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

[CynicalScouter]

Total Council Contribution / Unique UNSHARED Claims

*Unshared here is defined as a claim that is ONLY against one council. Thus a Claim against Greater New York Council is counted, but one against Greater New York Council AND Greater Hudson Valley is not. This does skew the data but not much.

$12,930.69 Average

$10,399.06 Median

$138.46 Minimum (Rocky Mountain $11,492 / 83 claims)

$200,619.25 Maximum (Greenwich $802,477 total contribution / 4 claims )

Local Council  Number	Local Council Name	Contribution / ALL Claims
1	GREATER ALABAMA	$8,281.64
3	ALABAMA-FLORIDA	$1,758.63
4	MOBILE AREA	$264.37
5	TUKABATCHEE AREA	$6,716.94
6	BLACK WARRIOR	$10,520.19
10	GRAND CANYON	$12,882.30
11	CATALINA	$4,956.35
13	DE SOTO AREA	$4,363.43
16	WESTARK AREA	$8,193.98
18	QUAPAW AREA	$11,775.63
23	GOLDEN GATE AREA	$10,540.18
27	SEQUOIA	$2,182.83
30	SOUTHERN SIERRA	$954.54
31	PACIFIC SKYLINE	$26,651.88
32	LONG BEACH AREA	$25,832.88
33	GREATER LOS ANGELES	$6,024.10
35	MARIN	$29,438.40
39	ORANGE COUNTY	$32,359.45
41	REDWOOD EMPIRE	$2,988.20
42	PIEDMONT 042	$77,299.71
45	CALIFORNIA INLAND EMPIRE	$2,272.77
47	GOLDEN EMPIRE	$2,826.55
49	SAN DIEGO - IMPERIAL COUNCIL	$6,008.58
51	WESTERN LOS ANGELES COUNTY	$4,578.75
53	LOS PADRES	$20,155.55
55	SILICON VALLEY MONTEREY BAY	$31,152.65
57	VENTURA COUNTY	$3,350.70
58	VERDUGO HILLS	$12,979.12
59	GREATER YOSEMITE	$10,232.56
60	PIKES PEAK	$17,019.22
61	DENVER AREA	$16,216.22
62	LONGS PEAK COUNCIL	$23,683.93
63	ROCKY MOUNTAIN	$138.46
66	CONNECTICUT RIVERS	$13,299.85
67	GREENWICH	$200,619.25
69	HOUSATONIC	$23,590.10
70	OLD NORTH STATE	$26,935.59
72	CONNECTICUT YANKEE	$10,368.82
81	DEL-MAR-VA	$16,009.19
82	NATIONAL CAPITAL AREA	$12,698.41
83	CENTRAL FLORIDA	$3,814.19
84	SOUTH FLORIDA COUNCIL	$5,720.04
85	GULF STREAM	$6,610.17
87	NORTH FLORIDA	$17,214.01
88	SOUTHWEST FLORIDA	$16,975.70
89	GREATER TAMPA BAY AREA	$12,427.35
91	CHATTAHOOCHEE	$7,444.42
92	ATLANTA AREA	$17,021.28
93	GEORGIA-CAROLINA	$3,663.71
95	FLINT RIVER	$10,641.31
96	CENTRAL GEORGIA	$3,185.72
98	SOUTH GEORGIA	$4,847.19
99	COASTAL GEORGIA	$20,190.59
100	NORTHWEST GEORGIA	$18,227.70
101	NORTHEAST GEORGIA	$17,972.82
104	ALOHA	$6,828.36
106	MOUNTAIN WEST	$14,126.97
107	GRAND TETON	$12,990.56
117	PRAIRIELANDS	$5,630.49
127	THREE FIRES	$10,744.97
129	NORTHEAST ILLINOIS	$20,283.09
133	ILLOWA	$6,218.94
138	W.D. BOYCE	$6,921.29
141	MISSISSIPPI VALLEY	$24,729.78
144	ABRAHAM LINCOLN	$29,586.11
145	HOOSIER TRAILS	$9,594.06
156	BUFFALO TRACE	$4,896.82
157	ANTHONY WAYNE AREA	$12,716.54
160	CROSSROADS OF AMERICA	$9,777.99
162	SAGAMORE	$9,821.50
165	LASALLE	$10,149.75
172	HAWKEYE AREA	$7,571.03
173	WINNEBAGO	$11,855.03
177	MID-IOWA	$15,740.07
178	NORTHEAST IOWA COUNCIL	$24,227.64
192	CORONADO AREA	$12,789.34
194	SANTA FE TRAIL	$10,704.32
197	JAYHAWK AREA	$8,428.61
198	QUIVIRA	$3,545.45
204	BLUE GRASS	$533.12
205	LINCOLN HERITAGE	$8,467.51
209	CALCASIEU	$5,203.71
211	ISTROUMA AREA	$4,303.80
212	EVANGELINE AREA	$1,951.51
213	LOUISIANA PURCHASE	$9,569.30
214	SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA	$5,074.68
215	NORWELA	$28,238.53
216	KATAHDIN AREA	$5,002.85
218	PINE TREE	$4,708.46
220	BALTIMORE AREA	$8,847.47
221	MASON-DIXON	$9,105.00
224	CAPE COD & ISLANDS	$21,641.54
227	SPIRIT OF ADVENTURE	$5,417.16
230	HEART OF NEW ENGLAND	$7,685.81
234	WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS	$3,324.70
250	NORTHERN STAR	$20,520.04
251	MAYFLOWER	$21,157.73
283	TWIN VALLEY	$16,332.56
286	VOYAGEURS AREA	$11,595.48
296	CENTRAL MINNESOTA	$8,933.58
299	GAMEHAVEN	$5,360.50
302	CHOCTAW AREA	$12,662.54
303	ANDREW JACKSON	$7,304.35
304	PINE BURR AREA	$1,823.58
306	OZARK TRAILS	$12,386.35
307	HEART OF AMERICA	$10,483.18
311	PONY EXPRESS	$16,370.97
312	GREATER ST. LOUIS AREA	$8,671.92
315	MONTANA	$22,249.48
322	OVERLAND TRAILS	$9,019.00
324	CORNHUSKER	$6,245.61
326	MID-AMERICA	$15,737.90
328	LAS VEGAS AREA	$17,274.16
329	NEVADA AREA	$20,544.55
330	DANIEL WEBSTER	$18,556.64
333	NORTHERN NEW JERSEY	$5,837.27
341	JERSEY SHORE	$3,542.58
347	MONMOUTH	$29,090.01
358	PATRIOTS' PATH	$16,175.72
364	TWIN RIVERS	$11,432.60
368	BADEN POWELL	$13,190.26
373	LONGHOUSE	$4,333.54
375	FIVE RIVERS	$10,804.78
376	IROQUOIS TRAIL	$8,155.86
380	GREATER NIAGARA FRONTIER	$6,149.94
382	ALLEGHENY HIGHLANDS	$13,225.85
386	THEODORE ROOSEVELT	$20,564.36
388	GREATER HUDSON VALLEY	$18,404.15
397	SENECA WATERWAYS	$34,042.55
400	LEATHERSTOCKING	$48,841.92
404	SUFFOLK COUNTY	$8,764.29
405	RIP VAN WINKLE	$9,231.38
412	GREAT SOUTHWEST	$439.89
413	CONQUISTADOR	$30,006.65
414	DANIEL BOONE	$10,761.05
415	MECKLENBURG COUNTY	$30,104.98
416	CENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA	$19,581.48
420	PIEDMONT 420	$19,346.24
421	OCCONEECHEE	$9,095.46
424	TUSCARORA	$20,444.05
425	CAPE FEAR	$10,448.95
426	EAST CAROLINA	$10,842.87
427	OLD HICKORY	$9,111.12
429	NORTHERN LIGHTS	$17,732.85
433	GREAT TRAIL	$11,997.09
436	BUCKEYE	$14,606.31
438	DAN BEARD	$10,668.84
439	TECUMSEH	$8,270.82
440	LAKE ERIE	$13,252.87
441	SIMON KENTON	$6,820.18
444	MIAMI VALLEY	$8,203.44
449	BLACK SWAMP AREA	$21,553.87
456	PATHWAY TO ADVENTURE	$4,756.46
460	ERIE SHORES	$23,642.92
467	MUSKINGUM VALLEY	$10,923.21
468	ARBUCKLE AREA	$16,367.60
469	CHEROKEE AREA	$3,185.52
474	CIMARRON	$4,633.64
480	LAST FRONTIER	$11,184.20
488	INDIAN NATIONS	$12,265.78
491	CRATER LAKE COUNCIL	$2,322.25
492	CASCADE PACIFIC	$17,699.12
