Jump to content

Chapter 11 Announced - Part 4 Revised Plan


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

So if my LC opts into the settlement I have to depend on the trustee to go after the insurance company?  I cannot go after them as an individual?


I believe the answer is: yes. BSA is transferring its insurance coverage to the Settlement Trust. That means yes, you have to depend on the trustee to go after the insurance companies (except Hartford which already cut its deal the "Insurance Settlement Agreement" or "Hartford Insurance Settlement Agreement").

This is why, as the TCC has said over and over, EVERY victim needs to be hiring a lawyer because this is going to get even more complicated. That lawyer will then be arguing in front of the trustee why the insurance company owes that particular victim XXX or YYY.

See page 51.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/75cad6f2-cc34-4b0c-896f-0d26815b1189_5368.pdf

C.Transfer of Claims to the Settlement Trust. 1. On the Effective Date or as otherwise provided herein, and without further action of any Person, the Settlement Trust shall assume the liabilities, obligations, and responsibilities of the Protected Parties for all Abuse Claims, financial or otherwise. These assumptions by the Settlement Trust shall not affect (a) the application of the Discharge Injunction or the Channeling Injunction or (b) any Non-Settling Insurance Company’s obligation under any Insurance Policy that is not the subject of an Insurance Settlement Agreement.

Edited by CynicalScouter
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 993
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

(deleted)  Sorry, but I am simply tired of the BS of somehow thinking money can cure everything.  (deleted).  Just my opinion, and I understand you suffered considerable based on what you have shred. 

Hello All.  New here-first post. I read these forums for hours and hours, and signed up to post this. So, as I understand the upshot of it all: 1.  That National initially indicated tha

IMHO, has been passed over may be more accurate or maybe I missed the judge's ruling on which National properties were restricted and the whole J.P. Morgan shell game. Locally, the prospect of s

Posted Images

7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:


I believe the answer is: yes. BSA is transferring its insurance coverage to the Settlement Trust. That means yes, you have to depend on the trustee to go after the insurance companies (except Hartford which already cut its deal the "Insurance Settlement Agreement" or "Hartford Insurance Settlement Agreement").

This is why, as the TCC has said over and over, EVERY victim needs to be hiring a lawyer because this is going to get even more complicated. That lawyer will then be arguing in front of the trustee why the insurance company owes that particular victim XXX or YYY.

See page 51.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/75cad6f2-cc34-4b0c-896f-0d26815b1189_5368.pdf

C.Transfer of Claims to the Settlement Trust. 1. On the Effective Date or as otherwise provided herein, and without further action of any Person, the Settlement Trust shall assume the liabilities, obligations, and responsibilities of the Protected Parties for all Abuse Claims, financial or otherwise. These assumptions by the Settlement Trust shall not affect (a) the application of the Discharge Injunction or the Channeling Injunction or (b) any Non-Settling Insurance Company’s obligation under any Insurance Policy that is not the subject of an Insurance Settlement Agreement.

Ok.  How does the trustee get the non settled insurance company's to pay into the settlement?  Where will the motivation be to settle if they cannot be sued?  Or will the trustee be suing them on behalf of all claimants or will they file individual suits?  Sorry if I sound ignorant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

They council was saying there are 19 camps in Wisconsin so no they can probably do with less.  Unfortunately every council is saying that and I’m currently at a camp that was sold (in Wisconsin).

We are in Wisconsin and we were told a couple of months back that all four of our camps that have supper camp programs will likely survive. I thought that was a bold statement. 

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

Ok.  How does the trustee get the non settled insurance company's to pay into the settlement?  Where will the motivation be to settle if they cannot be sued?  Or will the trustee be suing them on behalf of all claimants or will they file individual suits?  Sorry if I sound ignorant.

The trustee's decisions are binding as part of the bankruptcy proceeding. Think of it this way: the judge does NOT have the time to go through 80,000+ claims. She just doesn't. Instead the settlement trustee appointed by the bankruptcy court judge will do all the heavy lifting for the next several years to get through all 80.000+. The trustee will hire people to help sort this through.

If the trustee determines, for example, that Claim X is worth (based on the abuse matrix) $1 million, then the trustee's decision is BINDING as he or she is operating at the direction of the court. Think of this as mandatory, no joke, no screwing around, arbitration. That $1 million (minus whatever BSA and the LC have paid) is then going to be forced out of the insurance company exactly as if it was an order of the bankruptcy judge herself.

See pages 118-130 https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/75cad6f2-cc34-4b0c-896f-0d26815b1189_5368.pdf

See in particular ARTICLE X RIGHTS OF SETTLEMENT TRUST AGAINST NON-SETTLING INSURANCE COMPANIES and especially this sentence

Quote

The Settlement Trustee shall have the ability to exercise all of the rights and interests in the Insurance Policies assigned to the Settlement Trust as set forth in the Plan, including the right to resolve any disputes with a Non-Settling Insurance Company regarding their obligation to pay some or all of an Insured Abuse Claim.

 

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites

With 200 million in property promised, would that be 1/3 of all camps as suggested? I am sure some councils have cash that can settle the needed funds but most do not and will have to sell camps.

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

including the right to resolve any disputes with a Non-Settling Insurance Company regarding their obligation to pay some or all of an Insured Abuse Claim.

I take from that statement a lawsuit can be filed against an insurance company by the trustee?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I take from that statement a lawsuit can be filed against an insurance company by the trustee?

The idea is that the decision of the trustee is LEGALLY BINDING in and of itself just as if the bankruptcy judge herself made the decision. You don't need a separate lawsuit.

If the trustee says the insurance company owes $1 million, that's an enforceable judgement. The insurance company could then appeal to the bankruptcy judge, but they could not simply say "Screw you, we refuse to pay."

If they did, the trustee would notify the bankruptcy judge who would then seek contempt proceedings and/or simply order assets of the insurance company seized to pay the judgement.

Edited by CynicalScouter
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 1980Scouter said:

With 200 million in property promised, would that be 1/3 of all camps as suggested? I am sure some councils have cash that can settle the needed funds but most do not and will have to sell camps

Under the terms, the $200 million can be offset, dollar for dollar, against cash. Some LCs with minimal property (no camps, 1 camp, etc.) may have to just simply come up with raw cash. Others that have property AND cash may decide to use cash in lieu of selling the camp, leaving them with minimal cash flow but with their properties intact.

That's why LCs are getting to vote. I guess I can see the argument for some LCs that they'd be better off being cash-poor for several years rather than giving up their camp(s). Others may not have a choice.

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

 

The idea is that the decision of the trustee is LEGALLY BINDING in and of itself just as if the bankruptcy judge herself made the decision. You don't need a separate lawsuit.

If the trustee says the insurance company owes $1 million, that's an enforceable judgement. The insurance company could then have to appeal to the bankruptcy judge, but they could not simply say "Screw you, we refuse to pay."

If they did, the trustee would notify the bankruptcy judge who would then seek contempt proceedings and/or simply order assets of the insurance company seized to pay the judgement.

Thank you for the clarification.  Given that I would think that it would make sense for all of the insurance company's to try to settle beforehand.  Possibly the TCC et.al does not want them to knowing the trustee will determine they will owe much more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, johnsch322 said:

Given that I would think that it would make sense for all of the insurance company's to try to settle beforehand.  Possibly the TCC et.al does not want them to knowing the trustee will determine they will owe much more.

Possibly. The other factor is that not every insurance company knows which claim belongs to them. Remember that BSA and the LCs used various insurance companies over the years. So, depending on the year that abuse claim may be against Hartford, or Century/Chubb, or some other ins. company. That's why I think some are waiting because they aren't clear what liability they have here yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Us too.  Tight timeline to respond. We were told we will know by August.  They council was saying there are 19 camps in Wisconsin so no they can probably do with less.  Unfortunately every council is saying that and I’m currently at a camp that was sold (in Wisconsin).

I'm in Three Harbors, so our camps are Indian Mound Scout Reservation in Oconomowoc and Oh Da Ko Ta in Burlington.  Both are nice camps.  Both have a lot of people attached to the camps so it is tough.  We are visiting Potawatomi Council's Long Lake for summer camp this year and looking forward to it.  

The most valuable part of Scouting is the people.  There are some tremendous Scouters in the council and I hope that they are not too discouraged.  I also hope that, hey could we find some big donor somewhere?  I don't know.  Seems like we would have already had one if that's the case.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Since the insurance companies (other than Hartford) are also not covered, they are on the hook down the road as well.

As noted, most states will not allow direct suits on insurance companies, Instead, a victim will sue BSA and the LC, the BSA and the LC will then file with the court a copy of the bankruptcy settlement and direct that it be lawsuit dismissed, and that all claims will be channeled into the Settlement.

Hartford settlement is dead. Funeral arrangements pending. 
 

There is a claimant opt out provision in these cases but no one ever takes it because it gains you nothing. Basically you sue the settlement trustee who stands in the shoes of the BSA. The trust has to pay the cost of defense or tenders it to the insurance carrier who pays. You get your verdict 5 years from now and you get a pro rata amount based on the matrix, not what your jury award. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

How does the trustee get the non settled insurance company's to pay into the settlement?

An excellent question.  Here's my guess.  This is about to become ALL about the insurance and I wouldn't place my money on the Hartford "deal" (or better said Insult to Victims) even lasting too much longer.  So, how then to get the insurance companies to settle?  Well, that's where the trust comes in.  There are cases that are "slam dunks."  Horrible acts of abuse, States with viable SOLs, complaints about the abuser that weren't pursued, you get the idea.  If the Trust allows them to go forward and the insurers start to get judgements against them they have to pay.  If they pay enough then it becomes more advantageous to settle.  EVERYTHING in insurance is Time Value of Money.  Does this mean that every victim will be able to tell the trust "no thanks" and go pursue their own cases?  No.  The Trust is responsible for managing this process and against which insurers so that some will quickly realize it isn't worth it.  Does it also mean that those cases that go out to apply pressure will wipe out the available insurance proceeds for everyone else?  No, the Trust would more than likely negotiate terms ahead of time.  Will this take time?  Yep.  The insurers will put up defenses and even try to settle before making a more "global" offer.  At some point though the dam breaks for them and they want out.  Welcome to the business of bankruptcy.  It takes time.  I'm sure the TCC knows that victims want to know what's coming next.  Waiting to see if it announces a Town Hall meeting this week at TCCBSA.COM

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

We are in Wisconsin and we were told a couple of months back that all four of our camps that have supper camp programs will likely survive. I thought that was a bold statement. 

That might be optimistic.  As long as our camps have enough space and time to give the kids a good outdoor experience and capacity does not get too over-full, that is good.  

I have not spent as much time at camps as my family.  Our troop used to go to LeFeber (closed), then Gartner Dam (shifted focus more to cub programs), then Ma Ka Ja Wan (hit by derecho) and this year Long Lake.  We are staying closer to home.  Thunderstorms are scary for some of the kiddos who went through that severe weather in 2019. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was at our council camp last week.  Wandered around picking out my potential new home site.  Mountain and lake view preferred.

Just kidding but sad that the properties are clearly in the discussion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...