CynicalScouter Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 4 minutes ago, ThenNow said: When we were all young, spry and hopeful, we speculated about the, "Thanks, but no thanks. I'll take my chances," responses that could be down the road. Well, here we be in the cul-de-sac. We are. I cannot speak to other councils but the two I am familiar with are agreeing to pay but other councils are "yes, with conditions" and it remains to be seen if those conditions are going to be something BSA can or cannot work with. So far, in my limited knowledge, I have not heard any outright "no" language. I also wonder if the next document we see won't be a council-by-council breakdown but will be something from the Ad Hoc Local Committee of Local Councils telling the court they have received sufficient letters of intent/statements to meet the $500 million cash/property requirements of the LCs. I really, really want to see the LC breakdowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: I really, really want to see the LC breakdowns. Take a ticket and get in line. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said: 2) Councils putting in conditions: there have been councils that have put conditions on payment. Some wanted to try and put assurances their payments would only go to pay claims arising from their council. There is a big worry some councils will be bailing out other councils. This is apparently a sticking point. 100% understandable. Similar to or same as proceeds from camp sales only go to claims from that council. Well intentioned by individuals who want to help their council's victims. Also, probably some legal basis (no real knowledge in fact) that they want to see their local victims compensated as part of upholding the validity of being shielded against future claims. Complexity ... This case is complex enough. Yet another painful twist in how complex to manage. Can't isolate costs ... Some are shared by settlement off-the-top. Some of the funds go for trust admin, victim lawyer profit sharing, etc. OR is everyone only paid after a specific victim is reimbursed. It seems that this only works if no-one gets any fund from the settlement except on a victim-by-victim payment basis. Not even off the top settlement profit sharing. Not even trust administration. ... Otherwise, there is a spend rate and profit sharing independent of the victim's council. Here is my SE nightmare scenario. I'm in a 3 shades of grey state. We contribute 75% or more of reserves to a settlement. Only .01% of my funds go to our local victims. In next decade, state re-opens SOL. Victims now claim that they were not compensated because it was not worth revisiting the damage for pennies on the dollar. Or claim they were not compensated fairly now that the window is open. I could see the concrete settlement shield begin to crack. As a scout exec, I'd want to see most of my contributions to go local to build up that future shield. ... Seriously ... it would be hard to claim you already paid your victims if none of the local victims were compensated fairly or similar to victims in other states. If I was a SE in a 3 shades of grey state, I'd think hard about recommending to NOT be part of the settlement. If the SE is in an open state, I'd jump at the settlement. Edited July 15, 2021 by fred8033 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 7 minutes ago, fred8033 said: SE nightmare scenario. I'm in a 3 shades of grey state. We contribute 75% or more of reserves to a settlement. Only .01% of my funds go to our local victims. In next decade, state re-opens SOL. Victims now claim that they were not compensated because it was not worth revisiting the damage for pennies on the dollar. Or claim they were not compensated fairly now that the window is open. I could see the concrete settlement shield begin to crack. As a scout exec, I'd want to see most of my contributions to go local to build up that future shield. ... Seriously ... it would be hard to claim you already paid your victims if none of the local victims were compensated fairly or similar to victims in other states. I'm no sooth sayer, but I could see precisely that scenario coming to pass. As always, who knows? As a claimant, it seems like the dangling carrot would be attractive and a flicker of hope. As a person suffering with CPTSD and other co-morbidities caused by the abuse, chasing that carrot for X years of battle with the insurance companies, compounded by who knows how many of the same while the legislature(s) grapple with victims' advocacy groups might be an emotional death knell. Possibly physical, as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxRanger Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 I want to thank all of you for your patient answers to my questions. I shall pass on what I have learned to my scouting friends. I have decided to pull the plug on my 50+ years in the program with the possible exception of camp maintenance work (for so long as that might last.) Adios. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonEagle Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 Hello again. Firstly I want to apologize for the way I acted in the part 3 thread, got a little emotional and over reacted. I have some more questions I want to ask about the logistics of this case but first a peace offering. Would you guys be interested in me posting some relevant portions from my AIS update email? (Recieved 7/9). The main things I took away from the email are 1 don't listen to headlines claiming deal has been reached 2 the insurance is where the bulk of the $ is coming from so don't worry/ focus on the other contributions 3 it is possible we will be voting by end of august with ballots due in october if currently discussed plan goes forward. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 19 minutes ago, AnonEagle said: Would you guys be interested in me posting some relevant portions from my AIS update email? (Recieved 7/9). The pro se claimants here, including me, certainly would. Danke, in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 (edited) 34 minutes ago, AnonEagle said: 1 don't listen to headlines claiming deal has been reached 2 the insurance is where the bulk of the $ is coming from so don't worry/ focus on the other contributions 3 it is possible we will be voting by end of august with ballots due in october if currently discussed plan goes forward. It was the very same AIS attorneys going on PBS and talking to CNN that said the deal was reached. OK. That is close to my guestimated timeline Event Guestimated Timeline Disclosure Statement Objection Deadline Tuesday, August 10, 2021 Disclosure Statement Hearing Tuesday, August 17, 2021 Voting Record Date Tuesday, August 17, 2021 Deadline to Mail Solicitation Packages and Related Notices Wednesday, August 25, 2021 Rule 3018(a) Motion Deadline Friday, September 10, 2021 Deadline to File Plan Supplement Friday, September 17, 2021 Voting Resolution Event Deadline Friday, October 1, 2021 Voting Deadline Friday, October 1, 2021 Preliminary Voting Report Deadline Wednesday, October 6, 2021 Plan Objection Deadline Tuesday, October 12, 2021 Final Voting Report Deadline Friday, October 15, 2021 Confirmation Brief/Reply Deadline Wednesday, October 20, 2021 Confirmation Hearing Monday, October 25, 2021 Edited July 15, 2021 by CynicalScouter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 Wondering how the deposition of Mosby is going. Wondering too how the Kosnoff deposition is going to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 14 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: Wondering how the deposition of Mosby is going. Wondering too how the Kosnoff deposition is going to go. Same. Eagerly awaiting the news from our resident ace reporter, analyst and town crier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 Kosnoff points out something a little surprising to me. The TCC is not planning to do a town hall until August 12 until AFTER the plan disclosure statement hearing where the statement would be approved (or rejected). This seems...off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 12 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: The TCC is not planning to do a town hall until August 12 until AFTER the plan disclosure statement hearing where the statement would be approved (or rejected). For my part, I would look at the calendar. We're a fair piece from August 12th. They've called town halls on short notice and the clock has not struck 8.12 nor nearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 2 minutes ago, ThenNow said: We're a fair piece from August 12th. Right, that's why I said this seems off. I would suspect SOMETHING after the July 29 hearing since that's pretty big. If the judge nukes the RSA, the August 12 meeting is moot. If the judge approves the RSA, that's big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: Right, that's why I said this seems off. He's keeping his Tweety Birds fed, me thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsch322 Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 Can someone help me out understanding what the ramifications would be if true that AIS and other lawyers may have been funded by Wall Street and that the loans are due? If those lawyers pushed thru a settlement that wasn't good for their clients but mostly based on the need to pay back loans would that leave them open to malpractice claims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts