Chapter 11 Announced - Part 4 Revised Plan

[Muttsy]

Just now, Muttsy said:

That is correct but not only because they encouraged you to file a claim. They did it because they intended to bar your claim forever and pay you nothing. They did not want the chance that your abuse state could pass a window or a discovery statute. Just since Feb 20, 2020 the bankruptcy petition filing date, several more states either passed victim friendly laws or extended their existing laws. AR, LA, AZ, NY, ME

Talk about fraudulent concealment. 

They could have limited their media campaign to select states with windows or discovery statutes. They did not do that.  The TCC could have pushed back. It didn't because Stang is part of or wanted desperately to be part of the "cool kids club" aka Sidley and Austin, Case and White etc. The "A" List law firms in the bankruptcy sewer, er world. 

[ThenNow]

2 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

And here's the other concern: the re-traumatization is not over. Any victim who thought (or were told) they would be able to just file the Proof of Claim last November and be paid out is sadly in for a rude awakening (unless they take the $3500 not-questions-asked payout).

As I've said in detail several times prior to my above post. Remember the one about, "the documentation burden alone is going to be nearly insurmountable to some claimants" and the ever popular "fulcrum to flip to the Expedited Track"?  

[CynicalScouter]

26 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

That is correct but not only because they encouraged you to file a claim. They did it because they intended to bar your claim forever and pay you nothing.

No, it is because as part of the bankruptcy BSA was required to notify ALL potential claimants that they needed to file a claim and the language the BSA ads used were approved by the court.

The other ads pushed by lawyers/lawyers groups were much different.

[ThenNow]

28 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

Talk about fraudulent concealment. 

I'm going with the Child Catcher in Pinocchio. 

[CynicalScouter]

24 minutes ago, Muttsy said:

They could have limited their media campaign to select states with windows or discovery statutes. They did not do that.

Not really. The idea is that in a bankruptcy ALL claims from EVERYWHERE are settled as to the debtor, regardless of what state the claim originated from.

A bankruptcy court was not going to say "sure, this will settle claims in these states, but debts incurred in those states are not covered."

This gets back to a larger point which is that using the bankruptcy process to try and settle a mass tort is insane. But this is a bankruptcy proceeding; you cannot custom cut a bankruptcy to only affect claims from certain states.

[ThenNow]

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

No, it is because as part of the bankruptcy BSA was required to notify ALL potential claimants that they needed to file a claim and the language the BSA ads used were approved by the court.

I'm sorry, but again, you don't get it and you won't convince claimants by repeating the technical details. Being right is not the same as it feeling right and resting comfortably on one's fragile psyche. I mean no offense, but you simply can't understand or reason it away with legal precision. Sorry.

[CynicalScouter]

1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

I mean no offense, but you simply can't understand or reason it away with legal precision. Sorry.

You are right. I'm sorry.

[Eagle1970]

1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

I'm sorry, but again, you don't get it and you won't convince claimants by repeating the technical details. Being right is not the same as it feeling right and resting comfortably on one's fragile psyche. I mean no offense, but you simply can't understand or reason it away with legal precision. Sorry.

And, again, given the history of abuse and concealment I would only support a reorganization over liquidation if the BSA does everything it can to prevent further abuse AND takes care of the victims-be it compensation, reimbursement for expenses or anything else within reason.  I only have one vote, but it is my vote.

[fred8033]

49 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

This gets back to a larger point which is that using the bankruptcy process to try and settle a mass tort is insane. 

Fascinating.  Large amount written on this.  I just did a little (and I mean a little) searching and reading on this.  I had no idea so much was written on the problems of mass tort litigation (MDL), bankruptcy and using bankruptcy to manage/survive MDL.  Something is broken with MDL/bankruptcy.

It's a catch 22.  If BSA doesn't file bankruptcy, the MDL individual actions will drive it into bankruptcy.  "Actions" as no guarantee that it becomes a single class action.  It could be many individual claims over time.  No end of liability or suits.  So, bankruptcy first to preserve as much for MDL as possible?  Or large MDLs (if possible) resulting in bankruptcy.  

Only positive I see is bankruptcy first allows an easier acknowledgement of the liability debt. 

I doubt either path saves cost.  

Edited July 7, 2021 by fred8033

[ThenNow]

45 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

You are right. I'm sorry.

I drone on further not to pile on, but to add to my effort in kindness. Please take it that way.

The feeling this has elicited in many of us is one of being defrauded and abused, again, now in a very public way. Most of our abuse was "private," to use the best word I can think of at the moment. Many told their stories for the first time, including to loved ones, therapists, attorneys, the court and others. A huge, enormous, immense, momentous and ginormous event. In most cases, no one thing or moment was more difficult or wrenching than that one. Now, exposed and out in the open, we came with hands out to receive long over due restitution, compensation, recompense or whatever we want to call it. We did that at the public invitation of the BSA, which in hindsight we now see was very amorphous, vague and speculative. We didn't realize that or grasp the mantras known to insiders of, "welcome to bankruptcy" and this is "just business." It feels soooo humiliating and soul-crushing. We are reasonably intelligent and reasonable men. We feel foolish, gullible and confused like a the sexual abuse. I hope my description helps paint the emotion image. I've never before felt this kind of see-sawing between hope, elation and anticipation on one side and depression, confusion, anger and dismay on the other. Well, maybe when I joined Scouts and ended up being abuse by those I admired and trusted.

The BSA Bankruptcy Seesaw Game:

"It's going to be good. Wait, that sounds terrible. The LCs are hiding their assets and the HABs are protected?" 

"Ouch! The judge likes the BSA more than us. We are less important than 700,000 happy Scouts and annual dues. That don't feel so hot."

"Those guys are XXXXX and their lawyers are such and so! Um. How do we do this without help?!"

"What? The Hartford gets out for a fraction of their exposure? Gah...Oh, wait. That deal won't stick. Whew!" 

It's mind numbing and exhausting. Just standing and watching the legal gamesmanship has felt that way, as you've heard from a number of us. I apologize for continuing to try, but my effort is for myself (and the other guys) as much as hoping you can better understand.

Edited July 7, 2021 by ThenNow

[Eagle1970]

And the genius (not) who decided to use what I call "shades of grey" to define our worth goes to the top of my list.  I'm guessing he/she is not familiar with the book.  It has taken on a whole new sick meaning to me.

From the day the BSA camp employee "took me under his wing" because I was a boy who deserved and needed "special attention", I spiraled downhill.  As a young adult, I pulled out the merit badge to contact the Council, but it could not be handled anonymously so I feared his retaliation.  Then, I decided to hire an attorney to see what could be done (but by that time, the SoL was in full, ugly force).  The entire system left me to the wolves.  Frankly, it's amazing I have done as well as I have.

I'm not inclined to allow this to tear up what remaining years I may have on this Earth.  They will probably win again.

 

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, Eagle1970 said:

Frankly, it's amazing I have done as well as I have.

I'm not inclined to allow this to tear up what remaining years I may have on this Earth. 

And I, for one, am proud of you for that tenacity. It is not easy in any respect. 

[CynicalScouter]

PBS: Understanding the Boy Scouts’ sexual assault settlement and whether it’s adequate

• John Yang:

  Have you talked to any of the survivors that you have been — you represent? And what is their reaction to what they're hearing about this?

• Kenneth Rothweiler:

  Yes, I talk to survivors every day. And I always get their opinion as to how they're feeling and how they perceive the whole bankruptcy going.

  I wouldn't say they're overjoyed, but they feel satisfied because the Boy Scouts have acknowledged what they have done. And now they have come to the table, and compensation is coming to the survivors...

  This settlement with the BSA and the locals is just the first step. And that has always been the plan, to get the settlement with those two entities, and then to get the insurance rights, which have now assigned to the trust, so that we can go after the insurance companies.

  And that's where, actually, most of the money is. So, I predict that, in the end, this is going to be a multibillion-dollar settlement...

  Different amounts to different claimants, depending upon what state they're in, the severity of the abuse, the longevity of the abuse.

  There's a lot of factors that go into it. It's called a TDP, so trust distribution protocol, which is basically guidelines for the trustee to assess how much each individual claimant will get.

   

  John Yang:

  And there are — as I noted in the introduction, there are some attorneys who are not thrilled about this, who say it's too small, who say that you can't really judge how equitable it is until you know how much the local councils really have.

  What's your response?

  Kenneth Rothweiler:

  Well, my response to that is, those lawyers don't know what the plan was from the beginning.

  The plan always was to get a settlement with the BSA National and then the locals and then move on to the insurers. And as I told you, John, in the beginning, there's billions of potential dollars that could come from the insurance companies, also from chartering organizations, like the LDS Church, and — I mean, from sponsoring organizations like the LDS Church, and also from chartering organizations.

  So, there's a lot of potential money that can come the way of the survivors. We now have to be aggressive, as the lawyers, to go after it.

[ThenNow]

24 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I wouldn't say they're overjoyed, but they feel satisfied because the Boy Scouts have acknowledged what they have done.

I have not heard a full-throated "acknowledgement" of "what they done." Ever. Did I miss it? I don't expect one, either. Like any settlement agreement, it's often entered into with no admission of guilt or liability. Because you cough up money, you aren't shouting to the world, "We really screwed up and a lot of boys paid the price."

24 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

now they have come to the table, and compensation is coming to the survivors...

I know I'm parsing and he's in an interview, but this is more vague, global language that sets us up for another let down. The tank is still technically empty, won't be anywhere close to full and the spigot is being guarded by time, insurance companies, COs and the Great and Powerful Oz. Not to mention SoLs.

24 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Different amounts to different claimants, depending upon what state they're in, the severity of the abuse, the longevity of the abuse.

I've been hammering on my press contacts to talk about this. The public is almost universally under the impression that this is going to be an equal slicing of the available assets. It's not fair to anyone to continue the perpetuation of that misperception. 

24 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

those lawyers don't know what the plan was from the beginning.

Bah. He needed a better answer than, "Those guys are just stupid and ign'ert!" No substantive attempt to rebut or explain the opposition was the easy way out. "Trust me. I know what I'm talking about and those weenies don't." I'm not saying I agree with those accused of ignorance, but let's be lawyerly and honest. C'mon, man!

Edited July 7, 2021 by ThenNow

[Eagle1970]

4 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

 

I've been hammering on my press contacts to talk about this. The public is almost universally under the impression that this is going to be a equal divided of the available assets. It's not fair to anyone to continue the perpetuation of that misperception. 

 

Yes, if the story was really out there, the media would pick up "Boys who were molested in New York may receive up to $1 Billion dollars.  However, due to the Statute of Limitation in Mississippi, boys who endured the same abuse will receive somewhere around 10 cents".  At bare minimum, that would catch the attention of Legislators.  Whether they choose to jump in and do something to make this equitable is an entirely different story.