Chapter 11 Announced - Part 6 - Plan 5.0/TCC Plan TBD

[CynicalScouter 1434]

41 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

If the ballot will collect this info then I agree they will push this to reviewing the vote/plan confirmation.

My question and this I am not clear on is whether or not the payment timing will matter.

For example, does opting for the $3500 mean you drop your claim/you get no vote? You just get a check now?

Or does it mean "I vote to approve the plan and, if approved, I'll take the $3500 once approved"?

I'd want to see the exact details here.

If that $3500 is contingent on a) a yea vote that b) results in an approved plan that is different than “Here is $3500 drop your claim, renounce your right to vote, and go away”

Edited September 27, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Eagle1993 2160]

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

If that $3500 is contingent on a) a yea vote that b) results in an approved plan that is different than “Here is $3500 drop your claim, renounce your right to vote, and go away”

My understanding is that if you vote Yes AND selected $3500 ... as soon as the plan is approved (and the money is in the account) you should get your $3500.  I don't think it removes your right to vote and if the plan changes substancially, I wonder if you could change your mind.  For example, there is no guarantee the $3500 remains and is in the final plan.

I think there are going to be several cross tabs on this vote.

- Overall vote %

- Vote by LC

- Vote by CO

- Vote by $3500/total claim

If the total vote is 99%, none of the above will matter.  If it is closer to 66%, I expect there will be fights to show how only those taking $3500 approved the plan.  Or that only xx% of councils were approved.  It seems to open up avenues to fight the plan even if it achieves >66% of the total claimant vote.

 

 

[Eagle1970 210]

In the end, how many will take the $3500?  1000?  They should just get that offer out there and be done with it.  I'm not wealthy but am comfortable and I wouldn't bother whatsoever to chase $3500.  I once received $5000 in the mail because a spammer had sent me junk faxes.  I'd be quite surprised if they sold many releases for $3500.  Certainly, anyone thinking about it (who is represented) will get a healthy dose of dissuasion.  

[CynicalScouter 1434]

Zalkin is supporting TCC effort to classify claims. Many if not most of his clients are California. He is the one who said in the hearings he could walk into state court and get millions for his clients and has done so. Moreover he previously pushed to have claimants with time barred claims to be removed from voting.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/74bba80b-cf0c-4845-92a4-f57c4cb25c6c_6373.pdf

 

”Whatever the intent, the practical effect of the Debtors’ sudden reversal of position on this issue is to shine an even brighter light on the infirmities of the Debtors’ proposal to classify Direct Abuse Claimants that elect an Expedited Distribution together with those Claimants that do not. A Direct Abuse Claimant that elects a prompt and certain de minimis Expedited Distribution is simply not “substantially similar,” within the meaning of section 1122(a), to a Direct Abuse Claimant that elects to await a determination of its claim value in accordance with the TDPs for at least two reasons…”

 

[CynicalScouter 1434]

Oh and this from Zalkin tells me it is not just changes to disclosure; it is possibly Plan 6.0 (or at the very least 5.5)

” it now appears that the Debtors intend to file a further revised Plan in which Direct Abuse Claimants will not make the election whether or not to receive an Expedited Distribution until after the Plan goes effective.”

This all but guarantee la 67%: the people looking to get $3500 and get out will swamp those with higher claims in state courts.

Edited September 27, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter 1434]

30 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

I'd be quite surprised if they sold many releases for $3500. 

I can think of two reasons:

1) “I want closure”. The prospect of months if not years before the settlement trustee reaches decisions in many of these cases may not be palatable.

2) “I want privacy/I was told this would be anonymous”: there are a lot of victims who were told or expected that all they had to do was file a claim “anonymously” one time last year and never have to do anything else. If they want more than $3500 then at the very least there will be a second round questionnaire that will be used by the trustee along with likely interviews. Victims may not want to subject themselves to that.

[Eagle1970 210]

9 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

The prospect of months if not years before the settlement trustee reaches decisions in many of these cases may not be palatable.

 

Anybody who actually believed this would be over in 9 months hasn't spent much time in court.

[ThenNow 1373]

10 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I can think of two reasons:

1) “I want closure”. The prospect of months if not years before the settlement trustee reaches decisions in many of these cases may not be palatable.

2) “I want privacy/I was told this would be anonymous”: there are a lot of victims who were told or expected that all they had to do was file a claim “anonymously” one time last year and never have to do anything else. If they want more than $3500 then at the very least there will be a second round questionnaire that will be used by the trustee along with likely interviews. Victims may not want to subject themselves to that.

3) My claim is not actually valid or verifiable and I’m going to avoid that exposure and/or hassle; 

4) I do this for a living, filing in any and all cases in which I may or may not have a connection or grievance and see what happens. Cha-Ching. $3500 is a dandy pair of ostrich Ferragamos and matching belt.

[CynicalScouter 1434]

5 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

Anybody who actually believed this would be over in 9 months hasn't spent much time in court.

Most people haven’t.

[Eagle1970 210]

1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

3) My claim is not actually valid or verifiable and I’m going to avoid that exposure and/or hassle; 

4) I do this for a living, filing in any and all cases in which I may or may not have a connection or grievance and see what happens. Cha-Ching. $3500 is a dandy pair of ostrich Ferragamos and matching belt.

#3 certainly crossed my mind.  But #4....an attorney settling for his/her portion of $3500???  Maybe at $10k there would be a lot more action.  Idk.  We shall see.

[ThenNow 1373]

5 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Most people haven’t.

Nor done their homework.

• Archdiocese of Portland, 32 months
• Diocese of Tucson, 4 months
• Diocese of Spokane, 28 months
• Diocese of Davenport, 19 months
• Diocese of San Diego, 9 months
• Diocese of Fairbanks, 23 months
• Oregon Province, Society of Jesus, 29 months
• Diocese of Wilmington, 21 months
• Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 58 months
• Christian Brothers of Ireland, 33 months
• Diocese of Gallup, 31 months
• Diocese of Stockton, 36 months
• Diocese of Helena, 14 months
• Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, 44 months
• Diocese of Duluth, 41 months
• Diocese of New Ulm, 27 months
• Diocese of Great Falls-Billings, 17 months
• Crosier Fathers and Brothers, 14 months

[ThenNow 1373]

19 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

#3 certainly crossed my mind.  But #4....an attorney settling for his/her portion of $3500???  Maybe at $10k there would be a lot more action.  Idk.  We shall see.

I’m mostly referring to the Mass Tort Claimant Cottage Industry, as my friend calls it. Comb the papers for the latest action and file away. “Penalties for fraud? Jail time and fines? Pah. They won’t enforce that.” I’m not saying it is the case, but there are 5000 pro se claimants, a couple of us included who are NOT such humans. Also, if you have a decent pool of claimant clients, do the math. $3500 adds up quickly especially if you didn’t do a lot of legwork on the front end. I am NOT saying this is rampant, but cipher it out. $3500 x 1000? 2000? At 40%+...?

Edited September 27, 2021 by ThenNow

[Eagle1970 210]

1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

I’m mostly referring to the Mass Tort Claimant Cottage Industry, as my friend calls it. Comb the papers for the latest action and file away. “Penalties for fraud? Jail time and fines? Pah. They won’t enforce that.” I’m not saying it is the case, but there are 5000 pro se claimants, a couple of us included who are NOT such humans. Also, if you have a decent pool of claimants clients, do the math. $3500 adds up quickly especially if you didn’t do a lot of legwork on the front end. I am NOT saying this is rampant, but cipher it out. $3500 x 1000? 2000? At 40%+...?

I'm very interested to see how it plays out.  For someone who doesn't need the money, wants privacy or doesn't have a strong case, I can see the $3500 being considered.  But I recall seeing a breakdown wherein a big number of claims is in most severe abuse class.  Can't see a lot of them scooping up $3500, as adequate.  Then again, the more times I see that closed-state claimants could get nearly zero, the better that offer (or a bumped up one in the future) will look.  I don't know if the money is there, but a bump to $10k would likely settle a whole bunch of claims.

[ThenNow 1373]

15 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

I don't know if the money is there, but a bump to $10k would likely settle a whole bunch of claims.

Someone please file such an idea so I can watch Tanc Schiavoni fly around the room like a whirling dervish. I’d pay to see that. (Pretty much a zero percent chance we will get to see either that sort of exit ramp cash or therefore, sadly, the dervish.)

Edited September 27, 2021 by ThenNow

[CynicalScouter 1434]

It is going to be coming in fast and furious tonight. The latest:

1) FCR/Coalition proposed letter for the solicitation package

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/01a91144-1556-4ebc-9af3-4c9530df76ac_6376.pdf

All emphasis in original. Note what gets emphasized: how much and when.

"The Coalition and the FCR have worked tirelessly on behalf of survivors to negotiate the terms of
a the Plan, which will promptly provide over $1.8 billion to be paid to survivors. It also provides the
framework for substantial future settlements that will increase the recovery for survivors. The Plan is
currently supported by representatives of approximately 70,000 survivors.

The Plan represents the only assured path to recover and pay billions of dollars to survivors
of sexual abuse in the BSA’s programs. The only other path for survivors likely involves years of
litigation and significant risk that survivors will receive much less than they are assured of receiving
under the Plan. In our view, the settlement embodied in the Plan represents the best possible
outcome for sexual abuse survivors. It will result in meaningful distributions of billions of dollars
in value to survivors following confirmation, without lengthy, expensive and harmful litigation of
individual abuse claims. A very brief description of the Plan terms, as pertaining to you and your
recoveries, is contained below."

2) TCC files its proposed confirmation schedule. Confirmation hearing pushed back to February 28, 2022. Again: BSA has said it is out of cash by 1Q 2022.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/10798e10-7ef0-4fdc-949b-f9e992f936df_6375.pdf

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by CynicalScouter