RememberSchiff 3679 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 (edited) Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance Once again*, National** ignored the 5 P's, wasting time and money. Even after 14 months of "wishful thinking" for "a wonderful plan" with Sidley Austin, National entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy in February, 2020 with a woefully incomplete Plan. After more than 5 iterations, National sent out an incomplete plan for a vote according to U.S. Trustee. Time and money well spent for maintaining control? My $0.01, *Remember when Summit was our largest money pit? **Not that all others are blameless. Edited December 10, 2021 by RememberSchiff 5 P's, all others 1 Link to post Share on other sites
fred8033 1593 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said: Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance Once again*, National** ignored the 5 P's, wasting time and money. It's like war. Plan all you want, but plans fail when the court battles start. This escalated 10 to 50 times larger than originally expected. It's like difference between walking and driving or driving and flying. The predictions drove the planning and predictions were way, way, way off. Link to post Share on other sites
MYCVAStory 687 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 17 minutes ago, ThenNow said: Yup and the article even mentioned it. Thanks....sometimes it's tough to digest every piece of some of the realities. Gotta go onto Amazon and order my copy of "Late Career Change to Bankruptcy Attorney for Dummies." 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Eagle1970 210 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 I'm really interested in how the contingent-fee attorneys will walk back all of that big confidential money to their clients that they dangled in the commercials. God only knows how many of the 82,500 never really had a claim. But, you know, "confidential" and "just compensation" are pretty enticing. Between the disappearing money for attorneys, grey state reductions and the like, I will probably receive nothing. Oh, but I was able to re-live the experience, have all of my personal information shared with my Local Council and who knows what they did with it, and so on. That means, for a BS lie from the BSA, my private world is now open, probably to be leaked in a data breach and in the end, all I did was help the LC and the hourly attorneys with THEIR positions. As the victim, I am a victim all over again. Suffice it to say, my support for scouting has waned. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
fred8033 1593 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 19 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said: Worth remembering, the TCC's lead firm agreed AFTER being retained to give back 10% of its fees to a Survivor's trust. It's something, and not matched by the professionals from any other group. I know, I too wish I had a different career choice at this point but still.... It's called a kick-back. Customer manipulation. A common form of business fraud. I would not brag too much about giving back 10%. We had a local auto glass replacement company that bragged about giving a box of steaks with every job. Insurance companies complained. Because a job that was $200 then became $230. Common hourly rates in the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars. Who will notice the padding. ... I really liked the article that an auditor was hired to look at legal fees in this case. They were able to reduce charges by $200,000 or so. Then, billed the case $200,000 (or so). 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
RememberSchiff 3679 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 4 minutes ago, fred8033 said: It's like war. Plan all you want, but plans fail when the court battles start. This escalated 10 to 50 times larger than originally expected. It's like difference between walking and driving or driving and flying. The predictions drove the planning and predictions were way, way, way off. Remember, the claimant number prediction was for the Plan' quick claimant submission deadline (May, 2020) and there was no definitive vetting process for those claimants. Proper? Is it 10x or 50x larger? The vetting process is still being argued. Link to post Share on other sites
fred8033 1593 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 Just now, RememberSchiff said: Remember, the claimant number prediction was for the Plan' quick claimant submission deadline (May, 2020) and there was no definitive vetting process for those claimants. Proper? Is it 10x or 50x larger? The vetting process is still being argued. Yeah. I'm just going off the larger 8*,*** number. Originally, the prediction I heard was 1,500 to 2000. Perhaps that was wishful thinking with a rumor mill that kept reducing the estimate. Link to post Share on other sites
johnsch322 524 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, fred8033 said: It's called a kick-back. Customer manipulation. A common form of business fraud. I would not brag too much about giving back 10%. We had a local auto glass replacement company that bragged about giving a box of steaks with every job. Insurance companies complained. Because a job that was $200 then became $230. Common hourly rates in the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars. Who will notice the padding. ... I really liked the article that an auditor was hired to look at legal fees in this case. They were able to reduce charges by $200,000 or so. Then, billed the case $200,000 (or so). If I remember correctly it was during the interview process that the TCC asked if the firm would kick back 10% and they readily agreed. I would suppose that their hourly rates were already known. Link to post Share on other sites
Eagle1970 210 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said: Remember, the claimant number prediction was for the Plan' quick claimant submission deadline (May, 2020) and there was no definitive vetting process for those claimants. Proper? Is it 10x or 50x larger? The vetting process is still being argued. At this point, the only justice will be in vetting. If given the opportunity and with NOW knowing the recovery will be miniscule, many claimants will voluntarily withdraw. So, get on with the vetting. Do like the SBA did on the Covid fraud and make a couple of examples of false claims public. Give an easy out and I bet the claim count drops in half. As far as it goes for me, as I have said all along, take a camp with a nice view and make it a monument for victims/survivors. I will go there, maybe meet a friend or two, spend a little time cussing and crying and try to file this in a compartment where I can live the years I may have left, in peace. Edited December 10, 2021 by Eagle1970 Link to post Share on other sites
fred8033 1593 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 6 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said: ...claimant submission deadline (May, 2020) ... May 2020. Wow. Reminds me. We're way past two years of talking about this. BSA announced opening for girl membership Oct 2017? Shortly after that lawsuits started. GSA. CSA. I was at a council meeting in 2019 (or earlier) discussing the lawsuits and possible bankruptcy. I'm betting we'll be having these discussions for another two years. Link to post Share on other sites
fred8033 1593 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, johnsch322 said: If I remember correctly it was during the interview process that the TCC asked if the firm would kick back 10% and they readily agreed. I would suppose that their hourly rates were already known. Is it all money? It can be intentionally vague. Fees? Hourly fees to administer claims and make payments? Court case fees? 10% percent of their share of the award? I'd want to see the explicit wording on what is in and not in the 10% kickback. Say they bill $100m for court case, $100m for administering claims / making payments and 40% of their victim's share of the award ... say $250m. Of the theoretical $450m, are they sharing $45m or $10m? Or something different. Edited December 10, 2021 by fred8033 Link to post Share on other sites
johnsch322 524 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, fred8033 said: Yeah. I'm just going off the larger 8*,*** number. Originally, the prediction I heard was 1,500 to 2000. Perhaps that was wishful thinking with a rumor mill that kept reducing the estimate. I wonder if the figure was that low what data was given to come up with it? 1 Link to post Share on other sites
ThenNow 1373 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 15 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said: "confidential" They actually used, “anonymous,” which was a flat out lie and they (should) know that. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
johnsch322 524 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 1 minute ago, fred8033 said: Is it all money? It can be intentionally vague. Fees? Hourly fees to administer claims and make payments? Court case fees? 10% percent of their share of the award? I'd want to see the explicit wording on what is in and not in the 10% kickback. Ask for the retainer agreement 1 Link to post Share on other sites
johnsch322 524 Posted December 10, 2021 Share Posted December 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, fred8033 said: Is it all money? It can be intentionally vague. Fees? Hourly fees to administer claims and make payments? Court case fees? 10% percent of their share of the award? I'd want to see the explicit wording on what is in and not in the 10% kickback. Say they bill $100m for court case, $100m for administering claims / making payments and 40% of their victim's share of the award ... say $250m. Of the theoretical $450m, are they sharing $45m or $10m? Or something different. The TCC lawyers do not get any portion of the awards. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts