ThenNow

Very, very few were already reported or listed, for that very reason. I got a Saturday night hypothetical for youz guys. You’re a member of the LC Cone of Silence Brigade. You’re tasked with going through your share of a couple hundred Proofs of Claim. In your reading, you discover terrible things, credibly alleged, about a guy you go to church with or see at the bar or is a part of your hunting club. He abused more than one boy, you find. The SoL had run on all the claims. What do you do? How do you feel? How do you find yourself around him? Hm? I saw my abuser in my hometown once when I was a grown a** man. I walked into a coffee shop, got in line, and there he was a few people in front of me. I froze between pissing myself and going to my truck to get the bat I kept behind the seat. I talked myself into just waiting for him to leave and resisted the temptation to do what I wanted to do.

Wouldn’t you know. “Pride cometh before the fall.” I typed a comma instead of a period. D-Oh!

Fair warning. I have been granted special dispensation by the court to be a participating party in this process. I am limited to the Comma Committee. Trust me, it will take weeks. I plan to leave no comma misplaced, no comma conspicuous by its absence and no comma that I don’t want just because I don’t like the point being made. JUST KIDDING. I AM NOT ON ANYTHING, other than this stupid, hard, dinky Windsor chair my wife substituted while I’m suffering the two-year wait time on new breakfast table chairs.

Back to the case that kicked off this thread, I believe Auburn, AL is in the Chattahoochee Council, yes? If so, the list of claims shows 150 implicating it independently and 3 “shared” with Greater Alabama Council. I was thinking it may be a small number than that and very easy to work through and see the more recent claims, identify anyone notable, as here. I would like to know if LCs are reviewing all of their claims as a matter of course. Anyone know? PS - This is a Scouter site, yes? I need to report that I am baffled and troubled by the fact that topics are segregated by being designated “threads.” Shouldn’t you/we be calling them “binder twines”? There. Got that off my chest. Carry on...

From my view, given no attorney updates (other than when I talk to myself which is frequently), the TCC has done a great job of tying to keep us advised. Sometimes, it can only be after the fact when things emerge from the mediation cones of silence or happen in court. That’s a huge challenge for many of us; being behind the information curve. What I’ve heard here is a number of firms, AIS and others, haven’t been so hot communicating with clients, especially in response to personal inquiries. That is awful. No attorney should get 40-50% if they’re not doing their job. Me, too. Hindsight is 20/20, but it would have been nice for there to have been a more obvious, clear and robust explanation of the process within the POC. Unfortunately, guys who never really saw the document and/or processed through a call center would never have seen it or be told about it anyway. I hate that.

Ok. Obviously not done for the night. Don’t disagree and hopefully you didn’t think I was saying otherwise. I’m trying to point out the very hybrid, unique situation this is. We’re not talking about a direct allegation to a “reporter” or observed suspicious behavior. These are, most likely, detailed retellings of a man’s abuse for the specific purpose of receiving compensation, with some expectation of great discretion, confidentiality (admittedly qualified) and the promise of notice pre-disclosure. The difference couldn’t be too much greater.

Actually, I reported my head was throbbing and I was fighting off slumber. Furthermore, my wife has no interest in talking about BSA insurance matters after cursory briefings and hearing recaps. Knowing Chubb is a/the major player, she tells me, “Well, good luck,” and rolls her eyes.

Last note for the night, I think. What is difficult for non-victims to viscerally and deeply understand is this. Finding out about even the prospect of our Proof of Claim being used by others, without any due notice, is a massive trigger. When I read the article, it lit a short fuse. That fuse led to the implosion that occurs when I am confronted, yet again, with the falling, falling, falling into panic and despair that besets me when control is taken from me without my permission. Out of control of my body, my already fragile identity, my information and my fate. Everyone feels insecure when not in control. We feel the earth tremble, the ground open up beneath us and the seemingly inevitable slide toward dark places.

manda.pdf

Victims, generally, yes. As to the individual who put their blood and guts on the line to create the jumping off point for law enforcement? Maybe not so much if there is no notice, warning and, “Hey, you might want to be aware...” I know you can’t understand, and that’s got to be that (for me).

Yes. Ok. I see it and I now recall. It’s at the very end of an 8-line paragraph, comprising the totality of “PART I: Confidentiality.” Since I previously reported all this crap to law enforcement in 2003 and BSA in 2008, it wasn’t an issue for me. HOWEVER, we were told there would be due Notice of Designation of Additional Permitted Parties in the event any other previously unnamed party requested and was being granted access to our Proofs of Claim. If they’re forwarding to law enforcement, that should trigger the notice requirement. I know, I know. They are using an exception for expediency/existent circumstances or some such. Perhaps the victims received such notice? In ANY case, we deserve to be advised if this is happening with our POC. Right?

Because I’m a forum ‘how to’ dork, this is da link (I think):

I’m trying to figure out exactly what the H. E. Double Hockey Sticks is going on. (Btw, this conversation has been banished to the basement. I know, right? I guess I’ll see you there. Forgot what it’s called..)

I hereby lodge my official request for a new thread to talk about BSA and CO insurance or lack thereof. My head is throbbing trying to keep up. My wife’s undergraduate degree is from the top Risk Management & Insurance college in the nation. She always told me her texts were a great cure for insomnia. 😬 Not so here, but it is getting a bit hyper-focused and specialized. My view. Maybe I don’t mind table tennis that much after all?

I’ve also spent way too much time pondering the implications of all this hooey on E&O and D&O at all related levels. If this has been discussed, I’d love to be pushed toward the relevant discussion, regardless the necessity to play table tennis or other such.

My bet is the big reveal is going to cause irritation not unlike mine. Have all LCs been aware of the contributions by all others? Will the non-mediation firms will be seeing these for the first time? As far as I know, the members of the TCC are the only victim claimants who’ve been privy. Fair assumptions?

Was there a mysterious outbreak of fainting spells, hiking exhaustion and/or too much tent-contained flatulence that lead to this crisis? That was today’s (apparently bombed) comedic moment. One of them, anyway. I offer no equitable compensation in the event that commitment is breached.

Was there a mysterious outbreak of fainting spells, hiking exhaustion and/or too much tent-contained flatulence that lead to this crisis?

Forgive duplication if previously posted. I’m busy playing table tennis, bumper cars and pinball. [smirk] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/boy-scouts-get-conditional-approval-850m-bankruptcy-deal-n1277250

Please resist any temptation to do so. Some of us don’t excel at forum thread table tennis, bumper cars or pinball.

This I do not know. I am a lowly peon on the BSA Chapter 11 totem pole. (Can we use that phrase or has it been stamped “CANCELED”?) Meh to infinity and beyond.

Yes I do. As great as it would be to know the general calculus to get to the number(s), my irritation and response were built on the Bay-Lakes Council example. I was washing away all else, looking only at the live claims and the Under the Gray Cloud claims compared to their asset base. And, as I keep harping, why can’t we see the competing Berkeley Research Group Dashboards? “Non-disclosure/NDA,” “redacted,” “under seal” and “mediation privilege” may end up banished from my vocabulary after this. They have 155 claims, 5 that could easily chew up their long-term investments if they were the sole source of recovery, which I know is a fiction, and a pile of assets. It feels diminishing, in the specific, not in general or as to the overall calculation methodology. If they do not have the benefit of the channeling injunction, what impact will the claims have on their financial condition? They ain’t looking at coming up with $3M, me thinks. I’m not asking for pain, I’m saying this looks like a mini Hartford deal: exposure incommensurate with the ticket to home base. Meh. I don’t like it.

I know you’re doing calculations and speculating, but do you have any idea how this feels on “our side” of the table, as you wonder about it? “The market is doing great so it will be ‘easier’ for National and LCs to ‘absorb’ the cost of settlement...Huh. That didn’t hurt as much as I thought. Off we go...” I’m not seeing a market bump in my award making the pain of these 50 years easier to absorb. Sorry, but that’s how it feels.

My “Art of War” tactics have been discovered. On to chaos, I suppose...

By the by, limiting the topic/titling the thread around the RSA Ruling is a very tight leash unlike all the previous iterations. I still like, Episode V: When & How Much? but I have a built-in bias.