497	JUNIATA VALLEY	$16,211.69
500	MORAINE TRAILS	$22,157.13
501	NORTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA	$9,414.55
502	MINSI TRAILS	$22,639.61
504	COLUMBIA-MONTOUR	$32,616.38
509	BUCKTAIL	$11,344.83
512	WESTMORELAND-FAYETTE	$19,260.82
524	PENNSYLVANIA DUTCH	$13,517.58
525	CRADLE OF LIBERTY	$11,363.46
527	LAUREL HIGHLANDS	$15,593.07
528	HAWK MOUNTAIN	$19,952.73
532	FRENCH CREEK	$6,859.54
533	SUSQUEHANNA	$9,262.16
538	CHIEF CORNPLANTER	$32,616.38
539	CHESTER COUNTY	$31,193.60
544	NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM	$15,161.85
546	NARRAGANSETT	$16,021.22
549	PALMETTO	$1,952.92
550	COASTAL CAROLINA	$1,339.43
551	BLUE RIDGE	$6,921.35
552	PEE DEE AREA	$9,993.71
553	INDIAN WATERS	$3,892.02
556	CHEROKEE AREA	$38,064.52
557	GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAIN	$6,452.36
558	CHICKASAW	$5,426.40
559	WEST TENNESSEE AREA	$2,195.63
560	MIDDLE TENNESSEE	$13,185.64
561	TEXAS TRAILS	$8,481.81
562	GOLDEN SPREAD	$16,669.80
564	CAPITOL AREA	$31,082.53
567	BUFFALO TRAIL	$12,090.19
571	CIRCLE TEN	$13,634.51
573	YUCCA	$3,759.31
574	BAY AREA	$10,404.19
576	SAM HOUSTON AREA	$9,646.66
577	SOUTH TEXAS	$2,762.41
578	THREE RIVERS	$5,573.58
583	ALAMO AREA	$13,725.26
584	CADDO AREA	$8,298.49
585	EAST TEXAS AREA	$12,549.25
587	NORTHWEST TEXAS	$7,156.57
590	CROSSROADS OF THE WEST	$6,434.25
592	GREEN MOUNTAIN	$7,947.84
595	COLONIAL VIRGINIA	$3,306.18
596	TIDEWATER	$2,678.25
598	SHENANDOAH AREA	$6,738.32
599	BLUE RIDGE MOUNTAINS	$6,660.63
602	HEART OF VIRGINIA	$12,838.60
604	BLUE MOUNTAIN	$10,046.24
606	MOUNT BAKER	$14,238.41
609	CHIEF SEATTLE	$21,115.90
610	GREAT ALASKA	$5,909.08
611	INLAND NORTHWEST	$948.06
612	PACIFIC HARBORS	$9,380.95
614	GRAND COLUMBIA	$2,703.20
615	MOUNTAINEER AREA	$12,871.15
617	BUCKSKIN	$6,657.69
619	OHIO RIVER VALLEY	$16,283.31
620	GLACIER'S EDGE	$5,859.22
624	GATEWAY AREA	$11,312.93
627	SAMOSET COUNCIL	$23,278.78
635	BAY-LAKES	$16,820.06
636	THREE HARBORS	$13,400.14
637	CHIPPEWA VALLEY	$7,488.93
638	GREATER WYOMING	$13,093.32
640	GREATER NEW YORK	$5,625.00
651	POTAWATOMI AREA	$17,505.44
653	GREAT RIVERS	$5,753.42
660	BLACKHAWK AREA	$10,393.93
661	PUERTO RICO	$2,877.27
662	LONGHORN	$3,775.02
664	SUWANNEE RIVER AREA	$4,235.08
690	GARDEN STATE	$14,793.25
691	PUSHMATAHA AREA	$1,553.37
694	SOUTH PLAINS	$7,704.85
695	BLACK HILLS AREA	$4,587.80
696	MIDNIGHT SUN	$42,639.00
697	OREGON TRAIL	$19,156.56
702	RAINBOW	$8,735.26
713	SEQUOYAH	$10,346.73
733	SIOUX	$10,921.81
741	TEXAS SOUTHWEST	$4,351.69
748	YOCONA AREA	$4,694.74
763	VIRGINIA HEADWATERS	$7,360.67
773	GULF COAST	$736.83
775	RIO GRANDE	$5,854.26
777	WASHINGTON CROSSING	$17,597.22
780	MICHIGAN CROSSROADS	$4,598.50
802	TRANSATLANTIC	$2,540.56
803	FAR EAST	$13,419.91

