, assess accountability and data to be published, and serve at the highest levels.  First the BSA said it would add a Survivor to its Board.  ONE Survivor.  Now LCs are saying the same.  The TCC has repeatedly said that an organization responsible for 82,500 victims needs a lot more than that.  All this seems to me to be is again the absolute minimum and may even do more harm than good.  Abuse has gone on with well-meaning volunteers serving on Boards.  Adding ONE Survivor, as the press release says will help but Survivors, and I'm one, do NOT have the expertise to make recommendations and enact cutting edge abuse elimination protocols.  So disappointing.

  3. 5 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

    Richard M. Pachulski, co-founder of PSZJ, is now lead counsel for Torts Claimants' Committee.

     

    The comparison between the two groups is increasingly striking.  The TCC in order to avoid ANY connection to a mistake by one of its staff replaces its lead with another attorney from the firm.  The Coalition Tells everyone in its Tuesday night Town Hall to tune back in Friday for BIG news and has....NONE.  High road....low road.

  4. 1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

    Note that even if there is a big YES vote, there are parties that will slice and dice it various ways.  By council, by CO, by $3500 payout, by SOL.  The judge will have to rule on each of these.  In the end, unless we see 95%+ approval, I expect she will push for further mediation.  The vote is really going to be a  tool to see what side needs to give in more.

    Exactly.  This email mistake is red meat for the bankruptcy professionals and a way to point fingers and curry favor.  But, this vote is going to be analyzed many ways, and the communication (all of it) will be a topic during a confirmation hearing.  It for sure was an unforced error by the TCC professionals but at the end of the day Survivors don't care and the vote will let the Coalition declare total victory if it gets 75% of the vote, partial victory if it gets 66%, TCC will do the same if it gets more than 25% or 33%, and then when the $3500 votes are backed out the same arguments will be made.  Lastly, remember that Survivors can vote repeatedly with the last vote cast counting (not reported to an attorney if superseded by a mailed-in ballot).  So, the Coalition wants to take its pound of flesh now on a remedy because they don't get to argue but so much later on and have the judge say "I gave you your remedy and you agreed on it.  You don't get to say NOW that it wasn't enough."

  5. For some context and in the interest of accuracy, Stang the TCC's attorney had no problem saying that he had been asked to send out a letter for an attorney (Kosnoff), had it in writing, and did so.  Kosnoff has been promoting a NO vote and was mad that parts of AIS were saying the opposite so he wanted his message out.  This was supposed to go out to a Kosnoff client list but someone MISTAKENLY sent it out to a larger list.  Again, Stang said it was a mistake and not malicious.  As well, he said his folks won't be sending out any messages on behalf of counsel.  The TCC's professionals and Coalition's and BSA's are conferring now to come to an agreement on a message to send out to the recipients making clear the mistake and whatever else they can come to agreement on.

    What's important is to remember that the lawyers live for this stuff and if the Coalition and BSA were concerned that they'd lose the vote this lets them throw mud on it for their use later.  So, cue the outrage and suggestions of conspiracy between evil attorneys and TCC.  As well, get ready to hear "unprecedented" a thousand times.  This IS unprecedented in many ways.  Not only the scale of abuse but the fact that normally 95% of a bankruptcy "class" votes to approve a settlement.  The BSA and Coalition appear to have underestimated Survivor sentiment so they'll grab onto this opening.

    On Wednesday they'll turn outrage up to 100%, Stang will say "We made a mistake", hopefully they'll come to an agreement on what's to be sent out now, and it'll make for a headline or two in the legal/bankruptcy trade sites.  As a Survivor, my hope though is that the TCC at its Thursday night Town Hall will say "A mistake was made" and get back to what matters most to Survivors; how to vote, validating your vote, whether the settlement is fair and whether children will be protected.  Survivors aren't huge fans of ALL the lawyers right now so all your school-yard fighting is going to do is either make people NOT want to vote or just vote and change the channel until the results come in.  I suspect the latter will be true.

    • Upvote 1
  6. 6 hours ago, MattR said:

    I read that page. It contains a lot of creative logic. Yes, the bsa is funding the largest sex abuse settlement, but there is a much larger group of claimants. So, yes, it is low.

    Either way, an interesting number that was on the posted dashboards is cost to run the council per youth served. One was around $300/yr/scout and the other was about $1000/yr/scout. Those are amazingly high numbers. For that much money I would expect membership to go up.

    Anyway, this seems to be where the rub is. I suspect the BSA says it requires so much money at the council level because of the high cost per scout and the TCC says it shouldn't cost that much. And yet neither side wants to defend their view. Anybody know why?

    Two things:

    1.  I'm tired of hearing "Historic settlement amount."  Damn right it is.  It should be.  The number of victims IS historically high.  Broken down per claimant you know what else is historic? the awards they'd receive.  Historically low.

    2.  When looking at the cost per youth, the TCC is pointing out recent trends.  Look at the two LC analyses while we await others.  Available assets have gone up for many Councils as the number of members have gone down.  The rationale of "Covid....our membership is about to increase..."  Well, let's take a look at upcoming membership numbers, consider the impact of the public really coming to understand the amount of abuse and what that does to recruitment, and consider whether the BSA should be able to save its money right now instead of compensating Survivors that were abused back when.

    • Like 1
    • Downvote 1
  7. On 11/5/2021 at 8:01 PM, ThenNow said:

    To whit, this Survivor Working Group is all show and no go, essentially a PR stunt by the two entities who support this Plan.

    The devil is ALWAYS in the details.  Survivors are voting on the Non-Monetary (youth protection) portions of the  settlement as well as the monetary portions.  The only thing "guaranteed", and for a short time, are the vague assurances of what happens AFTER Settlement approval.  Then....the Coalition has ZERO motivation to see that any changes actually happen.  THAT'S why the non-monetary must be as stringent as possible NOW.  I REALLY hope that the Coalition hasn't concocted its "working group" as a reaction to the TCC shedding light on the non-monetary weaknesses, pulled in very well-meaning Survivors, and uses them for photo ops and settlement endorsement.

    • Upvote 1
  8. From TCCBSA.COM website.......

    Topics at this Town Hall will include:

    How much is your Local Council contributing towards your Claim? The TCC will discuss inadequacies of the cash and other asset contributions made by Local Councils.

    • Respond to voting questions: “where is my ballot,” “how do I fill out my ballot,” “what are the elections under the ballot,” and “where do I send my ballot”

    • Why the TCC Recommends a “NO” Vote.

    Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) 

    or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

  9. My bottom line, this is nothing but a distraction from the Coalition's inability to this point of gaining a bigger trust fund AND a reaction to the TCC making it clear that abuse elimination is a SERIOUS part of a reorganization strategy.  See this grand Coalition announcement for what it is, an interim step.  It does NOT change the fact that the settlement's "protection" of youth guarantees NOTHING when it comes to transparency with the public.  I appreciate any Survivor wanting to lend a voice and I thin most would line up at the chance to speak with the BSA right now.  We want to prevent what happened to us from ever happening again.  But you know what that makes me an expert in?  How to prevent MY abuse.  The Coalition's working group does NOT include experts in the field.  It does NOT include the immediate reporting of data.  It does NOT include a TCC demand that ALL recommendations would be released publicly so that the BSA could inform the public of what will be followed and what WILL NOT.  This is another Coalition attempt to distract from what's most important by throwing the barest attention at an issue.  Don't tell me "They're trying."  If they were serious about protecting our youth they would have listened to the TCC last Thursday night, which they obviously did, and said "We can do even more."  They have not.  They have announced a minor initiative before a plan that DOES NOT guarantee any significant changes. 

     

    • Upvote 4
  10. 2 hours ago, qwazse said:

    About yachts and other expensive hobbies, I daresay that some victims have them, or have friends who do. If Mr. Kosnoff thinks that a night on the water is such an insult to a lawyer’s clients, he could take it up with the Bar Association.

    It's just amazingly tone deaf.  Survivors are struggling, especially now.  Some have been active on this forum and you can feel their pain.  The right thing to do from the people who stand to make MILLIONS from our abuse is to just take a while off from reminding us that their life is so great.   Anyone who wants us to believe that he has empathy for the daily struggles of so many Survivors shouldn't take comfort in the ones that have expensive hobbies or the friends that do, he should instead be behaving in a manner that makes us feel like he remembers and cares about the ones that don't. 

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 2
  11. Reminder for tonight....guest on the TCC Town Hall.  It's nice of the TCC to remind us all that this is about more than money.  It's also a REORGANIZATION to ensure the safety of our nation's youth:

    The next Town Hall of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants' (the “TCC”) in the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy cases will be held on Thursday, October 28, 2021, 8 pm (Eastern)

    Michael Johnson, former Director of Youth Protection for the BSA, will join the October 28th Town Hall to discuss Youth Protection and the deficiencies of the current plan.

    Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) 

    or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

  12. 6 minutes ago, Bronco1821 said:

    My attorney sent an email stating that if you would like to talk to him about the vote, email his assistant and they will schedule a time.  I emailed the assistant, no response....emailed again, no response....why do I even have an attorney?  He has done nothing.  I have done all of the listening to court proceedings, reading the documents, finding information on my own.....  Could it be that I live in a closed state and won't be the cash cow he was hoping for?  I wouldn't put that past him.  

    Look at your retainer agreement.  Ask how much you'd be billed NOW if you released them.  If that doesn't get their attention then suggest that you will fight paying for service you didn't receive.  Then represent yourself or get another attorney.  I am NOT an attorney but I was once involved with a lawsuit where a member of my family did NOT release counsel when she should have, lost, and it was a hard-learned lesson.

  13. 12 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:

    For the moment, let's assume that advising clients in closed state to vote yes is sound legal advice.

    How could he make that video and give the same advice to every client? If it's true that survivors in closed states cannot do better than what the plan offers, it must also be true that survivors in open states are virtually assured of doing better by suing the local councils in state courts. They wouldn't be sharing anything with those in closed states.

    I don't know how he could only say that those in closed states risk (and, the way he put it, should expect) getting nothing without also saying that those in open states are making a large financial sacrifice, if the plan is approved.

    It seems to me that if an attorney is representing survivors in both open and closed states, a conflict of interest exists IF we assume that advising clients in closed states is sound legal advice.

    Remember....open, closed...attorneys will get their percentage.  It doesn't matter who gets what as long as it gets out the door so a percentage of the total awarded comes raining down. 

  14. The Rothweiler video is DISGUSTING.  He expressly states that if your claim is not in an "open" state that you will receive nothing. Importantly, he fails to recognize the many thousands of claims that are in statute even in bad states because the survivor is still within the timeframe under the applicable statute. Also, he quickly throws in the trash all of the claims in Oregon, Washington, and New Mexico, which each have very liberal rules when comes to this point. He also fails to tell everyone that under the plan those in "closed" stated will receive as little as 1% - 10% of their claims after the statute discount, which does not take into consideration an underfunded trust. Plus, he never lets us forget he is a trial lawyer from Pennsylvania, presumes that all of those claims will be disallowed when he and his partners argued vigorously for very minor statute of limitation discount. The hypocrisy is beyond what I ever thought was possible.   SURVIVORS DESERVE SO MUCH BETTER THAN BEING MISLEAD AND SUBJECTED TO FEAR-MONGERING.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 2
  15. Just a reminder:

    The next Town Hall of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants' (the “TCC”) in the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy cases will be held on Thursday, October 21, 2021, 8 pm (Eastern)

    Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) 

    or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

    To be discussed at this Town Hall:

    • Trust Distribution Procedures

    • Hartford Settlement and Local Council Settlement

    • Solicitation Materials and Voting Ballots

    • TCC’s recommendation on how to vote

    • Thanks 2
  16. Just a reminder...

    The next Town Hall of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants' (the “TCC”) in the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy cases will be held on Thursday, October 21, 2021, 8 pm (Eastern)

    Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) 

    or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

    To be discussed at this Town Hall:

    • Trust Distribution Procedures

    • Hartford Settlement and Local Council Settlement

    • Solicitation Materials and Voting Ballots

    • TCC’s recommendation on how to vote

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...