MYCVAStory

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

I am simply looking to see actual balance in responses to these tragedies. 

Agreed.  I also do believe that change will come from those most impacted, the victims.  We have lived in the shadows for far too long.  Our Society's image of masculinity made that our safe space because it was expected.  It's still a safe place.  But, times have changed and our abuse is known and a part of the "me too" era when sexual abuse is being confronted.  Now, victims who are able must speak out of they expect change.  Documentaries have been made covering the hearings and trial and stories connected to USA Gymnastics.  That was approximately 500 victims and while one is too many BSA victims could understandably be scratching their heads and asking "What about the tens of thousands of men?"  For victims this seems like it's taking forever to reach the end of the story.  But, if real change is going to happen it isn't the end, it's the beginning.  There are stories to tell, documentaries to create, investigations to be completed.  Remember Santayana's words: "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."  Victims must make sure that what happened is not lost to time.  There is plenty of blame to go around; the BSA, insurers, SOLs, attorneys, bankruptcy system and more.  But if we expect TRUE change then it must be demanded by those who were victims and feel able, and it must happen at the grass-roots level.  If you can, write and call every one of your elected officials.  Better yet, ask to meet with them personally.  Reach out to local media.  Scream, yell.  But in the words attributed to Ghandi, but he never actually said them, "You must be the change in the world you want to see."  Many aren't ready but if you can speak out in your small piece of this world then please do.  If enough of us do the possibility of change only increases.

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

If I had to guess, the parties to the RSA were re-negotiating the Coalition payment.

Or just perhaps the BSA and AD-Hoc got cold feet about excluding the Charter Organizations.  Some may not like the payment of the Coalition professional fees but I bet a whole lot of victims would be irate if the charter organizations were included in an injunction without providing any compensation.

53 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Someone among the RSA parties won’t agree to extend the expiration date, which is tomorrow. I heard no indication during the hearing as to which party or parties. If they won’t agree to extend, they don’t want to be in the deal, as cut. That’s my take. 

My money is on the TCC.

Remember, in bankruptcy, like politics, a day is a year.  Much can and often changes quickly.  "Dead" deals are resurrected miraculously.  Also, just a reminder, the TCC will be providing its "take" on the situation in a week:

NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS

The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Thursday, August 5, 2021, at 5pm PDT/8pm EDT. 

Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/89421964324  (no registration required)

or

Join by phone: 888-788-0099, meeting id 894 2196 4324

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

I feel like I am watching a 3 ring circus as all of this unfolds.  

That's a really good analogy.  The hardest thing to do is be patient as this unfolds, and remain confident that the interests of victims are being fought for as best as possible.  Victims are a strong and that strength has never been needed more than now.  Another day...week..month...stay strong.

37 minutes ago, RandomScouter said:

As a part of the the [most recently proposed] settlement plan, the BSA will pay the "coalition" (not to be confused with the TCC, which is the official group of abuse claimants) 10 million dollars for... legal fees?  However, the US Trustee (different from the Trustee who will oversee the $ in the settlement fund?) says, and I almost quote, "This is a no-no for various legal reasons."

Well, welcome to the bankruptcy code.  Code says that parties that make "substantial contributions"  Discussion: https://www.abi.org/abi-journal/substantial-contribution-claims-a-new-perspective

Since the Coalition was deemed a "mediation party" by the court the bar gets lowered on their making the substantial contribution claim.  That said, the US Trustee is doing his job by holding parties to the strictest rules for reimbursement.  Remember though that in many cases the Trustee basically "points things out" and then a party will provide a complete response to satisfy the Court.

Regardless of the above, it's nice to know that the US Trustee is paying attention and weighing in regardless of the impact.  No, I'm not a party making a "substantial contribution" worthy of reimbursement.  But I wish I was 😉

40 minutes ago, yknot said:

Will send good thoughts your way. Be well. 

Thanks brothers.  All will be good.  I suspect the last 16 months has made us tough old bastards!  I'm more interested in living vicariously through ThenNow as he heads to the sun.

