johnsch322

8 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

Assuming the $103B is what should be owed, isn't the purpose of bankruptcy due to not being able to pay all debts? Therefore isn't the whole point of the bankruptcy judge to determine what reduced amounts each creditor will recieve? 

As mentioned the TCC said that the table of what a claim was worth was for negotiation purposes.  If you read into that then the 103 Billion would be the same.  I am not the one to say that it is the bankruptcy judges decision to reduce amounts (can someone else comment on this) I will say there is a large gap between 2.7-7.1 and 103 billion.  I do believe that the judge could rule on some motions to get the figure above what has now been proposed by the BSA.

Here is a link to what the TCC feels that an abuse is worth for negotiating purposes. 

Boy Scouts of America: Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones (pszjlaw.com)

Couple that with the table 

Unique and Timely Abuse Claim Count by Local Council & Allegation Rows 1-264 (in white) list Abuse Claims against individual Local Councils. Rows 265-1,267 (in blue) list Abuse Claims against more than one Local Council

Contained in:

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/213bd53f-b44f-45c9-97fc-246bcb7ca06b_4108.pdf

And now we can see how the TCC came to value the abuse claims at 103 Billion

11 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

If I was an executive with an LC, I would be pounding on the BSA's front door to let me in with cash in hand and beg them not to launch me into the ocean.

I would think that the BSA has another more robust plan for survivors (remember the motto "be prepared"). The "Death Trap B Plan" leaves all of the LC's and CO's on the sinking ship and the BSA National on the only lifeboats. Would they wave and say good luck? How much bitterness would that generate? BSA National needs the LC's or there is no BSA.  Yes they can grant new charters but the publicity on the local and national level for the next 4 to 5 years will deter more parents from allowing their children become part of the organization.  With out new blood BSA cannot survive and I am sure that they know this.  If there is a Global Settlement then BSA can wave the flag and the spin will be look at what good we have done for our former members.

29 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

A single case of CSA against many LCs could sink or nearly sink the ship, asset base depending. $18+/-M is the high water mark for judgments, as far as I know.

So I looked up my LC it has over 17M in net assets as of now I am the only claimant. I am in California as is the LC.  I would think they would have to pony up a big chunk now or a larger chunk later. thoughts?

In my opinion ending the exclusivity would fast track the process.  With more than likely two new proposals that could land on her bench in a couple of weeks and the BSA knowing that the TCC's plan will be very detailed and generous to the survivors they would have to produce something similar  and then having a negotiated  compromise between the two might work.  Might scare the insurance companies and make them step up also.

25 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

She's basically said, "You say you must adhere to your 'out of cash' timeline. If you mean it, act like it."

Do you believe the BSA lawyers are losing credibility with the judge and if they are would that matter?

29 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Many victims do not want to be part of this class. Either they've found healing elsewhere, or don't value their injury on a scale that would demand restitution.

Or are dead, now so mentally ill they can no longer function as human beings, have a fear of acknowledging what happened, or afraid of what family and friends might think of them etc. etc. etc. but I very much doubt many would be in the two reasons you mention here.  I say this as someone who has lived and carried this nightmare for over 50 years and this is not an attack on you or BSA or  the YPT.  

My bad I was trying to quote Qwazse. 

57 minutes ago, yknot said:

yeah sure, "Figures lie and lairs figure." But you have to always ask how they've done it.

I have not made any attempt to lower the .07% figure to account for suspected false claims. I have not attempted to pick the largest possible denominator.

I think one must be very careful about using the 85k number of claimants as a benchmark as to the number of victims.  I looked at how many claims the LC that I belonged to had claims against it.  I was shocked to find that I was the only one since when I looked at the perversion files and the BSA docs contained therein it says my perpetrator was suspected of abusing 12 to 13 boys.  And that was in my troop. Could the real figure of victims be more in the 850,000 to 1 million range?  Maybe not that high but it does suggest that it just might be way north of 85,000.

18 minutes ago, qwazse said:

it's hard to say if and how anyone will know. These things are most successfully tracked in nations with a centralized health system. And, that is simply not us.

I am sure that 20, 30 ,40 possibly 50 years ago there was some sort of tracking of abuse and that tracking showed low numbers.   The UK has a centralized health system "the NHS" for many decades and there has been abuse.  Society will only know realities when victims come forward and I can attest to the fact that abuse survivors are slow to disclose i.e. USA Gymnastics, Catholic Church and the list could go on and on.  You cannot track in real time and that is the fallacy of tracking abuse and trying to say what what a good job we are doing now.

https://www.boltburdonkemp.co.uk/.../scouts-abuse-map

26 minutes ago, qwazse said:

As I've mentioned before, the survivors who've come forward to me have all been victimized outside of scouting. Same for the predators who I've had the misfortune of meeting. This is the more typical American experience.

This is a strange conversation.  The reason that BSA is in Bankruptcy is the abuse not because they had not payed their normal course of business obligations.  I can say from my experience and I would tend to believe still occurs young boys/men are ashamed and confused after abuse and will not reveal to others in the aftermath of abuse.  This would make any study moot. No one will know until 10 to 20 years from now if the YPT policies that have been successful.  Some of the policy may work some may not.  Just the fact that the Boy Scouts consists of young boys will always make it a magnet for pedophiles who desire them.  