 

[ALongWalk]

So Michigan Crossroads has a ton of claims and get’s hit with among the smallest amount per and, others like my council (we have our share of claims also but nothing like MC), get hit so much harder. I guess it for the greater good. We are in a pretty healthy financial situation and a property that we really don’t need so that is probably the reason. 

Edited September 15, 2021 by ALongWalk
Left a word out

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, ALongWalk said:

So Michigan Crossroads has a ton of claims and get’s hit with among the smallest amount per and, others like my council (we have our share of claims also but nothing like MC), get hit so much harder.

The statutes of limitations is a major player here: per claims Michigan Crossroads is paying a LOT less ($4,598.50) than councils in other states where the statute of limitations has been lifted.

Michigan Crossroads has around 1700 claims against it, BUT only 67 are not time-barred. That makes all the difference in the world here. It isn't just "ton of claims" it is "ton of TIME-BARRED claims".

[MattR]

Putting on my moderator hat here. Those using scatological terms to describe plans need to stop. The lawyers are doing there job.

[CynicalScouter]

TCC is asking court to delay the September 21 hearing at least two weeks so it can go through Plan 5.0.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/a3bc0ca7-fbc6-4dd7-9f98-f276356d61d2_6222.pdf

Quote

The Court should not allow the Debtors to circumvent the notice requirements
under Bankruptcy Rule 3017(a) by submitting material Plan and Disclosure Statement
amendments without providing for an adequate opportunity for all parties to review those
documents; that review requires an adjournment of the hearing. The Bankruptcy Rules require
parties to receive sufficient notice and time to review all documents relevant to the revised Plan
and object to the revised Disclosure Statement in advance of the hearing. See Bankruptcy Rule
3017(a). Per Bankruptcy Rule 3017(d), “Section 1125(c) of the Code requires that the entire
approved disclosure statement be provided in connection with voting on a plan.” See Comment to
Rule 3017(d). In accordance with section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Court should adjourn
the Disclosure Statement Hearing to a date that provides the TCC and other parties in interest a fair
opportunity to review the new Plan documents and prepare objections.

 

Edited September 15, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Eagle1993]

23 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

TCC is asking court to delay the September 21 hearing at least two weeks so it can go through Plan 5.0.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/a3bc0ca7-fbc6-4dd7-9f98-f276356d61d2_6222.pdf

 

Quote

Motion of Official Committee of Tort Claimants for Entry of an Order Terminating the Debtors’ Exclusive Periods to File a Plan and Solicit Acceptances Thereof Pursuant to Section 1121 of the Bankruptcy Code, that the TCC intends to file later today, the TCC does not support the Plan as it contains settlements with insurers, local councils, and LDS that are hopelessly inadequate.

 

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Motion of Official Committee of Tort Claimants for Entry of an Order Terminating the Debtors’ Exclusive Periods to File a Plan and Solicit Acceptances Thereof Pursuant to Section 1121 of the Bankruptcy Code, that the TCC intends to file later today, the TCC does not support the Plan as it contains settlements with insurers, local councils, and LDS that are hopelessly inadequate.

Yep, look like whoever mentioned it yesterday was right: TCC isn't going to wait until October 18 and run the clock out, they want to take over the process and put forth their own plan now.

Of course the problem is if this is TCC vs. the debtor and Coalition and FCR and Hartford and LDS, etc. will the judge agree?

[Eagle1993]

6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Yep, look like whoever mentioned it yesterday was right: TCC isn't going to wait until October 18 and run the clock out, they want to take over the process and put forth their own plan now.

Of course the problem is if this is TCC vs. the debtor and Coalition and FCR and Hartford and LDS, etc. will the judge agree?

I think its highly likely she delays the Sept 21 hearing.  I do question if she allows a different deal.  That said, she needs a deal with 66%+ of the claimants and the Coalition alone may not get it there (remember, many of those claimants are actually shared with Kosnoff).  Plus, if only voting claimants count, I've seen objections from many law firms that seem very active with smaller groups of claimants (and I expect they can rally votes quickly).  If the TCC is NOT onboard, she runs a major risk of having the vote fail.  She is probably better off with a deal that the TCC is onboard with even if it loses support from Insurance and LDS.

[CynicalScouter]

And here it is

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/88e3df3e-384a-4c17-8bdd-fa2aaf44875a_6225.pdf

TCC wants to submit its own plan ASAP, noting that exclusivity ends October 18 in the middle of BSA's voting (if it gets its way).

It this says this

Quote

The Tort Claimants’ Committee – the only fiduciary to known survivors –
is the only party in this case that can propose a plan that treats survivors fairly and equitably.
Unlike the Boy Scouts, the Local Councils and the “Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice,” the
Tort Claimants’ Committee will not sell out the survivors for an exit to these bankruptcy cases
that will pay, with the most optimistic estimates under BSA’s Fifth Plan, an average of $35,000
per survivor. The aggregate settlement amounts in BSA’s Fifth Plan may sound like a lot of
money but, in the end, the individual survivors are left short. As reflected in BSA’s Fifth Plan,
the Debtors, FCR, and Coalition’s steering committee of plaintiffs’ attorneys will not make the
demands that are required on insurance carriers so that survivors will be adequately and fairly
compensated.

It throws the RSA under the bus and argues, in effect, it never should have agreed to that deal. AND the TCC indicates it HAS a plan, here, now, ready to go.

Quote

The Tort Claimants’ Committee’s proposed plan does not comport with
the now-defunct RSA.3 The Tort Claimants’ Committee originally supported a settlement with
the Local Councils because the Boy Scouts and the Coalition publicly confirmed that the primary
value for survivors would be recovered through the billions in available insurance coverage.
However, over the past few weeks since the expiration of the RSA, the Boy Scouts and the
Coalition have changed their course and are now seeking a quick exit from the bankruptcy cases.
The road to the exit is paved with inadequate insurance and chartered organization settlements
that fail to capture the billions in value they promised would pay the sexual abuse claims of
survivors.

 

[CynicalScouter]

Outline of the proposed TCC plan (quotations from https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/88e3df3e-384a-4c17-8bdd-fa2aaf44875a_6225.pdf)

Every single thing they agreed to in the RSA, they now opposed, right down to the settlement trustee. No Gray 1/2/23. The LC contributions are now too low. The entire settlement trustee system and channeling injunction gets reworked.

Again: this is a complete repudiation of the RSA.

What follows are the main points of the TCC plan outline (I converted to numbered points, but otherwise no changes)

1. the TCC Plan does not include a fire-sale settlement with Hartford; instead, the TCC Plan will preserve the Hartford policies so that true value can be realized by survivors
2. the TCC Plan does not include the proposed $600 million settlement with the Local Councils; instead, if the Local Councils want protection from the childhood sexual abuse claims each Local Council will need to make a substantial contribution that is commensurate with the liability that implicates each Local Council
3. the TCC Plan will not provide a release for Chartered Organizations unless each such Chartered Organization makes a substantial contribution that is commensurate with the liability that implicates each Chartered Organization
4. Non-settling insurance carriers will not be insulated by a channeling injunction; instead, the settlement trust, or survivors who have a direct right of action, may sue the non-settling insurance carriers until such carriers have settled with the settlement trust and purchased back their policies in exchange for adequate consideration
5. any global settlement with an insurance carrier, Local Council, Chartered Organization, or any other party seeking a non-consensual third party release and protection by the channeling injunction will need Court approval
6. the TCC Plan includes modified TDPs that allow survivors to pursue and liquidate their claims in the tort system, enabling them to trigger the payment provisions under the applicable insurance policies
7. the settlement trust will be overseen by a disinterested settlement trustee that has experience with sexual abuse.

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by elitts
corrected important spelling error

[CynicalScouter]

More filings:

1) The insurers join the TCC motion to delay the September 21 hearing

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/3e62a26e-dce6-42a7-bb0b-7b3e4ce77d12_6226.pdf

2) The TCC wants its motion on ending exclusivity to be considered at the previously scheduled September 23 date and briefing done on an expedited schedule.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/2af12ca4-9055-40e6-b21f-795c212cb177_6227.pdf

[Muttsy]

11 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Outline of the proposed TCC plan (quotations from https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/88e3df3e-384a-4c17-8bdd-fa2aaf44875a_6225.pdf)

Every single thing they agreed to in the RSA, they now opposed, right down to the settlement trustee. No Gray 1/2/23. The LC contributions are now too low. The entire settlement trustee system and channeling injunction gets reworked.

Again: this is a complete reputation of the RSA.