Just now, ThenNow said:

Thanks for the invite. I’m off to Puerto Rico. Hopefully, I’ll do better than Century’s PI in locating him and the boat at his club. In any case, expect my future posts to have a gentle, Coppertone glow about them. I’ll report from seaside…

Let's trade.  I'm headed to a cardiologist next week after an "abnormality" turned up.  I'm looking forward to when he asks "Have you been under any stress lately?"  "Well, do you have a few hours so I can summarize it?!"  Enjoy, safe travels, and happy hunting!

Someone let Kosnoff know he can tweet his apology re the TCC not holding meetings when he thinks best.  The TCC for now has moved its REGULAR second Thursday of the month meeting to the week before.  Not a huge surprise given the the upcoming court dates and what might be better timing:

NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS

The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Thursday, August 5, 2021, at 5pm PDT/8pm EDT. 

Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/89421964324  (no registration required)

or

Join by phone: 888-788-0099, meeting id 894 2196 4324

To be discussed:

• Status of Boy Scouts bankruptcy case
• Status of the disclosure statement and chapter 11 approval process
• Status of negotiations with chartered organizations and insurers
• Other motions pending before the bankruptcy court
• Other pending motions before the bankruptcy court

Re the next TCC Town Hall meeting, considering the Bankruptcy court hearing schedule I wouldn't be surprised if their Town Hall gets moved to the best possible time, like the week before, as things crystalize.  Someone please ask Kosnoff for a retraction and "thank you" if that happens.  #wishfulthinking

7 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Kosnoff points out something a little surprising to me. The TCC is not planning to do a town hall until August 12 until AFTER the plan disclosure statement hearing where the statement would be approved (or rejected).

This seems...off.

Always interesting when someone under the gun starts pointing fingers elsewhere.  The TCC said it would hold Town Hall meetings monthly.  It has delayed meetings, and called one on short notice, to provide the best information.  I suspect if the TCC held daily meetings he'd say it was spending too much time on meetings.   #whatever.

1 hour ago, Sentinel947 said:

Depends on the Council, which is somewhat related to Council management success or failure as well as broader economic and social trends. 

Anecdotally, I've visited so many reservations in the past decade where I was told "We have several camps in the reservation but only use one regularly."  It always follows the demographics.  Take Ten Mile River Scout Reservation in New York.  10,000+ acres and at its height 11 independent camps and outposts.  Today, three camps.  Drive the old roads and it looks like one scout camp ghost town after another.  I don't know that Council's plans but if the notion is to hold on to all of that property until eight more camps are filled, well, good luck.  There are others like it.  It's business.  When times get tough, time to close the under-performing franchises.

1 hour ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Its hard for me to understand camps that are "underutilized".  I have to look elsewhere for camping locations because our closest camp is almost always booked up full.

Well, the BSA NCAP process looks specifically at utilization and strategic analysis of camp plans for usage.  https://www.scouting.org/outdoor-programs/camp-accreditation/

I'm guessing these reports and documents would be available, but under mediation confidentiality, and would have helped inform the Ad-Hoc Committee and TCC regarding the amount of under-utilization that made properties "available." 

2 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Right, the TCC has said over and over that they do NOT want the Settlement Trust turning into a real estate company. Settlement trustees are not in the real estate business. So cash is great, but properties are next-best-thing. That's why the agreement is written the way it is $200 million in properties OR additional cash.

Absolutely.  As well, this is why the TCC had CBE conduct appraisals on hundreds of properties.  This prevents an LC from saying "Here you go, it's worth a million" when it's worth a thousand.  As well, it also prevents the LC from trying to transfer the unusable portion of a camp (i.e. swampland).  The reality is that there are a lot of camps out there that while they have been valuable emotionally to LCs because of their history they have been grossly under-utilized.  So, some LCs might sound like they're horrified that their camp will be sold but I bet quite a few scout execs are happy that their hand was forced on this.

13 hours ago, ThenNow said:

So, if all is buttoned and zipped, let’s see the BRG Dashboards. Small ask if they are mirror images or mere inches apart. 

