Chapter 11 Announced - Part 6 - Plan 5.0/TCC Plan TBD

[Eagle1993]

Judge ruling on various discovery .... believes that it should proceed including information into the $3500  and how the claims were vetted.  Most of the requests do not implicate privilege info, or they may, but discovery could be not privilege .  In general, how the claims were obtained/vetted are likely not protected by privilege.

She is opening up advertising, intake, proof of claim, how it was done ... pretty much everything.

[MattR]

3 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Judge ruling on various discovery .... believes that it should proceed including information into the $3500  and how the claims were vetted.  Most of the requests do not implicate privilege info, or they may, but discovery could be not privilege .  In general, how the claims were obtained/vetted are likely not protected by privilege.

She is opening up advertising, intake, proof of claim, how it was done ... pretty much everything.

A more accurate understanding helps everyone. I'm not sure why it's taken so long to get to the point where this is being looked at but I'm glad it is.

 

[ThenNow]

37 minutes ago, MattR said:

A more accurate understanding helps everyone. I'm not sure why it's taken so long to get to the point where this is being looked at but I'm glad it is.

Interesting look back...

https://legalnewsline.com/stories/574366277-hearing-tomorrow-about-possibly-fraudulent-sexual-abuse-claims-against-boy-scouts

[johnsch322]

4 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Century is stating they are going to push back that the vast majority of claims are false and were not vetted.  Century is making the statement ... BAC is saying they have a TON of data on rosters and are certifying that only 5% of claimants were really scouts.

5% seems extremely low. That would mean only about 4,250 were actually scouts. Wonder how they came to that number?  If the troops have lost that number of rosters it does not look good. 

Edited December 2, 2021 by johnsch322

[skeptic]

18 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

5% seems extremely low. That would mean only about 4,250 were actually scouts. Wonder how they came to that number?  If the troops have lost that number of rosters it does not look good. 

"If the troops have lost that number of rosters it does not look good. "

Not sure why that looks bad.  Many troops do not keep historical records, or they purge files over time; if nothing else for space and so on.  Now, unit charters that are part of annual recharter, the copies at the Council offices, I do not know if there is a legal time they need to be kept.  Most types of files are no more than 7 years I have been led to believe.  So, not having them would not be odd.  

Considering how many emails appeared in my spam box soon after the advertising began, and also the ads coming on FB and other sites where my Scouting involvement was noted, it is obvious that the accumulators were seriously beating the bushes.  Even recently I got another ad in my spam list.  

[Eagle1993]

22 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

5% seems extremely low. That would mean only about 4,250 were actually scouts. Wonder how they came to that number?  If the troops have lost that number of rosters it does not look good. 

What I found very interesting was the following point.  BSA councils are saying that they cannot even find the vast majority of claimants on their rosters.  They are also saying they have so many rosters from that time period they cannot possibly scan them all in.  
 

Century is preparing some big hits during plan confirmation 

[vol_scouter]

1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said:

What I found very interesting was the following point.  BSA councils are saying that they cannot even find the vast majority of claimants on their rosters.  They are also saying they have so many rosters from that time period they cannot possibly scan them all in.  
 

Century is preparing some big hits during plan confirmation 

The local councils and the national council have rosters of their members that are maintained.  That said, some records can be lost and a few councils have experienced fires.  Our council pays for professional storage and has for many years.  Membership fees, until very recently, all went to national so national has 'complete' rosters.  Youth can come to a few meetings without joining but being sure that everyone is covered by insurance compels units to require official membership.  Once again, in our council there are a substantial percentage where there is no record locally or nationally of membership and the claim does not list a unit ever known to have existed or accuses volunteers that likewise have no record of ever being in Scouting.  No doubt, a fraction of such claims may be legitimate, but one has to doubt that that a large fraction would be when the claim has little or no evidence that can be substantiated.  

My estimation from our council would be 25% to 33% (and maybe as high as 50%) but no where close to 95% as stated.  This is just my estimation.  

Seems to me that now is not the time to investigate the likely validity of the claims.  That should have been done nearly a year ago when there were allegations of poor vetting.  Everyone has proceeded based on the current number of claims.  

[skeptic]

Depending on how far back they need to go, many recharters were still hand done.  That means hand written materials on carboned forms, at one time.  Reading some of our units very early charter lists is a study in patience and lots of guessing.  Printed rosters only were common going back about 25 years or less.  

 

[Eagle94-A1]

 

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

  If the troops have lost that number of rosters it does not look good. 

Record retention laws vary not only from location to location, but also what type of record and the information on it. It can vary from 3 to 50 years, and some records longer. Our COR is a records retention guru. When we purged our records, he told us to keep everything 7 years and under. Anything 8 years or older could be purged.

[Eagle1993]

15 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

Record retention laws vary not only from location to location, but also what type of record and the information on it. It can vary from 3 to 50 years, and some records longer. Our COR is a records retention guru. When we purged our records, he told us to keep everything 7 years and under. Anything 8 years or older could be purged.

I think the concern being raised is that if councils purged records, then councils would simply say they don't have roster information.  Instead, councils are saying they do have rosters, they have 5% of the claimants found, and in fact, they have so much data from rosters they don't have the man power to scan in all of the records to provide Century.

Century's lawyer said in court ... so, what you are telling me, is that only 5% of claimants are showing up PLUS you have a ton of roster data (hundreds of thousands, etc.) to the point that you cannot scan them all in.  The council said yes.  Century's lawyer then said no backies when it comes confirmation time .. .the judge stepped in and said that would be hard for them to undo that statement now that they made it in court.

Century made it clear.  In every case in state court, BSA would start by finding the individual in their rosters, find the offender in their rosters, perhaps even find incident reports.  They are wondering why BSA is not doing that in bankruptcy.

Here is the point Century will make.  The BSA knows the majority of these claims are likely false.  Probably not 95% ... but a very high percentage (think 50 - 75%).  The BSA and councils are only offering a small dollar settlement, not because that is all they can afford (especially councils), but because they know most of the claims are false.  In addition, BSA is using the $3500 payment to buy votes from many of the false claims.  All of this is done to get a plan approved quickly with the lowest settlement they can.  However, when they are promising other companies money (such as Century) they are saying to assume all or most of the claims are real.  Century just wants to be on the same playing field as BSA ... if 75% of the claims are false, then Century only wants to talk to the 25% of the real claims.  

This is why Century and other insurance companies are going after law firms and aggregators.  They know they are on the hook for claims post plan and want to clear out questionable claims prior to plan confirmation.

 

[johnsch322]

46 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I think the concern being raised is that if councils purged records, then councils would simply say they don't have roster information.  Instead, councils are saying they do have rosters, they have 5% of the claimants found, and in fact, they have so much data from rosters they don't have the man power to scan in all of the records to provide Century.

Century's lawyer said in court ... so, what you are telling me, is that only 5% of claimants are showing up PLUS you have a ton of roster data (hundreds of thousands, etc.) to the point that you cannot scan them all in.  The council said yes.  Century's lawyer then said no backies when it comes confirmation time .. .the judge stepped in and said that would be hard for them to undo that statement now that they made it in court.

Century made it clear.  In every case in state court, BSA would start by finding the individual in their rosters, find the offender in their rosters, perhaps even find incident reports.  They are wondering why BSA is not doing that in bankruptcy.

Here is the point Century will make.  The BSA knows the majority of these claims are likely false.  Probably not 95% ... but a very high percentage (think 50 - 75%).  The BSA and councils are only offering a small dollar settlement, not because that is all they can afford (especially councils), but because they know most of the claims are false.  In addition, BSA is using the $3500 payment to buy votes from many of the false claims.  All of this is done to get a plan approved quickly with the lowest settlement they can.  However, when they are promising other companies money (such as Century) they are saying to assume all or most of the claims are real.  Century just wants to be on the same playing field as BSA ... if 75% of the claims are false, then Century only wants to talk to the 25% of the real claims.  

This is why Century and other insurance companies are going after law firms and aggregators.  They know they are on the hook for claims post plan and want to clear out questionable claims prior to plan confirmation.

 

So are they saying they have so much roster material that they can only find 5% because it is a monumental task or that there is only 5% of claimants in their data bases?

[Eagle1993]

23 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

Noticed this:

NOTICE OF DECEMBER 2, 2021 VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETING
HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL TORT CLAIMANTS’ COMMITTEE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Official Committee of Tort Claimants’ (the “TCC”) holds weekly meetings to keep survivors of abuse (“Survivors”) and their representatives informed. The next meeting will be on December 2, 2021 at 8:00 p.m. (ET). The details for the next meeting are below.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the Tort Claimants’ Committee will

hold a virtual town hall meeting on December 2, 2021 at 8:00 p.m. (Eastern Time).
Zoom: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required)
Dial-In by Telephone: 888-788-0099 (Toll Free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295. If asked for a “Participant ID,” just press #
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that, pursuant to section 1102(b)(3) and 1103(c) of the Bankruptcy Code, the TCC holds virtual town hall meetings for Survivors of childhood sexual abuse and their representatives Survivors who are not appointed to the Tort Claimants’ Committee to provide updates and access to information about the bankruptcy cases.  The identity of participants shall be kept strictly confidential, but if you ask questions using the
Zoom “Q&A” function, you might want to use your initials or otherwise abbreviate your name

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that this Town Hall will include:

Topics

Communications with the TCC and its Counsel
TCC’s continued goals of (1) more money for the trust,
(2) independent governance of the settlement trust, and
(3) meaningful youth protection.
Voting Deadline and Confirmation Timeline
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the Town Hall meetings will occur on every Thursday at 8:00 p.m. (ET) using the same Zoom link above and dial in information.  Recordings and transcripts of all Town Hall meetings are posted after they are concluded at  www.TCCBSA.com.

Reminder for those interested 

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

So are they saying they have so much roster material that they can only find 5% because it is a monumental task or that there is only 5% of claimants in their data bases?

No. They are saying that they looked through all of their rosters and only found 5% of the claimants (number from Baltimore Area Council).  They said they have too many rosters to scan them in.  
 

I think 5% is far lower than the actual end number.  However, one would think those not on rosters may be asked a few more questions.     
 

I definitely believe there are many abuse victims who would not show up on rosters.  However, it seems possible many claims are simply people looking for a check who were not abused.  That is not fair to anyone involved.   If that was 5-10% of claims … probably not worth the time.   However, this data is starting to show that percent of false claims may be a lot larger.   I think the judge is open to those interested in seeing if there are large groups of questionable claims and if they are focused in some law firms.  

[Eagle1993]

Short TCC call today.  They introduced Richard Pachulski, emphsized votes are due at Omni by December 14, 4:00PM and their recommendation is to vote no ... but everyone should vote regardless of their decision.

They also mentioned that mediation is ongoing ... so perhaps good news that TCC is back in mediation.

There was some mention of some optimism on where mediation is headed; however, there is no agreement and nothing is in writing/plan yet.  

To me, this is actually really good news.  I expect this first plan to fail, so for BSA to exit any time soon, they need an agreement with the TCC.  Perhaps we are starting to see some movement.  TIme will tell.

[vol_scouter]

17 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

No. They are saying that they looked through all of their rosters and only found 5% of the claimants (number from Baltimore Area Council).  They said they have too many rosters to scan them in.  
 

I think 5% is far lower than the actual end number.  However, one would think those not on rosters may be asked a few more questions.     
 

I definitely believe there are many abuse victims who would not show up on rosters.  However, it seems possible many claims are simply people looking for a check who were not abused.  That is not fair to anyone involved.   If that was 5-10% of claims … probably not worth the time.   However, this data is starting to show that percent of false claims may be a lot larger.   I think the judge is open to those interested in seeing if there are large groups of questionable claims and if they are focused in some law firms.  

The list of claimants was sent to the BSA who then matched names to registrations and councils.  Whenever the BSA did not have a registration, it was sent to the council based on the geographic location of the alleged abuse.  The councils looked into the computer databases and the paper records to try to verify that the claimant was in Scouting.  There are a substantial percentage that could not be identified.  As I said before, that does not guarantee that the claimant was not a Scout.  Paper records could have been lost or destroyed in a flood or fire.  Our council records are intact but there was a good percentage that were not able to be associated with a record anywhere.

Local councils and the BSA have worked diligently to identify all claimants but many could not be found.