What follows are the main points of the TCC plan outline (I converted to numbered points, but otherwise no changes)

1. the TCC Plan does not include a fire-sale settlement with Hartford; instead, the TCC Planwill preserve the Hartford policies so that true value can be realized by survivors
2. the TCC Plan does not include the proposed $600 million settlement with the Local Councils; instead, if the Local Councils want protection from the childhood sexual abuse claims each Local Council will need to make a substantial contribution that is commensurate with the liability that implicates each Local Council
3. the TCC Plan will not provide a release for Chartered Organizations unless each such Chartered Organization makes a substantial contribution that is commensurate with the liability that implicates each Chartered Organization
4. Non-settling insurance carriers will not be insulated by a channeling injunction; instead, the settlement trust, or survivors who have a direct right of action, may sue the non-settling insurance carriers until such carriers have settled with the settlement trust and purchased back their policies in exchange for adequate consideration
5. any global settlement with an insurance carrier, Local Council, Chartered Organization, or any other party seeking a non-consensual third party release and protection by the channeling injunction will need Court approval
6. the TCC Plan includes modified TDPs that allow survivors to pursue and liquidate their claims in the tort system, enabling them to trigger the payment provisions under the applicable insurance policies
7. the settlement trust will be overseen by a disinterested settlement trustee that has experience with sexual abuse.

I like the TCC Plan. A LOT. Quite an about face. It is a much clearer path. I’m sorry it has taken so long to roll out. It could well be a game changer. 

[MYCVAStory]

Yep. the TCC knew this was coming.  Now we'll see a group that might care about ALL victims.  Worth noting why the Coalition just might think the BSA plan is a good one.  The lawyers that are a part of the Coalition GET REIMBURSED 10.5 MILLION DOLLARS to pay their attorneys. PLUS almost a million a month until this is done.  That's money that could have gone to victims everyone.  The portion below....

19. Payment of Coalition Restructuring Expenses
On or as soon as reasonably practicable after the Effective Date, Reorganized BSA shall
reimburse state court counsel for amounts they have paid to the Coalition Professionals for,
and/or pay the Coalition Professionals for amounts payable by state court counsel but not yet
paid to Coalition Professionals for, reasonable, documented, and contractual professional
advisory fees and expenses incurred by the Coalition Professionals (the “Coalition Restructuring
Expenses”) from the Coalition’s inception up to and including the Effective Date, up to a
maximum amount equal to (a) $950,000 per month for the period from August 16, 2021 up to
and including the Effective Date (pro-rated for any partial month), plus (b) $10,500,000

So....Hartford gets off lighter and drops its administratvive claim...Coalition takes less than it should but its bills get paid...  THAT'S why the TCC is saying "Enough is enough." 

 

[MYCVAStory]

1 minute ago, Muttsy said:

I like the TCC Plan. A LOT. Quite an about face. It is a much clearer path. I’m sorry it has taken so long to roll out. It could well be a game changer. 

They tried to play nice and make it work.  The Coalition overplayed its hand and now must hope, and the BSA too, that this judge doesn't care a thing about victims.  The US Trustee's opinion will be interesting.

[MYCVAStory]

21 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

What follows are the main points of the TCC plan outline (I converted to numbered points, but otherwise no changes)

1. the TCC Plan does not include a fire-sale settlement with Hartford; instead, the TCC Planwill preserve the Hartford policies so that true value can be realized by survivors
2. the TCC Plan does not include the proposed $600 million settlement with the Local Councils; instead, if the Local Councils want protection from the childhood sexual abuse claims each Local Council will need to make a substantial contribution that is commensurate with the liability that implicates each Local Council
3. the TCC Plan will not provide a release for Chartered Organizations unless each such Chartered Organization makes a substantial contribution that is commensurate with the liability that implicates each Chartered Organization
4. Non-settling insurance carriers will not be insulated by a channeling injunction; instead, the settlement trust, or survivors who have a direct right of action, may sue the non-settling insurance carriers until such carriers have settled with the settlement trust and purchased back their policies in exchange for adequate consideration
5. any global settlement with an insurance carrier, Local Council, Chartered Organization, or any other party seeking a non-consensual third party release and protection by the channeling injunction will need Court approval
6. the TCC Plan includes modified TDPs that allow survivors to pursue and liquidate their claims in the tort system, enabling them to trigger the payment provisions under the applicable insurance policies
7. the settlement trust will be overseen by a disinterested settlement trustee that has experience with sexual abuse.

Thank you for capturing this.  It's CRITICALLY important for this plan to see the light of day and the court allow victims to decide.  The more the BSA and Coalition object the more you know it's going to be a better option for victims!