Jump to content

Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

But, the risk is that the inconvenience is the total loss of the BSA.

Again, where are you getting this from?

As has been pointed out over and over, this is a Chapter 11 reorganization. Not a Chapter 7 liquidation.

There will be no "total loss of the BSA" at the end of this process.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Forums work well in many ways, but it is probably not the best way to discuss the difficult feelings of this bankruptcy while also discussing the impact to child sex abuse survivors.  However, there a

The mental fallout from my abuse was mostly dormant prior to the current lawsuit. It would still torment me in idle moments. Or at night sometimes when I lay in bed trying not to blame myself after so

I would like to not lock the thread but we seem to be in a rut that we need to get out of before any progress can be made. Here are some observations that might help. First, human dignity is the

Posted Images

1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

Again, where are you getting this from?

As has been pointed out over and over, this is a Chapter 11 reorganization. Not a Chapter 7 liquidation.

There will be no "total loss of the BSA" at the end of this process.

When the TCC is requesting $102 B, the liquidation of the BSA and local councils seems at least possible and perhaps probable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CynicalScouter said:

Again, where are you getting this from?

As has been pointed out over and over, this is a Chapter 11 reorganization. Not a Chapter 7 liquidation.

There will be no "total loss of the BSA" at the end of this process.

The organization was  struggling before the law suit. There is a risk. But if you want to get more into details, lets say at the very least the program as intended by the current mission and vision is at risk. 

Barry

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eagledad said:

Your basic reasoning all along has been the numbers. Many of us were personally solicited (pushed) by law firms to join the law suit. When everyone is asked to join, the numbers become meaningless against my experience.

So what? Again, that does NOT mean that their claims will be approved by the settlement trustee.

And this is where I 100% completely agree with the insurance companies motion(s) for limited discovery. Let's have

  1. 1000 randomly selected claims reviewed for supporting documents and evidence and
  2. 100 claimants subject to deposition

BOTH of these things will happen eventually (if we get to a settlement, the claimants will have to provide supporting material to the settlement trustee). Why not now? If it can be show that of the, for example, 100 claimants randomly selected something like 90 have valid claims (sufficient evidence, not timebarred, etc.) or 900/1000 then BSA and insurers know exactly how much they have to pay.

Since November, in that sense, all about math.

How much (and when).

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Well said. I'm not sure where I stand with putting some burden of the compensation on everyone for the bad acting of a very few.  That is a worthy discussion. But, the risk is that the inconvenience is the total loss of the BSA. I think it reflects the unfairness of the situation.

Barry

I appreciate you saying so, Barry, and value the compliment coming from you. I mean that sincerely.

I wonder, though, if the loss is/was necessary if the BSA would be more forthcoming in this process. Also, the claimants can't be responsible for the condition of the organization going into the Chapter 11, by that I'm referring to the LDS departure, COVID and other reasons for membership decline. The February 2020 filing happened to be at a time the BSA was already "weakened." I still don't think "total loss" is necessarily imminent, but I have to focus more on advocating for the claimants and my case. In my view, if the BSA is dying it is from a thousand cuts, many at their own hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

When the TCC is requesting $102 B, the liquidation of the BSA and local councils seems at least possible and perhaps probable.

Actually, they did not and have not yet made that demand, at least publicly/before the court. I don't know what the exact mediation demand(s) have been. As I understand it, that number is the aggregate claim value estimation, and then conservative because it does not place values on repeated abuse or abuse of a boy across multiple of the tiered categories. That said, I agree. It is possible.

Edited by ThenNow
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

When the TCC is requesting $102 B, the liquidation of the BSA and local councils seems at least possible and perhaps probable.

Except, if you read, they aren't asking for $102 B from the liquidation of BSA and the LCs

Nowhere, let me repeat, NOWHERE in that document do they call for that. They don't use the word. They don't even reference Chapter 7

They aren't stupid. They KNOW the BSA and the LCs don't have $102 B. AT BEST (and this is AT BEST) BSA has $1.4 B and the LCs $4-5 B (and that is with full, complete liquidation).

What they said was this:

  • TCC estimated all claims at $102 B CONSERVATIVELY. For example, rather than treating 5  occurrences of the same sexual abuse as 5 claims, they are treating it as 1.  That's really, really conservative.
  • Up until that point, BSA had NOT offered their own estimate, so TCC offered their own estimate. In the REVISED reorganization plan, BSA came out with its number.
  • TCC is not asking for BSA and/or the LCs to come up with $102 B. EVERYONE understood and understands the bulk of this will be paid by insurance.
  • TCC was saying that BSA can do a LOT better than its initial offer of what amounted to ~$300 million. It doesn't have to be $102 B, but it can't be that low, either.

Clearer for you now? Again, NO ONE (other than Kosnoff) is talking about the liquidation of BSA.

 

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole back and forth is futile, as we have a few that simply want the BSA Corporate to somehow take total responsibility for a societal sickness for which nobody has a cure, and likely never will beyond simply no interaction between adults and children.  The reality that BSA often was acting at the time on the direction of outside authorities, and also families that chose to not chance the victim being publicly visible due to the legal circus, as well as misdirected fear of embarrassment.  Yes, in some instances it appears, though we often do not know for sure why, that someone in BSA may or did choose to not follow up properly.  But, in many cases they were apparently put off by local authorities and family decisions.  The actual victim then was left in the lurch to deal with their trauma with little or no help at the time, and later with emotional adult problems.  

It seems to me that the only fair thing then, since in the larger sense it is a failure of human nature and society, then we should have a tax on everyone to defray the emotional costs of therapy and so on, since reality is that society is primarily at fault, even more so than the corporate BSA, right behind the actual predators.

And that is where the reparations comparison falls.  Some how, society, in a different era, failed people, whether youth, slaves, or races, allowing obvious or at least noticeable emotional and physical damage to occur.  And, no amount of retroactive compensation for that damage will ever actually make those victims whole, nor will it stop similar aberrations  in the future.  Mankind is really not necessarily particularly kind, and there are always going to be those that try to take advantage in some way or another, no matter how many barriers are in place.  When the rules are not followed, or someone gets a pass because of connections or money, penalties should be harsh, but not ruinous.  

Just a view that some here will never feel to be reasonable or even rational.  Most on here are not against some type of compensation and aid to victims, but they do not want it at the expense of the overall positive elements of the program or the opportunities for youth.  In the end, a few will NEVER be happy with the outcome.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, skeptic said:

as we have a few that simply want the BSA Corporate to somehow take total responsibility for a societal sickness for which nobody has a cure

Really? Where? I haven't seen them post on the boards here. Who are they?

What I see are some people here who are aware that

  1. The states changed civil statutes of limitations, meaning that
  2. Claims against BSA National (and LCs and COs) for allowing thousands of scouts to be secually abused through the negligence have been filed and
  3. At least 900 lawsuits are already filed and pending against BSA/LCs/COs with more to follow, therefore
  4. There is literally no way BSA/LCs/COs are going to avoid having to pay out and that
  5. The only real debate is "How much and when" at this point.

But like I said, if you've seen people posting that "simply want the BSA Corporate to somehow take total responsibility for a societal sickness for which nobody has a cure" please point them out in the future.

Thanks.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CynicalScouter, Please read my post again.  No where did I say that the TCC is asking for liquidation.  There is an implied expectation of $102 B but because it is so far greater than the value of the BSA and LCs, it is being used to push for more money.  

If the TCC is making a large estimate, the maximum amount of money is most likely from the liquidation of the BSA and LCs with the insurance companies contributing generously.  The attorneys say that they want to get the maximum amount of money for the claimants (just established that it is likely through liquidation) so without saying anything, the TCC is after liquidation.  If the attorneys are trying to get the maximum for the claimants, then they wish liquidation of the BSA, LCs, insurance companies, and big payments from the COs.  That might not be the most likely scenario but it is the one that maximizes claimant settlement.

The BSA will soon be no longer able to present a reasonable business plan to emerge from bankruptcy and will be forced in Chapter 7.  Yes, I realize that the BSA cannot be 'forced' into Chapter 7 but it will have no other options.

Strang said that he did not care about the survival of the BSA or LCs.  

Perhaps behind closed doors, the parties are close to an agreement.  Based only on what they say, the BSA could be forced into Chapter 7 liquidation and the LCs could soon follow suit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, skeptic said:

he reality that BSA often was acting at the time on the direction of outside authorities, and also families that chose to not chance the victim being publicly visible due to the legal circus, as well as misdirected fear of embarrassment. 

