johnsch322

So the question I will ask is: if there is no way that the insurance company's can be sued then why aren't all the insurance company's endorsing the plan?

I'm sorry Muttsy I didn't know it was you I sold that car to. But you really liked it when you bought it.

I am sure that the insurance carrier would be able to defend in court and these would be jury trials. The slam dunks would be cases where the preponderance of evidence would be pretty overwhelming. It would be explained to the jury that the fact that BSA has BK’ed but that fact has no meaning to the facts. If found liable the court/jury would assign damages and whatever portion would be the insurance carriers would have to be paid by them. That is a bit of simplification but it would be a fair process. It is basically what would have happened if BSA did not enter bankruptcy.

I believe that the lawsuits can be filed against BSA and LC’s but only the insurers would have to actually pay. One of the more knowledgeable members would know more than myself.

From my understanding and what some others here have said is that there will be attempts at settlements with the carriers (I.e. Hartford Settlement but for larger amounts) and if that doesn’t succeed there will be individual lawsuits filed in state courts to bring pressure. If a settlement can accomplished between the trustee and carrier’s that money will be awarded thru the settlement trust.

That is the 100 Billion dollar question. Someone said that the survivors on this forum are not representative of the average survivors knowledge of what is transpiring so it will depend on how informed other survivors become. The lawyers involved are the key here as they seem to hold a lot of influence with their clients (Kosnoff and letter writing to the judge). My legal team has come out and publicly supported this outline of a settlement. I believe that the lawyers who are voicing public opposition are trying to get a little more. Maybe not more in the total figure but maybe in the no real questions payout. They might know that they have more false/unsubstantiated claims. Hypothetically if you have 20K claims and 75% are false/unsubstantiated claims and you can get another $500 on top the $3500 you would pick up another $3.75 million for your firm (at 50% contingency). If more money is distributed such you might find a couple of lawyers speaking positively.

Not sure what you are trying to say. Could you clarify please?

I am sure once the BSA documents (enrollment forms etc.) to the lawyers and claimants there will be many calls from lawyers to claimants to settle for the $3500. Lawyers will not want to spend time and resources for claims that they don't believe in. The lawyers will get their $1150 to 1750 for those claims and call it a day.

The short answer would be there really is no other viable option. The states with no SOL's will still have those in place even if this does not pass and the judge can still do a cram down plan if that happens. The Coalition who represents 60K claimants must know that at 30K of these will be affected yet they are endorsing the plan. Depending on which state you are talking about there will be a value attached to a viable claim.

They would also need the trustee to allow them to sue BSA/LC.

The promissory note I know about. $500M is more than BSA national is putting into the trust.

Forgive my ignorance but what loan are talking about?

The insurers claim minimal offer for survivors is upped from $1500 to $3500.

What I don't believe is that this is over. I do believe that there will be more SOL states. My optimism is for others I live in California and my abuse occurred in California. This is not over.

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.

Personally I feel lousy about it. Hopefully there can be some kind of righting of this wrong even if it means I would get less.

I personally don't feel all is doom and gloom. I found it interesting that the TCC said that the BSA was not happy no ones happy. That is usually a good sign of compromise. Also BSA was on the clock.

I cannot answer that with any certainty. My lawyer definitely did and I would assume so based on that fact.

The psychiatrist was associated with my lawyer and it was virtual. The interview was about the abuse, my life since, impacts on my life, and he spent time on present mental state.

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.

I looked up the Crater Lake Council web page and it says that location is temporarily closed.

So what kind of supporting documents would you be talking about? It seems that the majority of the claimants told no one about what happened and I have read that for male victims that is prevalent. So there would be no paper trail about the abuse. Most are old enough that if they had told there parents the parents are now deceased. Would the fact that the abusers name is in the perversion files be enough?

While browsing thru Zillow I noticed a house/meeting hall being sold by the local Boy Scouts in Eureka California.

One other question (for now) I was told by a lawyer that once BSA filed for bankruptcy I could not be cross examined. What do you know about this? Thank you for taking questions and answering.