Jump to content

Chapter 11 Announced - Part 4 Revised Plan


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

What exactly I want is for the insurers to pay out.

On a time-barred claim? There was never any chance of that happening other than at the levels we are talking about (1, 2, 3% of claim value).

Why would an insurance company pay out for a claim that it had no legal obligation to do so? They aren't charities.

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@CynicalScouter Thanks from me and frankly, surely everyone, for tracking on the status of National's bankruptcy pleadings, and the procedural steps, past and pending, in the Bankruptcy case. And your

Okay. Enough. If you aren't talking about court proceedings then drop it.  It would be a shame to lock this thread now.

A few random observations from watching this bankruptcy unfold over the past several months: The focus has clearly been on protecting the national organization first and then the local councils.

Posted Images

2 hours ago, ThenNow said:

How do open state guys feel about those in closed states being left with an Oliver Twist look on their faces? 

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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, johnsch322 said:

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

The only way that would work is if

1) You convinced the insurance companies to pay out claims they have no legal obligation to do so (due to time barred status)

2) You somehow were able to get the court to divert some of the proceeds from abuse victims in non-time-barred states to abuse victims in time-barred states. And there's no chance of that happening either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

What exactly I want is for the insurers to pay out.

I do wonder if you don't sign on the settlement, would you have the option of suing the LC (and their insurance company) in the future if SOL lookback windows change.  For now, you could vote against the deal unless they change the payout percentages.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

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.  

The civil SoL is all about protecting corporations against liability.  And it is political in many States.

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

they also said consistent with maintaining scouting. There was never a scenario where BSA was going to be able to come up with billions of dollars here because it did not have billions of dollars to offer in the first place.

I've said this before and wish it could be heard by the broader public. I believe many of you here have and acknowledge it, to one degree or another. Other than the guys who were geared up and ready to litigate in open states, I don't think many of us sat down and did an available assets analysis and distribution calculus when we read the invite to file a claim. It is a simple matter of fact to say, "there was never going to be a scenario...", but facts and feelings are in play. More so feelings I think. In the minds and hearts of many BSA CSA survivors, we heard a promise. In it was a nod, at long last, and a committment to provide "equitable" payment. It drew us out into the open. Now, here some of us stand, basically naked with our hands out. Oops. "Please, sir. May I have some more?" "Um. Sorry. No equitable compensation for you." I don't think most men ran a decision tree analysis or insurance defense scenarios when they felt a spark of hope for recompense and affirmation of their pain. Yes, maybe it was all there to see and black and white, but it's hard to read through buckets of tears. It may just be me...

Edited by ThenNow
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eagle1993 said:

I do wonder if you don't sign on the settlement, would you have the option of suing the LC (and their insurance company) in the future if SOL lookback windows change

That's an interesting question.

If you opt-into the settlement then it is clear that in the event of a future SOL lookback you'd need to get permission of the Settlement Trustee to reopen the claim.

But if you opt-out, can you still come back around?

The U.S. Trustee's position is that this whole mess is just that: a mess where third parties (LCs and COs) are getting waived out of future claims based on some twisted legal reasoning.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

I've said this before and wish it could be heard by the broader public. I believe many of you here have and acknowledge it, to one degree or another. Other than the guys who were geared up and ready to litigate in open states, I don't think many of us sat down and did an available assets analysis and distribution calculus when we read the invite to file a claim. It is a simple matter of fact to say, "there was never going to be a scenario...", but facts and feelings are in play. More so feelings I think. In the minds and hearts of many BSA CSA survivors, we heard a promise. In it was a nod, at long last, and a committment to provide "equitable" payment. It drew us out into the open. Now, here some of us stand, basically naked with our hands out. Oops. "Please, sir. May I have some more?" "Um. Sorry. No equitable compensation for you." I don't think most men ran a decision tree analysis when they felt a spark of hope for recompense and affirmation of their pain. Yes, maybe it was all there to see and black and white, but it's hard to read through buckets of tears. It may just be me...

It is not just you.  I am now dealing with more injustice, piled on top of a lifetime of injustice on this issue.  Meanwhile, in a plaintiff-friendly State, victims (some with minor or questionable claims) are licking their chops.  It all figures.  My only regret now is filing my claim.  I took my daughter used-car shopping last week.  You literally cannot by an old beater for the amount of money we stand to receive as compensation for a lifetime of trauma.

Maybe I'll try to get the prosecutor to file criminal charges against my abuser, if he's still even alive.  I have lots of detail and people are convicted for far less.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

It is not just you.  I am now dealing with more injustice, piled on top of a lifetime of injustice on this issue. 

I am truly sorry. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

It is not just you.  I am now dealing with more injustice, piled on top of a lifetime of injustice on this issue.  Meanwhile, in a plaintiff-friendly State, victims (some with minor or questionable claims) are licking their chops.  It all figures.  My only regret now is filing my claim.  I took my daughter used-car shopping last week.  You literally cannot by an old beater for the amount of money we stand to receive as compensation for a lifetime of trauma.

Maybe I'll try to get the prosecutor to file criminal charges against my abuser, if he's still even alive.  I have lots of detail and people are convicted for far less.

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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

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.  

Ok, but do you really believe that the court is somehow going to order the insurance companies to pay out of claims that are not enforceable in their respective states?

There's literally no way that happens. The insurance companies will appeal and win arguing that the bankruptcy court cannot simply force insurance to pay for things that are not both VALID and TIMELY (as in not time-barred) legal claims.

The only way it happens is if your state(s) lift the SOLs. Many have or are. But that's months if not years down the road (most state legislatures are now out of session and won't come back until next January 2022)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

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.  

I can't even imagine a valid claimant voting for approval, unless they are desperate for a couple of dollars.  Why would this win approval.  Why would attorneys support it.  I simply don't get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Ok, but do you really believe that the court is somehow going to order the insurance companies to pay out of claims that are not enforceable in their respective states?

There's literally no way that happens. The insurance companies will appeal and win arguing that the bankruptcy court cannot simply force insurance to pay for things that are not both VALID and TIMELY (as in not time-barred) legal claims.

The only way it happens is if your state(s) lift the SOLs. Many have or are. But that's months if not years down the road (most state legislatures are now out of session and won't come back until next January 2022)

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

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.  

I also think it important for those who may have significant disappointment in the future to being tempering hope with a pragmatic, left brain takeover. 

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