1 hour ago, Muttsy said:

KOSNOFF has a point: Isn’t the BSA signing it’s own death warrant meaning liquidation is the inevitable logical conclusion?

 

Because the BSA is non profit they have the control whether they go into Chapter 7.  They cannot be forced.  Welcome to the forum.

I think this would be a great idea.  I have been searching for a forum were I could converse and talk about what I am feeling with other survivors.  Most of us don't really no anyone else in our situation. 

2 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Questions:

Is there agreement or a bench decision which assets are restricted?

Does this new plan answer the pressing question of how much money/assets are committed to the Trust? It seems a potential pool of local council assets and insurance policies and good luck fishing.

If the motion to send this third plan out for a vote is denied, how will the exclusivity deadline be effected?

So far there are no bench decisions on assets and the TCC is still questioning the validity of what the BSA says is restricted.  

Money/assets are exactly as you stated " potential pool of local council assets and insurance policies and good luck fishing'". 

If the plan is turned down by the judge she will then rule on the exclusivity.  If exclusivity is denied to the boy scouts then we will see most likely two competing plans.  I believe that the TCC most likely has one waiting in the wings.

This is also the week the TCC is supposed to give the BSA a plan to give to each individual local council on their assets and what they need to (in the TCC's opinion) to contribute.  According to the TCC it will leave each council with two years of operating cash so they will be able to survive.  It will also include what each individual LC's potential exposure is.

Within the filing:

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/213bd53f-b44f-45c9-97fc-246bcb7ca06b_4108.pdf

there are 134 pages of local council insurance policies.

With that many from numerous insurers I surmise their is major exposure.  Quite possibly why the insurers want to extend the exclusivity period for BSA.  

5 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Why do you say that? Is it because the BSA would not want the air, ground and spirit of the woods further "contaminated" with tales of sexual abuse? I am not being attacking or snarky, it's just the only reason I can come up with in my little brain. That and, possibly, fear of bad press. I'm really trying to understand why someone might feel that way if it provided a measure of healing and some small recompense.

It is OK to be snarky and I don't feel attacked. 

I feel like the Boy Scouts will not want any survivor to come around if and when there is some kind of conclusion for them to what has occurred.  When they went thru the risk analysis and consulted with their lawyers and most likely the insurance carriers before entering bankruptcy I don't believe they foresaw the firestorm that has been been started.  I think they may have predicted 5 to 10 thousand abuse survivors (and they also reached out themselves saying they wanted survivors to be taken care of with therapy etc.) which they could throw the 125 million or so and probably had already been in discussion with Hartford for possibly another 250 million and that would be roughly 50k or so to each claimant and that would be worst possible scenario.  Instead they opened up Pandora's Box, the Genie got of the bottle and now the lid won't close and the Genie is going nowhere.  Now they are kind of stuck with a legal strategy they had developed early on and it doesn't fit the new reality.  I am confident that in the onset they had reassured the LC's that they would not be affected or at least minimally affected.  Now there it is the threat of the "toggle plan" which by the Boy Scouts own admission will not be good for some LC's as there will be LC's that go bankrupt.  in short it is kind of like getting a divorce you tell the spouse don't worry I will take care of you and by the time the courts get done you barely have a pot to piss in and you hate her with all your heart.

38 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

I had an odd thought, last night.  Since there will never be enough money to compensate victims for what we have gone through, how about if BSA sets aside and maintains a network of local and national campgrounds for the sole use of survivors?  I, for one, would eagerly enjoy the beauty of nature for a week or two per year at, say, Philmont-or even the local camps in my council (with 50 Amp full hookups, of course).  Actually, it would be somewhat healing for me AND would paint BSA in the light of acknowledging the facts and publicly welcoming the victims.

I do not believe that could ever come to fruition.  Could you imagine the stories that would be told around the campfires.  I am sure the Boy Scouts would not welcome any of those conversations on their properties.

I need a little help in understanding why the BSA is throwing a hail Mary.  It seems to be quite clear that the proposed settlement if it goes to a vote will not pass.  If the toggle plan is put into place and passes the LC's and the insurers will be left blowing in the wind per se.  The line of lawyers at state courts will be very long filing suits against LC's (lets say 30% of claimants or approximately 25,000 individual claims).  The cost of litigation would be in itself would be astronomical (lets say 250K per case times 25,000 = $625,000,000).  The amount paid out to those who get judgements in their favor (lets say 25% of filed cases at $10,000,000 per = $6.25 Billion) and yes the insurers would have to pick up a lot of the payouts and i might be low or high in my estimations. The cases that go to jury trial would generate much unneeded publicity which BSA does not need at this point of time.  How will the LC's feel about being put into such a vulnerable situation?  Feedback would be appreciated.

I am a survivor with a lawyer.  If I nor any other survivor in this bankruptcy had no lawyer we would have no restitution.  The TCC lawyers have a plan for the continuation of BSA that gives fair compensation to survivors.  The people who are fighting this are lawyers for the BSA and for the insurance companies.