Again, over and over with the same line.

BSA is NOT being sued for failure to report.

BSA is NOT having claims against it for failure to report.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FAILURE TO REPORT THE ABUSE

The claims are, in short, and as I've already linked to or posted at least a DOZEN times already.

  1. Negligence/Duty of reasonable care - BSA had an obligation to look after these kids and not let them be harmed.
  2. Negligence in Supervision - the abusive leader was an "agent of [Boy Scouts] was under [Boy Scouts] direct supervision, and control" using BSA methods, uniforms, instruction, etc.
  3. Negligence in Retention - the abusive leader was not shoved out the door fast enough
  4. Negligence in Hiring - (yes a volunteer is "hired" for these purposes) Boy Scouts failed to do enough of a background check to detect the abuser's tendencies and nevertheless held the abusive leader out as a "competent and trustworthy scout leader, supervisor, servant, teacher, and counselor."

Even if BSA had reported the abuse and the abuser had been convicted, that would have NO legal bearing on the claims against for negligence BSA.

NONE.

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

The attorneys say that they want to get the maximum amount of money for the claimants (just established that it is likely through liquidation) so without saying anything, the TCC is after liquidation.

Again, I keep repeating this over and over maybe it will get through.

  • TCC cannot force liquidation.
  • TCC cannot ask for liquidation.
  • TCC cannot achieve liquidation.

The maximum amount for the claimants in a Chapter 7 must ALSO be balanced against a plan that allows the entity to survive.

So if TCC came to the court with a plan that said "BSA is valued at $1.4 billion, we want $1.399 billion" the court is going to reject that because it leaves BSA with NOTHING upon which to reorganize and survive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I appreciate you saying so, Barry, and value the compliment coming from you. I mean that sincerely.

I wonder, though, if the loss is/was necessary if the BSA would be more forthcoming in this process. Also, the claimants can't be responsible for the condition of the organization going into the Chapter 11, by that I'm referring to the LDS departure, COVID and other reasons for membership decline. The February 2020 filing happened to be at a time the BSA was already "weakened." I still don't think "total loss" is necessarily imminent, but I have to focus more on advocating for the claimants and my case. In my view, if the BSA is dying it is from a thousand cuts, many at their own hand.

True, but it could be the death nail.

And, honestly, your response suggest how far you are willing to let this go. You are probably justified, I wouldn't go there anymore. You are victim looking for restoration of your life. Plain and simple. You can't control the system trying to work that out, so don't get in the habit of justifying the wreckage. 

Surly you can respect our passion for the mission and vision of the program and the impact of its loss to our culture. I'm not saying our pain is greater than your's, but the inequity of how it's being resolved just feels immoral. 

Barry

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

Again, I keep repeating this over and over maybe it will get through.

  • TCC cannot force liquidation.
  • TCC cannot ask for liquidation.
  • TCC cannot achieve liquidation.

The maximum amount for the claimants in a Chapter 7 must ALSO be balanced against a plan that allows the entity to survive.

So if TCC came to the court with a plan that said "BSA is valued at $1.4 billion, we want $1.399 billion" the court is going to reject that because it leaves BSA with NOTHING upon which to reorganize and survive.

As I keep repeating, if this drags outpast this summer, the BSA will be forced into liquidation because it cannot emerge from bankruptcy.  The BSA must make the filing but it will be forced nonetheless.  The attorneys have said that they are fighting for the most money possible.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:
  1. Negligence/Duty of reasonable care - BSA had an obligation to look after these kids and not let them be harmed.
  2. Negligence in Supervision - the abusive leader was an "agent of [Boy Scouts] was under [Boy Scouts] direct supervision, and control" using BSA methods, uniforms, instruction, etc.
  3. Negligence in Retention - the abusive leader was not shoved out the door fast enough
  4. Negligence in Hiring - (yes a volunteer is "hired" for these purposes) Boy Scouts failed to do enough of a background check to detect the abuser's tendencies and nevertheless held the abusive leader out as a "competent and trustworthy scout leader, supervisor, servant, teacher, and counselor."

And this is the reasoning where we disagree. You are suggesting the impossible. The BSA set the system in place to protect the kids. But, they aren't negligent for the bad actions of individuals. 

Barry

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...