Excellent point.  Remember, the LCs are NOT under mediation confidentiality to do so, nor are they under an NDA.  The TCC shared the dashboards with the LCs and specifically encouraged them to share them publicly.  Because they contain financial data that is figuratively the "property" of the LC it's the LC's choice as to whether to share.  Frankly, it's always a bad look when a non-profit doesn't share all that it can.  Again, the question to ask the LC is "Will you share the TCC's dashboard for the Council?  If not, in light of the TCC encouraging it to be shared, it not being part of mediation confidentiality, and no NDA ever being produced by BSA or the LC. why not?"

2 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

No disrespect but how does sexual victimization qualify a person for this job? Earnestness is not a qualification. These poor men have been manipulated to believe they are equivalent to creditor committee members in commercial bankruptcies. This requires a level of competence that cannot be conferred by don of the sword on each shoulder. 
 

I feel sorry for them. They were used like pawns. They just didn’t understand that having a good heart and sincerity was actually a disability when you are swimming in a shark tank like this. 
 

They are embarrassed and ashamed after yesterday is my assessment. 

Remember, the TCC works with experienced bankruptcy attorneys, financial;l advisors and analysts, pension experts, insurance litigators, and others versed in bankruptcy.  Its members never purported to be experts or have competence other than try to make the best decisions in consultation with the best experts it could secure.   You're also making the assumption that they rely on heart and sincerity.  We know that they come from business, the military, the legal profession, and others.  I don't suspect they lack in guts.  NONE spoke yesterday because it wasn't appropriate.  My suggestion is that you watch the next Town Hall and pose the question to the members on by asking them directly if they feel used , embarrassed or ashamed.  You might have your opinion but consider the alternative.  Would having NO victims advising any part of this be better?  The situation is horrible because of the number of claims and the limited pot of gold.  That's the fundamental issue and I don't think the nine people trying to make the best of it should be criticized until after this is over and they choose to talk about the decisions made.  Only then, when we know more, should we stand in their shoes and judge.

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

This may also include his ongoing accusations that a) the TCC, the Coalition, or both, are in the pockets of Wall Street money who are simply looking to cash in at the expense of the victims

It is VERY important to note that the US Department of Justice career employees (not political appointees) interviewed over a hundred victims and selected the nine it felt most appropriate.   They did this without consideration of how many clients a specific attorney represented.  They wanted nine that would represent ALL victims and not one firm's clients.  None of the nine were Kosnoff's clients.  The  Coalition was self-formed and filed to be recognized as a mediation party.  I bring this up just so that victims recognize that the TCC was selected and instructed to represent ALL victims regardless of the "business" of their attorneys.  Think what you want about the motivation of the coalition but It is grossly unfair and inaccurate for Kosnoff to suggest that the TCC is in the pocket of anyone other than the people it represents. 

21 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

In my case, I'm clearly still working through it.  I know that because sometimes what I post would make a pitiful legal argument.  I really don't suppose I'll ever really be past it.  It's just part of my past.  Not my fault.  Not even close to my fault.

I hope you stay strong.  You've already hit on the most important part of all of this, what happened WAS a part of your past.  This bankruptcy though has dragged it into the present for those who were ready for it as well as those who weren't.  I hope for all our sakes that at some point we can all find a way to put this back in the past where it belongs.  That's a tough destination to reach and the path is an individual one, sometimes interminably long with a lot of detours.  Just don't ever give up and you'll keep getting closer.

55 minutes ago, yknot said:

 Our state United Methodist Church Council issued a statement today saying all Methodist churches should not renew COAs but have the council charter units instead to limit liability. 

 

 

Do you mind sharing that statement or what State that is?

In the for what it's worth category, I spoke to a long-time bankruptcy attorney today and asked "Was anything a surprise?"  His response, "Nope, the timeline was realistic without objection.  Objections are common and not a surprise"  He seemed nonplussed and suggested that bankruptcy court is a wonderful venue for grandstanding and lengthy proclamations if you are a corporate attorney, regardless of the validity of argument.  "Why?"  "Because the client is listening."   This grinds on but for all of us who hoped that our cases would see the light of day sometime it's still proceeding faster than they would have.  Small consolation I know.

