ThenNow

Remember, the insurers are not hiding the fact that they include time-barred claims in the “invalid” category. It is right there in black and white. They’ve beaten that drum harder and louder as this has gone forward. What’s that, 59,000 or some such? I try not to remember the number, frankly.

Yes. Solely and exclusively speaking for myself. I apologize if that post suggested otherwise.

Bring it on…

Question for my fellow survivor/victim claimants. What say you about this effort? As I’ve said, I hate the prospect of fraudulent claims and unethical attorneys, but have trepidation about letting the camels (Century/Chubb and Hartford) get their nose under the tent. Curious to hear your thoughts and feelings. Both matter to me.

My important questions way back there got buried under the avalanche! PS - I’m glad I turned off email notices for every post. 😬😅😉

Dang it. I had my machine on text to audio while swinging in the hammock. Reminiscing about my Gramps listening to baseball on the old transistor, but this was exciting from the first pitch!

When do you think you will get the additional information? I’m not in any way poking, just very interested to see it, whatever ‘it’ is.

Because of BSA was going to collude with any group of lawyers, they wouldn't have picked Kosnoff D-oh. I misread your post. Apologies.

Agreed, but the statement was that the AIS secret agent accessed the POC somehow.

Why do you say that? From the launch press conference, he was clearly the lead dog. Stewart E. was a bit of a mess in terms of moderating and presentation.

I don’t know if this happened, but I’m seriously enjoying this rabbit hole right now! I had a crap day yesterday, slept poorly, woke up early and went straight into wrangling and vexing over a matter of no eternal consequence.

I take it no pillow was deployed?

How did they do that? The claimant failed to mark the POC confidential, as opposed to publicly available? Not sure how the are accessed. Never asked, since I marked mine for confidentiality. Or, the AIS person, as a Permitted Party (via what group), jumped on a pro se claimant not already represented? Dunno.

And, he substantively responded?

You can direct message. Click a screen name and select it. I’m nearly a Luddite and unsure of group DMs.

Debtor in Possession. Yup. That pesky word and legal concept of agency.

I'm glad you used the word "conflate" as opposed to anything accusatory. I'm not sure if you looked at his profile, but I highly doubt there is any malicious intent or volitional deception. My take.

I don't care what is there to be revealed, only that it become known and widely distributed.

That is less egregious and doesn't implicate BSA, but nonetheless very wrong on multiple levels.

I'd say, affidavit(s) from those who experienced this firsthand. And, pronto. Sounds like they are there for the asking and a trip to the Notary.

I'm not an insider, but yes, no, no. This was initially in 2019, if I understood correctly.

Digital redirection is, in fact, direction/indirect recommendation, if this is correct. Direct nexus: this --> then that --> then the other thing. I'll wait to see the rest.

If any "official" website for claims registration or reporting lead to AIS contacting a would be claimant, that is the same thing, unless the system was hacked. Redirection of a contact is, effectively, a direction/recommendation. I'll wait on the pillow dealio until I see the rest of the trail.

I have a string of expletives to unleash when I see the rest of this trail of bread crumbs, er, loaves. Going to get a pillow so my wife doesn't think I cut off some fingers or discovered my old car is missing.

Was the retainer agreement attached or included with any BSA presentation or materials?