Home > Boards > US OTC > Delisted >

United Western Bancorp Inc. (fka UWBKQ)

RSS Feed
Add Price Alert      Hide Sticky   Hide Intro
Moderator: Docsavag, Large Green, Newtogame, fredscott36
Search This Board: 
Last Post: 11/28/2020 8:01:04 AM - Followers: 189 - Board type: Free - Posts Today: 4


This Bank was taken by the OTS, OCC & FDIC Under Color of Law
Now there is a Big Cover Up going on

Shares Outstanding: 29.26


DENVER--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- United Western Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company"), a Denver-based holding company whose principal subsidiary was formerly United Western Bank® (the "Bank), today announced that on February 18, 2011, the Company filed a Complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against the Office of Thrift Supervision (the "OTS"), the Acting Director of the OTS (the "Acting Director") and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC").

 On January 21, 2011, the Acting of the OTS, in cooperation with the FDIC, seized the Bank and appointed the FDIC receiver based on three alleged grounds: (i) the Bank was undercapitalized and failed to submit an acceptable capital restoration plan ("CRP") within the time prescribed by statute; (ii) the Bank was likely to be unable to pay its obligations or meet its depositors' demands in the normal course of business; and, (iii) the Bank was in an unsafe or unsound condition to transact business. The Company alleges in the Complaint that none of these grounds existed at the time of the seizure. 

A. Gibson, Chairman of the Board of the Company said, "The seizure order issued on January 21, 2011 by the OTS, appointing the FDIC as receiver, is arbitrary and capricious and lacked any rational basis in applicable law."

The Company's Complaint refutes the allegations made by the FDIC and the OTS, and importantly, among other facts cites:

The Acting Director of the OTS, without any reasonable basis, concluded the Bank had failed to submit a CRP acceptable to the OTS. However, despite the statutory requirement that institutions be given a reasonable time to submit a CRP, the OTS demanded that the Bank submit a CRP within seven days, a clearly unreasonable request in excess of its statutory authority.

The Bank's capital position provided no basis to accelerate the standard 45 day time frame for filing a CRP. On December 3, 2010, the OTS directed the Bank to take a capital write-down with the intent of lowering the Bank's capital ratio as much as necessary in order to create the illusion that the Bank was not adequately capitalized. The result of this arbitrary and capricious directive was to lower the Bank's total risk-based capital ratio to 7.8 percent (which is only 0.2 percent below the 8.0 percent ratio required to be considered adequately capitalized). But for the OTS's arbitrary and capricious directive, the Bank would have remained within the technical definition of adequately capitalized and not been subject to the requirement that it submit a CRP.

The Company believes that the seizure of a Bank with a reported total risk-based capital ratio of 7.8 percent and a pending recapitalization is unprecedented. If the standard applied by the OTS to United Western Bank was uniformly applied to banks across the country, a significant number of those banks would be subject to immediate seizure. The majority of the institutions closed by the OTS in 2009 and 2010 were critically undercapitalized, meaning that the ratio of tangible equity to total assets was less than 2 percent. A number of these institutions were insolvent; for example, one of these institutions had a core capital ratio of negative 7.11 percent and a total risk-based capital ratio of negative 7.36 percent.

The Company's research suggests the OTS has not accepted any CRP submitted to it during this financial crisis. Instead, the OTS appears to reject CRPs as a matter of course, regardless of merit, and then asserts that the failure to submit an acceptable CRP is grounds for receivership. The rejection of the Bank's CRP was part of this unreasonable pattern by the OTS.

No grounds existed for the Acting Director to reasonably conclude that United Western was likely to be unable to pay its obligations or meet its depositors' demands in the normal course of business. The liquidity concerns asserted by the OTS and FDIC were based on their unfounded disapproval of the Bank's 17 year-old business model and a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bank's long-term, contractual relationships with certain of its institutional depositors. There was no rational basis for the OTS or FDIC to conclude that the Bank would not continue to effectively manage its institutional depositor relationships as the Bank had for almost two decades, including through the worst of the financial crisis in 2008 and going forward. The institutional depositors would have maintained funds on deposit absent an arbitrary or capricious action by the OTS or FDIC to force withdrawal of such funds. The Bank repeatedly, most recently as of January 20, 2011, advised the OTS that this was the case. The Bank had ample liquidity to pay its obligations and meet depositor demands.

The Bank had over $400 million of cash at the time of the seizure, which represented approximately 25% of total deposits on January 21, 2011.

The Company and the Bank were very close to completing a recapitalization transaction of $200 million, with commitments in place of $149.5 million and parties identified to complete the transaction at the time of the seizure of the Bank by the FDIC. The completion of this transaction would have eliminated the need to seize the Bank, thereby avoiding a significant loss to the Deposit Insurance Fund. This information was provided to the OTS on January 20, 2011.

 The Company is represented in this law suit by its internal counsel and certain inside directors of the Company and certain former inside directors of the Bank are represented by BuckleySandler, LLP of Washington, D.C. and certain independent directors of the Company and certain former independent directors of the Bank are represented by the Washington office of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky &Walker LLP.

I  am not sure you understand, don't confuse the moneys that belong to the Bank (the ITR and JPM moneys due) even if the Government did not take the Bank, those moneys are the banks.

The government is liable because they took the Bank, our asset, our constitutional rights, under color of law and tired to defraud all of the shareholders as well as the employees the credititors and others. took assets held in the Banks Name and deprived all of us including the community. They Tarnished the management and the Banks Business reputation. I ask you what is it worth? An Unconstitutional move by government thugs.

And now they don't want us or any body to talk about the cover up
Jim Peoples, former CEO, left, and Guy Gibson, former chairman, are challenging bank's takeover.


#31703  Sticky Note What happened with the excluded Assets & Liabilities iPrelude 10/09/14 09:42:28 PM
#49383   .....NO URGENCIES, SKITTLES...........fine wine takes time to ferment...........the fredscott36 11/28/20 08:01:04 AM
#49382   Let’s do this in time for Santa. I Large Green 11/28/20 07:53:59 AM
#49381   ....BLACK FRIDAY at BIG LOTS...........gosh I love that place.......... fredscott36 11/28/20 07:09:51 AM
#49380   693 11/27/2020Courts Notice or Order and BNC Certificate of iPrelude 11/28/20 12:28:09 AM
#49379   Fred must have been on a Thanksgiving BENDER Large Green 11/27/20 09:35:14 AM
#49378   LARGE I guess the TRYPTOPHAN is having a residual BBANBOB 11/27/20 08:54:20 AM
#49377   Hey Fred, psst, psst, psst...The FDIC normally likes Large Green 11/27/20 07:44:10 AM
#49376   Gobble gobble United faithfuls... waddling off to bed Sunnybank 11/26/20 08:59:31 PM
#49375   HAPPY TURKEY DAY ALL BBANBOB 11/26/20 08:55:16 AM
#49374   Well said Doc and many blessings to one investandpray 11/26/20 08:42:57 AM
#49373   Happy Thanksgiving, all! Been a long road, Docsavag 11/26/20 08:31:48 AM
#49372   .......judeo-christian pagan RITUALS..................ROCK ON............. fredscott36 11/26/20 08:16:30 AM
#49371   Gobble gobble good people. Enjoy family and friends. Sunnybank 11/25/20 09:32:29 PM
#49370   Doc, if we win both Georgia recalls we Sunnybank 11/25/20 09:18:17 PM
#49369   You know he's just going to gobble that up... Docsavag 11/25/20 04:17:44 PM
#49368   Wanting it OVER IS NOT SURRENDER at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BBANBOB 11/25/20 03:23:30 PM
#49367   """one of those lunatics even wants to send BBANBOB 11/25/20 03:12:24 PM
#49366   ....and watch venable LLP shut this forum down................the fredscott36 11/25/20 12:59:59 PM
#49365   .......have you fairies obtained your formal approval to fredscott36 11/25/20 12:48:42 PM
#49364   691 11/25/2020 iPrelude 11/25/20 12:43:36 PM
#49363   691 11/25/2020 Order Granting Application to Nightdaytrader 11/25/20 12:43:14 PM
#49362   689 11/25/2020 iPrelude 11/25/20 12:33:04 PM
#49361   ..........didn't we agree on a NO QUITTERS pledge, fredscott36 11/25/20 11:43:22 AM
#49360   JUST GETERDUN I could care less about the BBANBOB 11/25/20 11:37:30 AM
#49359   ...................................Douglas Emhoff.......................... fredscott36 11/25/20 11:19:08 AM
#49358   They better SOGOTP as sleepy Uncle Joe is Docsavag 11/25/20 09:11:17 AM
#49357   I do not see this as anti-climatic at Large Green 11/25/20 07:50:05 AM
#49356   ......final submission pkg going in, or in BK fredscott36 11/25/20 07:11:28 AM
#49355   Fred, you said the following "FDIC might accelerate Large Green 11/25/20 07:05:50 AM
#49354   Newtogame very well said, as accurate as a Chaleco 11/24/20 05:04:00 PM
#49353   .....SOL on Securities Fraud: two (2) year statute fredscott36 11/24/20 01:12:27 PM
#49352   fwiw crystal Hewhocantrade 11/24/20 12:54:01 PM
#49351   Well I did!!!!!!!!! Newtogame 11/24/20 12:53:57 PM
#49350   I find it outrageous, that NO_ONE tried to Newtogame 11/24/20 12:44:48 PM
#49349   Seems like you are the person that reported Newtogame 11/24/20 12:37:48 PM
#49348   Did anyone try to verify what Tradeinman reported Newtogame 11/24/20 12:33:02 PM
#49347   SAY WHAT??????????????????????????????????????? BBANBOB 11/24/20 12:31:01 PM
#49346   Manipulation of a security's price or volume fredscott36 11/24/20 12:29:30 PM
#49345   so what exactly was TRADEINMAN's FRAUDULENT behavior Newtogame 11/24/20 12:16:50 PM
#49344   .....off the record, we investigated the steps required fredscott36 11/24/20 11:08:33 AM
#49343   nah im good Hewhocantrade 11/24/20 10:54:39 AM
#49342   .......................$567.43 +18.75 (+3.42%).......................... fredscott36 11/24/20 10:51:02 AM
#49341   Respectfully.......... you should catch yourself up, even if you Tradeinman 11/24/20 10:45:10 AM
#49340   Been here for a while Hewhocantrade 11/24/20 10:35:13 AM
#49339   Heat is fine, family personal attacks would normally Tradeinman 11/24/20 10:29:47 AM
#49338   SO BLOCK his emails or pm's BBANBOB 11/24/20 10:28:19 AM
#49337   respectfully, if you don't like the heat, shouldn't be Hewhocantrade 11/24/20 10:25:58 AM
#49336   He’s already attacking my family again and sending Tradeinman 11/24/20 10:23:16 AM
#49335   trade - then stop them Hewhocantrade 11/24/20 10:18:59 AM
#49334   If this thing wasn’t delisted, one would swear Sunnybank 11/24/20 10:11:14 AM
Consent Preferences