Eagle1993

I tend to agree with this comment from the site. There are countless news sources and forums (ahem) that blast scouting from all sides. It's great to see a positive message for the tens of millions who benefitted. I believe in scouting which is why I spend my free time leading a Den, Pack and Troop. I haven't been fishing in months, haven't gone golfing in over a year as I spend much of my free time working on scouting. I believe it is a unique experience and greatly benefits those who participate. Can the BSA improve ... sure, but its the best program available at this time. I think our country would be much better off if more youth went through scouting and unfortunately, it appears we are headed in the opposite direction. Hopefully efforts like this can start turning this around.

Similar battles are going on in other cases. Found this article to be interesting ... and perhaps a hint to future battles. https://buffalonews.com/news/local/buffalo-diocese-relies-on-insurance-policies-to-cover-abuse-claims-in-bankruptcy/article_aadfdb85-b90c-548d-9e36-9be79e19f1b5.html

I expect the BSA at all levels knows the CO model is broken. If they truly implemented the model, @David CO is correct. No unit can switch COs as the unit is simply the extension of the CO. If the CO decides to not recharter, they shut down the unit. Now, the CO can decide to be "friendly" and offer to donate the scout equipment to another unit, but it is the CO's property. I'm probably incorrect, but I thought in the past veteran bars required the unit to be chartered with the same CO over the time period. The BSA doesn't run this way anymore. It seems like they are committed to the "idea" of the CO as they can claim that the CO is the owner of the unit and fully responsible. However, they also don't really want the COs to own the units (look at changes they made to how the funds must be used for scouting after a unit closes). DEs know that many COs don't really meet the charter agreement, but they have to sign off or they would see many units simply collapse. That said, if I were this unit I would be doing the same actions they are currently planning. Unfortunately, the units I know that searched for COs recently ended up panic signing a CO up right before charter. They were selective at first, but then realized few if any organizations are looking to sign on BSA units (at least based on what they have told me).

Look at Schedule 2 and 3 here. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/876518_2293.pdf This shows all of the various insurance policies for National and LCs. The question is what is coverage of each of these policies. Then someone would have to see how many claims existed against that specific policy. Then add all of those up. The problem for Hartford (and others) is that have a ton of exposure through multiple policies. I think the TCC is asking (through Discovery) how they came up with $650M. The collation has already concluded the that $650M is not adequate.

I think you are correct that it’s the insurance companies that were served. While Kosnoff is tweeting about BSA and Mediators it looks like he indicated there was discovery coming from the insurance companies. “The mediators Carey, Finn and Gallagher have zero credibility now, if they ever did. They facilitated this outrage in secret and w/o the survivors’ bk lawyers. They simply sold out the victims. They should resign or be fired and no one should ever accept them as mediators again.” “I’m certain that BSA and it’s team of legal vermin and Chubb and Hartford’s pond scum legal teams and even the disgraced mediators are soiling their BVDs today. Discovery a few hours ago propounded on CB and HIG lawyers. No more talking; no more mediation...”

I saw Kosnoff’s tweet yesterday and was wondering why he made the statement about discovery. He mentioned that the mediators were also served. It really seems the judge has lost all control.

Agree with simplify. LCs and COs are pushed out of the court room and settlement. National insurance policies are given to the settlement trust. The trust can either settle with the insurance companies or sue them in District Court. BSA HA bases including Arrow are added to the pot and the Philmont mortgage is determined to be unsecured (Arrow is secured). Done.

WSJ reporting Century may go bankrupt over the BSA lawsuit. https://www.wsj.com/articles/boy-scouts-sexual-abuse-claims-threaten-financial-havoc-for-insurance-companies-11619211199

@Eagle1970 welcome to Scouter.com. I’m terribly sorry to hear of your abuse.

CFL's sale is going final. The plan is to make it a high end family camp ground.

One problem here ... that is $86,060 in the Settlement Trust per victim. This does not mean victims walk away with $86,060. 1) The Settlement Trust will have to pay fees to lawyers, administration, etc. that manages the trust. In some cases, they will have property they have to sell (oil rights, paintings, etc.) 2) Many claimants, as mentioned, have legal representation who will take 40% of the recovery. So, $7.1B * 10% (trust management) + $7.1B * 40% (legal fees) = $3.55B in "fees" leaving $3.55B for victims. That means the victims walk away with $43K each with a $7.1B payout.

I agree that the end goal of the TCC and many claimants is not the destruction of the BSA; however, most will want the money their lawyers are telling them they could expect if they reject the current offer. The TCC (and the various lawyers) has a number in mind on what the BSA can afford to pay (as they have said on this site, they have already had a company perform an assessment of more than 500 BSA properties including a review if they are restricted or not). They likely have a number in mind in terms of liability of insurance companies. I doubt it is the full $102B; however, it is likely well north of $1-$2B. Until BSA's offer comes close to number they have in mind, they will continue to reject any offer. The judge is unlikely to approve a deal until the claimants approve an offer. In the latest response, the prediction is that 95% of claimants will vote against BSA's current offer. BSA needs 66% to approve. Now, does this then end with Chapter 7 of BSA ... I think that is too early to tell.

Kosnoff is on twitter complaining about Judge Silverstein improperly sealing and over redacting victim letters to the court. I was curious has the redacting is working in this case and why they wouldn't allow release of a groups estimate of Harford's liability.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/887735_2672.pdf Interesting find in the Future Clamant Representative response .. the court redacted their estimates of Harford's liability. So clearly there are estimates, but the court doesn't want that public.

Ok, I'm unlocking this topic. I removed a comment made about lawyers and some of the back and forth about that comment. I left on the tort discussion and that back and forth as it seems applicable. Let's try and stay on topic and avoid calling people names. Also, it would be good to have some patients with each other as this is a difficult topic to discuss in an online forum. Lets keep it scoutlike. My apologizes if I deleted something you believe as critical to this topic. You can always repost if you like.

I also think there is a difference between Cub Scouts & Scouts BSA in this area. I wouldn't let a 2nd grader just wander off from my Den Meeting. I also know the kids parents so I confirm who is taking him home. Scouts BSA ... once our Troop Meeting is done, 1/2 the kids get on their bikes and ride off. I don't track down 40 kids to confirm they made it home safely.

I definitely agree that being outside is relatively safe and a good reason to keep meetings/events outdoors as much as possible. We were following a similar plan, but ended up with 1 scout with Covid on one of our backpacking trips. Then a few months later another scout (my son) ended up having Covid while at a Troop meeting (outdoors). Those two events did not lead to any transmission (as I expect being outside helped), but it pushed us to virtual only for about 3 months (that plus winter). I'll add that we did require masks (though on the backpacking trip they were not always up) and social distancing even when outdoors. I was open with parents that if they have any concern, they should not send their kids to our events. That made my job a bit easier when I had to call parents informing them of the infections. I would say at minimum always follow your CO, Council, County and State Guidelines. I would hate to be in the position of calling parents if we had a Covid case and were violating those rules/guidelines.

CDC may be revising their guidelines for masks outdoors. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/it-still-necessary-wear-masks-outdoors-cdc-looking-revising-mask-n1264937

One of the topics in the May hearing is the estimation request. The TCC wants an estimate by claim. That way, they can look at every claim vs every insurance policy. Let's say Council A had a policy by Harford from January 1 to December 31 1990 with a maximum payout of $3M. The TCC will want to look at the total amount of claims (from the estimation process) they would have against that policy (that council in 1990). If it is $1.1M ... they want the $1.1M payout from that policy. There are both National & LC policies they will look at. The issue with Harford and Chubb is that they insured National & LCs all over the place for a long period of time. So sure, 1 policy max payout may be $3M ... but then if they have hundred of policies over the years and many of them start maxing out they could be on the hook for billions. That is why the insurance companies are fighting against the estimation proposal. They know the end result and its bad for them. They raise some valid points (how can you legitimately estimate this in a bankruptcy hearing when civil action for a single case could take a considerable amount of time). This is at least my understanding of the liability side.

Harford can likely afford $16B plus. They can sell off all of their investments/equity. It is not an offer based upon their resources to pay. BSA could sell off their HA bases and increase their offer. TCC is going to sue JP Morgan over that loan. Chubb will have to make an offer. LCs .. the TCC knows how much they can pay (they already assessed 500+ properties) COs ... who knows ... So ... the TCC and lawyers know what the real ability to pay is and I expect it is well north of the $1.1B offer. The only way this resolves quickly is BSA and insurers and LCs greatly increase their offer. If they don't, get ready to wait years in court. Many of these lawyers have been in this rodeo before. They play the LONG game. They have spent 4 years in court battles in the past over $20M. Do you really think they give up hundreds if not billlions of dollars without a long court battle?

Lets say if you look at the combined total of all insurance contracts they have over the time period and max payout is $10B. Then $650M is a steal for them. Insurance payouts are not based on the operating income of the insurance company. Just look at AIG. They owe what they owe. If they go bankrupt, then they will have to determine how much they have to pay during their own Chapter 11.

Very, very difficult to determine. National & LCs each had their own insurance policies that vary by time period. In addition, each of those may have some sort of limit of coverage. You have to piece together 100s if not 1000s of insurance contracts to see the total amount and then compare that to how many claimants there are within that time frame against that policy.

Kosnoff's team dug into this a bit and they believe that Harford is able to get the $650M from Warren Buffet's reinsurance company (so essentially they can settle with almost no impact to their bottom line). He is spending a ton of time ripping the various insurance companies (and their families). I think the $650M really touched a nerve as most plaintiff lawyers probably know deep down BSA has limited unrestricted assets (they will argue how much, but it is not $5 - $10B). The various insurance companies; however, do have some deep pockets and will borrow to stay out of bankruptcy ... so seeing $650M when the expectation is (as you said) 10 times that really got them upset. I wonder if BSA thought the Harford agreement would help their cause ... it looks like it hurt.

So ... um, here is an official response to BSA's & Harford's offer. If you don't want to read it ... the Cliff Notes ... "BSA can pound sand." https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/887735_2672.pdf

I think the one thing all of us need to remember is that what is said in public (even in court submissions) could simply be negotiation tactics. For example, National BSA may know that Sea Base, for example, will easily be lost if challenged. They would never admit that in their submissions as it can be a traded off during negotiations if included in the final settlement. Same with some of the submissions from lawyers. Kosnoff and others likely know the council assets wouldn't really go to National if National goes Chapter 7 ... but they push that message to perhaps scare up more dollars from the Ad Hoc Committee. We are talking billions of dollars at stake. BSA + Insurance offer so far stands at ~$1.1B. It is very likely it will end up larger. It would be one of the largest payouts in the last 5 years in any case in the USA and likely the largest sex abuse settlement ever. I expect a lot of what we see is scripted to try and influence the final outcome.