Chapter 11 Announced - Part 8 - TCC Term Sheet & Plan Confirmation

[johnsch322]

41 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

@johnsch322 ... Wishing you the best.  It's an ugly scaring crime.  I'm not sure what else to say.  

Fred I have always felt your sincerity in your posts.

[PaleRider]

5 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Does that mean we to start a war of words with each other?  Different interpretations of facts exist that reach different opinions.  Either this channel is about the legalise of the bankruptcy or devolves into a yelling fest.

Some people have been thru hell because of the past.  Others have not.  One group can bring their pain.  The other can bring a moderating view.  Each INDIVIDUAL has a right to their interpretation of what happened.  

Out of respect for the hard work of the moderators and the purpose of this channel, I've been avoiding posting.  

Can we keep this channel to the bankruptcy proceedings?

No it doesn't have to be war of words.But the fact is this is all part of this bankruptcy.I don't expect all of the guys that made it through the Scouting experience to understand what we deal with on a daily basis's. Unfortunately there isn't a on and off switch.So I will just crawl back into my silence the very place I've been for the past 40 years.Thatvway I don't have to worry about my emotions stepping on others feelings.✌️

[ThenNow]

Okay. I know who these folks are and what they do, but does anyone know how they integrate with all the other professionals working this cash cow? 23rd Monthly Fee Application. WooHoo! $115,197 with a 20% holdback. This month's payday is $92,157.60. (By the way, that's the moolah kind and not the peanut and caramel log variety from our childhood.)

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/566b1605-4d4e-42d4-a5ce-7f6e1584c93c_9039.pdf

https://www.alixpartners.com

[ThenNow]

Notice and agenda for Wed's hearing at 10ET. The $how must go on. (See above post.)

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/deb3c636-6cf0-4dd4-a3e5-ca89945008b4_9040.pdf

[fred8033]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Okay. I know who these folks are and what they do, but does anyone know how they integrate with all the other professionals working this cash cow? 23rd Monthly Fee Application. WooHoo! $115,197 with a 20% holdback. This month's payday is $92,157.60. (By the way, that's the moolah kind and not the peanut and caramel log variety from our childhood.)

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/566b1605-4d4e-42d4-a5ce-7f6e1584c93c_9039.pdf

https://www.alixpartners.com

Greatly appreciate the links.  I liked this sentence on bottom of first page...  "The total time expended for fee application preparation is approximately 12.5 hours and the corresponding compensation requested is $7,627.00"

Hourly rate to prepare the fee application is $610.  

Who are "The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors"?

Edited February 28, 2022 by fred8033

[ThenNow]

32 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Who are "The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors"?

The Scouters on this forum? Jk. I'm not sure of the membership, but this explains some of the elements. Effectively, the Debtors owe them cash and are holding no gold watches, artwork, real property or other things of value against which they can move to satisfy the indebtedness. I reserve the right to be wrong, per usual.

https://www.mgwl.com/blog/what-you-should-know-about-ch-11-unsecured-creditors-committees/

[fred8033]

2 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

The Scouters on this forum? Jk. I'm not sure of the membership, but this explains some of the elements. Effectively, the Debtors owe them cash and are holding no gold watches, artwork, real property or other things of value against which they can move to satisfy the indebtedness. I reserve the right to be wrong, per usual.

https://www.mgwl.com/blog/what-you-should-know-about-ch-11-unsecured-creditors-committees/

So the hiring and work is not controlled by BSA or the court?  The bills / work is controlled by those being owed money.  ???

Edited February 28, 2022 by fred8033

[ThenNow]

34 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

So the hiring and work is not controlled by BSA or the court?  The bills / work is controlled by those being owed money.  ???

My understanding is a fee request that lands on the docket is an official, "Please ma'am, I want some more" seeking porridge from the  slop bucket. Quoting:

Perhaps the most significant fact about a Creditors’ Committee is that it may, with Bankruptcy Court approval, retain professionals including attorneys and accountants to represent the interest of unsecured creditors, and these professionals may be paid by the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate.  11 U.S.C. §1103(a) and §330(a)(1).  Attorneys can assist a Creditors Committee with obtaining information necessary to make decisions and recommendations, negotiating with the debtor, other classes of creditors and other interested parties, and guidance regarding legal obligations and responsibilities as Committee members.