36 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

Yes I do. It’s called state court and the guys and gals with pitch forks are called trial lawyers and yes it’s hot because the HVAC in those decrepit courthouses are always bad.

If that were to happen then consider this, the States where there are open SOLs would allow cases to proceed.  Awards would be given to those who prevail, insurers would appeal indefinitely, but the real issue would be settlements.  When the open States wipe out all the exposure for victims in "closed" States there would be ZERO left if/when States change their SOLs.  Oh, and the same thing would happen to cases in open States that don't get settled in time before policy limits are reached.   The mission of the Trust is to try and secure the most possible and distribute it "equitably."  I Know the "equity" part is a third-rail.  I'm not debating that.  It's just important to understand at this point the impact of letting anyone sue who they want.

9 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

My Council is not the only one that was told that in order to participate in the settlement/bankruptcy tals they had to sign a NDA. Moreover, I know for a fact and this is in the court record that anything coming out of the mediation talks is covered by a mediation NDA as well.

PLEASE do not accept that.  The TCC SPECIFICALLY said that their analysis was not part of mediation and did not share the dashboards as part of it.  The TCC spoke directly to the LCs outside of mediation via Zoom and information seen as confidential was designated by the individual LC.  Each LC is in control of their dashboard and can disclose what it wants.  If the LC believes that the TCC dashboard is incorrect then now is the time to make that case.  If all it wants to do is hide behind some sort of NDA or mediation confidentiality that doesn't exist then perhaps the LC doesn't understand their "right" to release data or it has its own reasons for not doing so.  So, the question to ask first is "Do you have something in writing from National or another entity that says that our LC's dashboard falls under mediation confidentiality because the TCC said previously that it didn't."  Gotta say, it's always interesting when an entity cries poor, but then hesitates to prove it.

7 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

I once bought a 15 year old BMW from a used car salesman. It kinda went like this. He talked good. The transmission fell out a week later. 

It's good that you're dubious of all of it.  Every claimant should be until they are comfortable.  It should make for a good discussion with your attorney since they're getting paid to represent and interpret.

12 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

It would seem that any “test plaintiff” take home award should be capped to the $2.7 limit of a tier one claim. Anything above that should go to the Trust. No? Otherwise, the leverage plaintiffs could get awards of 3-5++ x the max Claims Matrix Value and that doesn’t seem right. Meesa cornfussled. 

As suggested, there would probably be a pre-arranged negotiation so that the selected case would pay back to the Trust a significant percentage so that it's a win-win.  The claimant if they prevail receives an amount closer to the suggested "value" and other claimants via the trust will share in the trust's "percentage." 

16 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

Could someone please explain to this poor mentally challenged soul how this is supposed to work?

It can be confusing.  I'll try to overly simplify it.  A Victims Trust will take possession of the insurance policies.  Basically, the BSA "assigns" them.  Then, the trust allows some small number of "slam dunk" claims to go to court with much coordination.  This will include a negotiated percentage of any award going to the trust so that it doesn't dilute coverage limits for remaining victims.  Theoretically these claims will win in court and the insurers will then be liable for paying.  String together enough of these and the insurers will want to settle to stop the bleeding.  What this judge has displayed doubt on is the ultimate binding nature of the values that have been assigned and forcing the insurers to agree.  Most certainly the insurers will put up a legal fight against ANY of this because they know that time is on their side.  The longer any claimant waits for a settlement the less they tend to accept.  This is also why they will demand a lot of verification and press their "bogus claim" arguments.  This is all nothing new and has been played out in asbestos, airbags and lots of other mass tort issues.  Victims need to understand that the Trust, led by the managing trustee, will take the fight to the insurers.  Couple things....it will take time and the TCC has shared that there will be victim representation on a committee giving input to the committee.  I also suspect that if a plan is approved the TCC will continue its Town Halls to explain in detail how the Trust will work and then the Trust will continue its own communication.  I wish any of this would be settled quickly for us, victim or not.  But, the only way that would happen is if the TCC and Coalition had somehow negotiated for the kind of lowball offer that the insurers would have responded to with "Who should we make teh check out to?"