johnsch322

I would not be surprised if that was a question and debate going on behind closed doors right now. BSA may be asking themselves if they should just do a standalone bankruptcy. It would most likely save them some legal fees. Especially if the plan was rejected on appeal.

This is not an accurate statement. A NO vote does not necessarily mean that all legitimate claims (time barred or not) will not receive compensation. It only means that the plan as constructed will be rejected by vote. Afterwards a new plan most likely the TCC's will be put into play and the TCC is not against the grey state reductions. In fact if it is rejected and LC's, CO's and Insurance kicks in more money than each individual claimant will get more. That is if they are allowed to have liability releases within BSA's bankruptcy which is a big question mark after yesterday's Purdue rul

So when I am looking at Los Padres (California) with 83 claims with a low range of liability at $31,875,500 and high range at $144,323,500 and $14,453,991 in unrestricted assets contributing $1,834,155 or 12.7% of net unrestricted assets VS Ventura Council (California) with 84 claims with a low range of liability at $30,178,500 and high range at $136,510,500 and $1,437,344 in unrestricted assets contributing $325,108 or 22.6% of net unrestricted assets I do not understand the data?

The number of claims can vary greatly. There are LC's with 2 claims giving a higher % than LC's with 300 claims. No rhyme no reason.

I have been browsing thru the TCC's Local Council analysis and I am amazed at the differences of % of contribution from unrestricted assets from council to council. Some give very little compared to what they have and some give a lot more and that can be within the same state.

The plan is not going to be accepted by the survivors and for good reasons. Los Padres the council where I have a claim has 83 claims against it and values Los Padres share of liability at $22,098 per claim. This is in California and open state and they want to contribute just under 13% of their unrestricted net assets to get a release of liability as if they had gone thru a bankruptcy or paid off their share of judgements or settlements. the councils cost of litigation would exceed the $22,098 per claim.

Well with that analogy I would say that it took a village to abuse me. The village consisted of BSA National, the LC, a CO, a Troop and an abuser hence as a village they are responsible and should pay.

I do not want to beat a dead horse but you make statements with insinuations without real numbers or meaning. It was just 2 simple questions. PS I know money and all survivors know money will not fix pain. It is compensation for the pain.

Sorry quoting wrong person.

So I ask you what are "impossible expectations" versus reasonable expectation in dollars? Also what are the "two wrongs do not make a right"? Are you saying the abuse was wrong and just compensation is wrong?

Copied from TCC website The next regular Town Hall of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants' (the “TCC”) in the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy cases will be held on Thursday, December 16, 2021, 8 pm (Eastern).

A bad deal for BSA survivors became worse with the "negotiated" settlement with Century and became a sweetheart deal for insurance company's. This is starting to feel more and more like the BSA is settling with insurance instead of survivors.

I just watched the coalition town hall along with several others that I am on a chat with. KR started to get very heated at the end when we asked a lot of questions about what he was saying. The official question count was at about 26 and between the 3 or 4 of us we must have asked 30 questions. Not an a very accurate question count by the coalition. He also talked in a not nice way about Jim Stang and the fact that TCC has paused town halls until after voting. And once again he said big announcements were coming real soon.

Omni is back online.

My bad I meant survivors trust.

They are not representing victims on a contingency basis. TCC lawyers are Pachulski Stang Ziehl and Jones LLP. and they were hired by the TCC and paid for by the BSA.

Can you explain that please? My understanding is that the 10% is going into the settlement trust.

The TCC lawyers do not get any portion of the awards.

Ask for the retainer agreement

I wonder if the figure was that low what data was given to come up with it?

If I remember correctly it was during the interview process that the TCC asked if the firm would kick back 10% and they readily agreed. I would suppose that their hourly rates were already known.

This is for all those who believe and defend current YPT. This happened only 3 years ago.

@Eagle94-A1 can send me a private message with details.

Give me background on who it will go to and an address and I will gladly double that.

I have stated this before...my daughter was in girl scouts in Canada while we lived there. We had to pay $50 to get a clearance check before my wife could go on an overnight with my daughter. We gladly went to the RCMP filled out the paperwork and paid the $50. There was no exceptions.