PS - They are being submitted to the court for approval. Have any been rejected to date? This I do not know, but I'm thinkin' not. Century made a stink and got JLSS to require 20% be held back until the end of the case. Remind me when that is, again?

Edited February 28, 2022 by ThenNow
Dang it!

[SNEScouter]

2 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Who are "The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors"?

Similar to the TCC but instead of survivors, this committee represents other miscellaneous / trade creditors with claims against BSA.  https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/804598_141.pdf

[ThenNow]

Question for the wise. In reading the objection located on the docket via the link below, I found several interesting assertions. I haven't searched the TDP/IR processes to confirm all of them. I claim Monday malaise. In the meantime, anyone know the source of this assertion by the "Certain Insurers"? How does one come by that "private confidential information" to build one's case? There are several things I seek and I'd be happy to tell BSA "what I want, what I really really want." (Name that tune but don't deviate too far into a pop culture fest.) Sharing is care and I hope this is true.

TDP & IR: Defendant (BSA) shares private confidential information with Plaintiff to build Plaintiff’s case before Plaintiff is required to submit documentation to the Settlement Trust.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/29429b4d-503f-481b-b84e-5ee58331b5fd_9033.pdf

[ThenNow]

Another beauty from the Certain Insurers' objection. Quoting:

$24.5 Million Potentially Diverted from Abuse Claimants Solely for the Benefit of Plaintiffs’ Lawyers Who Represent Them

90. In connection with the RSA, the Coalition and the Debtors requested that the Court approve payments of $950,000 per month throughout the case and additional fees up to $10.5 million for professionals that Coalition plaintiffs’ lawyers hired on behalf of the Coalition without any showing of a “substantial contribution.” The Court denied that request, finding that it would harm the Abuse Claimants:

The cost of the coalition’s professionals was to be borne by the State Court counsel who formed the coalition, not their clients. Payment by Boy Scouts and certainly payment by the investor trust comes directly or indirectly out of their client’s pockets and, indeed, the pockets of all abuse victims . . . any funds diverted from abuse victims, especially to pay an obligation of their lawyers, needs to be closely examined. Aug. 19, 2021 Hr’g Tr. at 20:20-21:3 (Supp. Obj. App. 1).

91. The provision regarding payment of Coalition fees remained in the Prior Plan, leading the Court to state when approving the Disclosure Statement that “the Coalition fees, I will decide that on a motion, on an appropriate motion unrelated to the plan . . . I’m not going to glom on something additional to the plan that doesn’t need to be decided in that context.” Sept. 29, 2021 Hr’g Tr. at 104:9-10 (Initial Opp. App. 55).

92. Undeterred, Coalition plaintiffs’ lawyers refused to remove the provision from the Prior Plan and then demanded that the Debtors increase the payment to $21 million. The Debtors relented. The Claimant Representatives now go even further and demand that an additional $3.5 million be used to pay fees incurred by the Pfau/Zalkin firms in connection with these Chapter 11 Cases. Revised Plan § V.H. Payment of Coalition and Pfau/Zalkin Restructuring Expenses.

These recoveries for plaintiffs’ firms are in addition to the substantial contingency fees that are, in many cases, 33% to 40% of their clients’ recoveries and, if either the Prior Plan or Revised Plan is confirmed, will likely be billions of dollars. Payment of the professional fees that these lawyers (but not their clients) chose to incur further dilutes the recoveries of not only their own clients but all Abuse Claimants. This is particularly inappropriate because these plaintiffs’ lawyers also negotiated an agreement that allows the estate to contribute absolutely no cash to the Settlement Trust for the benefit of Abuse Claimants. See Feb. 11, 2022 Hr’g Tr. at 65:14-18 (MR. KURTZ: “It was originally contemplated that the debtors would make a contribution to the trust as we got to the end of March . . . that was dropping to zero, and that’s still the case.”) (Supp. Obj. App. 4).

[SiouxRanger]

21 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

Fred I have always felt your sincerity in your posts.

I have to agree in Fred's sincerity and balance.

And I agree with his comments about "a different time, place, beliefs, sensitivities, etc. (and I do not intend to misquote or misrepresent Fred's comments), and frankly, even today, the last decade or two, having brought 3 sons through the program to Eagle, I have never felt comfortable about discussing abuse issues and feel that even I, recognize that I, personally , live in that different time, place...).

And, not only is that uncomfortable, parent to child, but I never really appreciated the extent of the abuse.  (I do now.) I never saw any suggestion of improper behavior in any scouting activity I was involved in. (I once deduced that a burglary had happened by a tiny splinter of wood on my desk-about 1/32nd of an inch long-no way it got to my desktop without foul play-and I was right.)

BUT, where I depart from agreement with anyone's comments to the contrary, is that abuse is a CRIME and as a CRIME it should be reported to the police, folks charged and authorized to investigate reports of CRIME. And the police are charged to report credible allegations to the state's attorney.

And allegations of abuse should be reported no matter of the reporting person's evaluation of whether it is a crime, or will be taken up by a prosecutor to file charges, or whether those charges will ever be proven, or whether a conviction result.

An observers duty is to report, regardless of beliefs, results, or consequences.

And THAT is where National failed its Scouts, its leaders, its Councils, its Chartering Organizations, and its PRINCIPLES, starting with "Trustworthy."

And we cannot doubt that failure of National as its bankruptcy is proof enough of its catastrophic and unmitigated failure of principle.

That National (apparently) required Councils to send ALL documents related to an abuse claim to National, retaining NO documents at the Council offices, is clear and irrefutable evidence of National's pattern of concealment of incidents of abuse. This is unforgivable. PERIOD.  

That there were parents whose scout had been subjected to abuse who did not want their scout subjected to the legal process, having to be interviewed by law enforcement, subjected to depositions with the alleged abuser being present, and then having to testify in court-Yep, I understand and that is one reason why so few cases were prosecuted back then.

Were there parents, guardians of their natural children, who exercised that authority and waived claims against abusers?  Yep, probably a lot.  Are there claimants now, whose parents intentionally waived filing a claim (to protect their scout in his tender years) until it was too late to file under the applicable statutes of limitations?  Certainly. And likely a high percentage of claimants who are outside the statute.

And are there adult scout claimants now who still suffer from the damage inflicted in their tender years?  Yes. Without doubt.

One of my best friends was ruthlessly abused as a youth, and only told me about  it about 4 years ago, a delay of about 52 years. And his parents KNEW of the abuse and sent him to a facility where he was further abused.  He had a tortious adult life.

 

[fred8033]

19 hours ago, ThenNow said:

Another beauty from the Certain Insurers' objection. Quoting:

$24.5 Million Potentially Diverted from Abuse Claimants Solely for the Benefit of Plaintiffs’ Lawyers Who Represent Them

90. In connection with the RSA, the Coalition and the Debtors requested that the Court approve payments of $950,000 per month throughout the case and additional fees up to $10.5 million for professionals that Coalition plaintiffs’ lawyers hired on behalf of the Coalition without any showing of a “substantial contribution.” The Court denied that request, finding that it would harm the Abuse Claimants:

The cost of the coalition’s professionals was to be borne by the State Court counsel who formed the coalition, not their clients.

Feels creepy to egregiously wrong:  asking for payments first before victim gets cash while also being under contract to take a very healthy contingent percent.

[skeptic]

3 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Feels creepy to egregiously wrong:  asking for payments first before victim gets cash while also being under contract to take a very healthy contingent percent.

This really surprises people?  They are simply validating my descriptions from early on in this mess.  

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

Feels creepy to egregiously wrong:  asking for payments first before victim gets cash while also being under contract to take a very healthy contingent percent.

 

57 minutes ago, skeptic said:

This really surprises people?  They are simply validating my descriptions from early on in this mess.  

I don't get it, either. The argument is the bankruptcy code allows for payment/reimbursement based on a "substantial contribution" to the deal leading to the plan or some such. The US Trustee's comment back when they tried this the first time was pretty much, "Um, this case isn't close to over. How can we know if someone made a substantial contribution until a plan is approved?" As my gramps would say if you burped, "Bring it up later and we'll vote on it." This is nothing more than parties being unofficially officially appointed as a fiduciary so they can get paid from the estate. Fiduciary to me? Whom? Not me. How does that make any sense, especially when their 33%-40% amounts to many many many nickels. Let's get this straight. I wiggle a way to have my clients (and survivors who are NOT my clients) pay for the attorneys who help me make a deal to make millions of dollars from my clients. Okay. Makes total sense. Or not. Anyone get this?